
Originally Posted by
Casinomeister
I think you are referring to one episode where the chat csr said they were part of the Virtual group. Damning as that may seem, it's still not enough to convince me. Chat reps have been known to make erroneous statements in the past. It's just not the evidence one needs.
Could be - I'm still checking some sources - hope to have some answers soon.
Does it really make a difference whether or not it's virtual or the old Crystal Palace casinos? It's still probably the same management: different color - same flavor. A rogue is a rogue.
Nope, there are on the same page as Crystal Palace. They are confirmed rebrands and in full operation.
http://www.casinomeister.com/rogue/crystal_palace.php
Due to confidentiality clauses, I can't think of a software provider that will confirm the ownership of privately held companies.
RTG being one of them. But there are ways to figure this out ourselves without having to ask

Maybe so, but when said "private company" is going to be handling large sums of player's cash, and being made privvy to the most intimate personal details of players who cash-out, we have very RIGHT to know who we are supplying our money and details to. While private companies do not have to provide details of ownership, they do at least have to give a trading name, and when handling money they also have to register with financial regulators.
RTG are simply aiding and abetting their operators with any deceptions, and being based in Costa Rica can get away with it.
I am happy the new names are listed under "rogue". Players who are trying to do the right thing and checking your rogue list before depositing should at least know more about the risks they are taking.
I hope that further investigation will reveal more, and we may even see a rep come along to "fight the fire", and give us all the opportunity to ask questions, and hopefully get some answers.
Empty Fruities Astern Capt'n
Back to port for unloading.
Full Sails - before we get raided ourselves.
Bookmarks