http://rivalpowered.com/whatsNew
just the messenger on this one. I'll look at the issue of putting the terms in the T&Cs regarding progressives. I'll do this for Rockbet soon but I'll mention it to Rival to notify all operators about it.
John
|
|
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Dormant account
http://rivalpowered.com/whatsNew
just the messenger on this one. I'll look at the issue of putting the terms in the T&Cs regarding progressives. I'll do this for Rockbet soon but I'll mention it to Rival to notify all operators about it.
John
RobWin (20th May 2009)
Banned User
The message John did not post below. How many people know if this is true??? They leave it open ended so no way I will comment yet stay tuned offline.Originally Posted by RockbetJohn
"May 16, 2009
One Million Reels BC Progressive Jackpot
NICOSIA, CYPRUS – Rival Gaming, a leading provider of online gaming solutions, would like to take this opportunity to clarify recent confusion regarding the One Million Reels BC Progressives Jackpot reinstatement.
Each Rival licensee owns, and is responsible, for their own brand. This is the case with the vast majority of online casinos whether they license their software from Rival or from another company. Rival does not have a controlling interest in any of its licensed casinos. Bonne Chance NV is a Rival-licensed gaming service provider offering processing and other turnkey services to Rival licensees. Rival Gaming offers 3 Progressive Slot games in its 80+ game portfolio. These progressive games are Rival-wide and allow a small percentage of each real-money wager to be contributed to the corresponding jackpot. When the jackpot is hit, the customer receives the entire amount in their account. The customer can then withdraw or continue playing. Neither Rival nor the operator holding the winning customer have a financial interest in the progressive jackpot in and of itself. Progressive slot games are meant to be used as a marketing tool to acquire and retain customers.
On May 10, 2009 a "no-deposit required" promotion, which allowed play on Rival's One Million BC Progressive slot game, was granted to customers of a Rival-Powered casino property. A customer from this casino hit the jackpot. The terms of the promotion allowed for only a small fraction of the total win amount to be withdrawn by the winning player. The intent of Rival's Progressive Jackpot system is for all real-money progressive-game-playing customers, across all Rival-Powered properties, to have a chance at winning the jackpot. In order to maintain the integrity of Rival's Progressive Slot games, the amount of the jackpot won with the limited cashout rules in effect was put back into the jackpot. The terms of the promotion were followed and the intent of the Progressive Jackpot system was maintained. Protocols have been updated to prevent a similar occurrence in the future.
Rival and its partners would like to sincerely thank their customers, clients, and affiliates for their continued loyalty and support. As of this writing the One Million BC Progressive Jackpot currently stands above $230,000 and is ready to be won!"
Meister Member
Achievements:
I read it several times and only 2 comments stand out to me, This one, "Each Rival licensee owns, and is responsible, for their own brand. This is the case with the vast majority of online casinos whether they license their software from Rival or from another company. Rival does not have a controlling interest in any of its licensed casinos. Bonne Chance NV is a Rival-licensed gaming service provider offering processing and other turnkey services to Rival licensees."
and this one, "In order to maintain the integrity of Rival's Progressive Slot games, the amount of the jackpot won with the limited cashout rules in effect was put back into the jackpot. The terms of the promotion were followed and the intent of the Progressive Jackpot system was maintained. Protocols have been updated to prevent a similar occurrence in the future."
I don't have a good understanding about white labels so I have a question for those that do, is that what they are implying in the first statement?
Regarding the 2nd quote, it does sound like that they are admitting some kind of wrongdoing by the casino did happen, but they aren't admitting exactly what. "Protocols have been updated to prevent a similar occurrence in the future."
I'm really disappointed but not a bit surprised that the statement didn't elaborate more on both issues, aren't you?
Last edited by bb28; 19th May 2009 at 11:41 PM. Reason: grammer
Dormant account
The first statement basically says that the casino in question did the action not Rival. Because Rival re-instated the jackpot I think it goes without saying that they didn't approve of the behaviour of that casino.
The second statement to me does say that to maintain the integrity of the software and of the progressives that the jackpot was re-instated. Rival isn't guilty here, the casino in question is and Rival in my opinion took the right course of action, the jackpot was returned.
The comment about protocols more or less says that you shouldn't expect to see this behaviour happen again.
Didn't this happen at an RTG casino not too long ago ...
Anyways I am done on the subject but was just trying to help.
John
bb28 (20th May 2009), Jaxon (20th May 2009), RobWin (20th May 2009), slotheadlizard (20th May 2009)
Meister Member
Achievements:
I appreciate you taking the time to clarify part of the statement and it goes without saying that I like and respect you, so I'm not going to give you a hard time.
I wish that they had took it so far as to pull the license of Irish Luck, but of course no one here is privy to that contract, so maybe they couldn't. That would have sent a much stronger statement out to players and affiliates alike and would have made more of an appearance of trying to get back into everyone's good graces.
RobWin (20th May 2009)
Banned User - repetitive flaming
Achievements:
If Rival do not have any controlling interest in any of their Casinos how were they able to reinstate the Jackpot?
What were the original protocols and how have they been updated?
Are Rival stating categorically that they were unaware this progressive bonus promotion was taking place?
Are Rival stating that no other Casino was aware that Irish Luck were going to carry out this promotion?
Just so we know what a can worms this has opened here is a hypothetical situation;
What would of happened if this had not come to the forums attention and the player had played back the jackpot funds to Irish Luck to earn comps, since the money would have been legitimately theirs and Rival have no controlling interest.
Neither Rival nor the operator holding the winning customer have a financial interest in the progressive jackpot in and of itself. Progressive slot games are meant to be used as a marketing tool to acquire and retain customers.
This is strictly true and very cleverly stated to give the impression that Irish Luck had nothing to gain financially from a customer winning the progressive at their Casino.
Of course the fact is Irish Luck had plenty to gain from having the winner from their Casino including the small matter of $225,000 they hoped to misappropriate.
They even had the publicity lined up remember another way they would have benefited from the winner being from their Casino.
They end the statement with this little gem;
As of this writing the One Million BC Progressive Jackpot currently stands above $230,000 and is ready to be won!
No doubt all these Rival powered Casino owners will be queuing up here to state who they are and how they are merely licensed by Rival and ownership is completely independent of them in order to distance themselves from Irish Luck.
Bonne chance
gambling addict
Achievements:
Yeah, I trust Rival all right. It just took them slightly more than 2 full days to reinstate the JP after the issue was widely discussed at forums. If they were unaware of this they probably need to hire new intelligence.
senseless gambling addict
bb28 (20th May 2009), jetset (20th May 2009), paul02085 (26th May 2009), Pinababy69 (20th May 2009), Rusty (20th May 2009)
Ueber Meister
Achievements:
That's a pretty unequivocal denial by Rival of the T2 Marketing court case claims. Unfortunately T2's legal representative has not yet responded to a request for his comment on that denial.
jetset
amandajm (22nd May 2009), jas2587 (22nd May 2009), NASHVEGAS (21st May 2009), Pinababy69 (20th May 2009), Rusty (20th May 2009)
Banned User
Money talks and sings and dances. Carry on but stay tuned.
Banned User
STOP IT!!.....Don't ever lose your sense of humor. Go to finish reading y-day's email just now and Mr.Crook, too funny
PS--- I don't think I will open Mr.Crook's email, well you know
Last edited by NASHVEGAS; 1st June 2009 at 03:46 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks