eCOGRA: Q & A with Andrew Beveridge

[Pinababy69]

After the debate that (once again) took place last week in the latest eCOGRA thread, Andrew Beveridge offered to do a Q&A session with me. I had been busy and not as yet gotten around to emailing him myself. I would guess he had read some of the comments here and wanted to try and answer some of the outstanding questions/issues that myself and others have. So I think it important that people know he volunteered to do this, before even being asked. And I would hope that people can remain civil in this thread, and that the debate that will undoubtedly ensue, can remain polite and on point.

I will just post this exactly as it was sent to him. He has relayed that he will work on this over the next week, and his replies will be posted in this thread.

I'd like to thank Ted (Spearmaster) for helping me, and Rusty for providing the General Questions. Rusty had many more questions, but it was felt that maybe not all were entirely relevant (ie. more Microgaming related as opposed to eCOGRA, and also some questions that the answers can be found on the website www.ecogra.org

I'm sorry this is so long. I know that some people already have knowledge of the specific issues I've raised, but there are also people who are not familiar with all of them, and I wanted those people to at least have a general background, for understanding. Also, don't forget the search function on the forum here if anyone feels they need more info.

Thanks once again to everyone involved.


INTERWETTEN

In February of 2008, Interwetten ran a 10% cashback promotion ($10 bonus for each $100 lost) for blackjack players. There were problems the second weekend, and any players who had made a profit, had their winnings voided and accounts locked. The casino claimed a technical malfunction, even though the identical promo had run and been honoured the weekend before.

The affected players filed complaints with the LGA in Malta, and some with CM. At the time this originally occurred, Interwetten was using Chartwell software. Sometime in May of 2008, eCOGRA awarded a Play It Safe seal to Interwetten. I'm guessing this is when they switched the casino over to Microgaming software. There is some discrepancy as to whether the seal applied to only their poker room, or to the casino and sportsbook as well. The casino was most definitely displaying the seal at that time. At the time the seal was awarded, there had been no resolution of this matter one way or the other, including no response from the LGA.

1. Was eCOGRA aware of the the player complaints regarding Interwetten?
2. Was the seal awarded to just the poker room? Or poker and casino?
3. Even if the seal were awarded to only the poker room, is it still the same ownership/management/policies, etc? How do you justify awarding a Play It Safe seal to a company with this many outstanding player complaints?
4. The casino itself now definitely falls under the eCOGRA umbrella. Given the fact that you "certified" this operation while these complaints were outstanding, would you be willing to revisit this issue with the 15 or so players who were affected by this?


CASINO ACTION/TUSK

On February 15, 2008 eCOGRA suspended the seals of the Casino Action Group and the one poker room (Arctic Poker), currently under their umbrella. The reason given at that time was "failures in compliance with eCOGRA's Generally Accepted Practices (eGAP)". A representative from Casino Action posted on the CM forum citing "purely administrative issues, seals to be re-instated soon, business as usual". On February 27, 2008 Microgaming announced they were terminating the software licence with Tusk Investment Corporation (to include the six CA casinos, and the 28 My Poker Profit poker rooms). They further stated that the company was in the liquidation process.

It was at this time that the player community found out that the "failures in compliance" that eCOGRA referred to was "the Group failing to maintain ratio of reserves to obligations".

On March 20, 2008 it was announced that Casino Rewards would be taking over the Casino Action properties, that being the casinos only, but not the poker rooms. Player balances and bonuses were transferred over, and all seemed fine. However, this left a gap of five weeks or more that players were unable to access their accounts, initiate withdrawals, etc.

1. Were you aware of the dire situation that CA/Tusk was in financially?
2. Why did eCOGRA not think it acceptable to give more of an explanation when the seals were revoked? Do they not believe that the player community has a right to know when their funds are at risk?
3. There had been mention of an NDA (non-disclosure agreement), and this being the possible reason why you could not provide us (players) with more information. Are there NDA's in place that prevent you from disclosing these issues to the player community, prior to the company actually folding?
4. If the answer to the above is yes, then how can you protect the players from this ever happening again?
5. While the casino players have been taken care of, the poker players affected are perhaps going to get 20% of their account balances returned to them, via the liquidators named to the case. At least one poker room, Arctic Poker, was a member of eCOGRA when the seals were revoked. How can you expect players in the future to have confidence that eCOGRA will protect them, when the only explanation players were given for revoking Arctic Poker's seal was "non-compliance with eGAP policy"?
6. eCOGRA is advertised as being in the business of player protection, not casino protection. What assurances do we have that if this whole scenario repeats itself in the future, that players will be protected? The players from Arctic Poker were certainly not helped in any way by the poker room they chose to play at, having an eCOGRA seal.
7. If these same operators popped up again in the future, wanting to open a new casino/poker room, would you consider certifying them again, given their past mistakes and mismanagement of funds?

GRAND PRIVE

On December 1, 2008 Grand Prive made the decision to back out of the U.S. market completely. It was later revealed that their affiliate program, Grand Prive Affiliates, were going to cease operations, and all affiliate accounts would be closed. The final payment due to affiliates would be made in December, for November's revenue. Yet, the casinos continue to operate, business as usual. When affiliates sign up to a program, they sign up with the understanding that they will be paid their commission for life on the players they have referred (with the exception of a CPA deal). This whole issue has been viewed by most as a serious breach of contract. Many affiliate sites (including Casinomeister) have blacklisted all of the GP casinos. While I understand that the GP affiliate program is not certified under eCOGRA, many within the industry believe that the affiliate programs and the casinos they represent, are all one and the same. If a casino treats its players badly, chances are the affiliate program isn't top notch, and vice versa. It all comes down to ethics and common business practice.

1. Do you view the GP affiliate program and the GP casinos as two different entities?
2. Considering how unethical it is for the GP affiliate program to treat its business partners in this manner, what assurances does the player have that the casino side of the business will treat its players any better?
3. Was the removal of the seals from the casinos ever considered when it was revealed what the affiliate program was planning on doing?
4. Grand Prive opened a new casino called Villa Fortuna, and a new affiliate program, Villa Fortuna Affiliates, catering to the European/UK market. eCOGRA has recently gotten involved in certifying affiliate programs (Roxy and Fortune Lounge at present). Would you ever consider awarding a seal to VF Affiliates, given the unethical business practice of GP Affiliates? If so, how do you explain that to affiliates who were affected by the GP mess?
5. Do you believe that casinos and their affiliate companies should be judged together, or individually? Do you believe that the industry as a whole, would be better off (and more legitimate), if everyone (regulatory bodies/agencies, industry advocates, webmasters, players, etc) considered all aspects of a company's business prior to awarding certification or a stamp of approval?

REPUTABLE PORTAL SITES LINKING

Within the last year or so, eCOGRA ventured into cross linking with portal sites. I refrain from using the word reputable, as there are many on the list that are anything but reputable. I didn't spend a ton of time on this, but did click some random links (today) to see what sort of sites eCOGRA was linking to.

Two of the criteria that are listed at ecogra.org in respect to what is required of these linked sites:

"Sites that link to eCOGRA will be continuously inspected by independent eCOGRA contractors at least once monthly".

"eCOGRA prefers not to be associated with sites that promote known rogue operations".

The third link I clicked on had a listing for almost every casino available on the internet, including Cool Cat, Club Player, Palace of Chance and Prism. These casinos wrote the book on rogue business practice, and are blacklisted at any true reputable gaming portal.

The next link I clicked on "theonlinecasinogamblingdirectory.com" is not an affiliate site, it is merely a search engine with a search bar on the main page, and not much else. No content, no banners, no casino reviews....nothing. There are some links at the bottom of the page. I clicked on the About Us link, which took me to a page that stated "we provide the most comprehensive search of online gaming sites". There is also a link on their main page to Gambling Tools and Systems. That directed me to a page full of links to topics like "Beating the Casino - Win Every Bet" and "How to Win Consistently at Baccarat". One final link from the homepage I checked out was Affiliate Programs, which took me to a page loaded with links to almost every casino affiliate program in existence, including some that this particular webmaster had marked as blacklisted, one of those being Villa Fortuna Affiliates (see above). I gave up after this as I had seen enough.

1. In respect to the monthly inspections, who are the independent contractors that perform this duty? Do they have any knowledge of online gaming, and what constitutes a rogue operation?
2. Given what I've posted above, are you satisfied that these contractors are doing an adequate job?
3. The second site I mentioned has links to gambling tools and systems. Any savvy player knows that there is no system that is going to allow you to consistently beat a casino and house advantage. Many are nothing more than scams to bilk yet more money out of unknowing players. Do you think that by linking to sites such as this, it lessens your own credibility in the player protection arena?
4. Would you agree that this aspect of your operation needs a lot more work and time devoted, for it to truly represent a list of "reputable" sites? Are you planning on ramping up the inspection procedure to ensure that this happens?
5. What is the purpose of exchanging links to sites such as these? Many people/players believe that it is nothing more than self-promotion, with no actual value. What do you think you can do to change this perception?
6. Have you ever considered asking the player community for help in matters such as this? Perhaps a "player liaison" (unpaid position) would lend some credibility to the claim that player protection is your primary goal. Any thoughts on this?

GENERAL QUESTIONS

1. What safeguards, if any, for the player does eCOGRA offer that a site's licensing authority does not?

2. How is eCOGRA funded and is it a profit making organization?

3. Are there any plans to make eCOGRA funding more transparent?

4. Does eCOGRA have any plans to have auditing done by an independent third party?

5. Does a player have the right to appeal an eCOGRA decision?

6. What plans does eCOGRA have to improve as an organization in the future?

[RobWin]

All great questions there Pina and I truly wish you good luck in getting "Clear Cut" answers to them. I'm sure though that you won't mind me not holding my breath waiting on them to actually be "truly transparent" answers, but we shall see. I'm willing to give Andrew the benefit of doubt until proven different. Is Andrew actually going to make an appearance here or is he doing this back and forth thing with you thru email?

[spiderlegz]

Good questions, altough I would have left out Grand Prive. They actually had it in their T&Cs for affiliates. So they didnt actually breach the contract.

[Pinababy69]

All great questions there Pina and I truly wish you good luck in getting "Clear Cut" answers to them. I'm sure though that you won't mind me not holding my breath waiting on them to actually be "truly transparent" answers, but we shall see. I'm willing to give Andrew the benefit of doubt until proven different. Is Andrew actually going to make an appearance here or is he doing this back and forth thing with you thru email?

Fair enough Rob, I guess time will tell. Like you, I'm willing to give anyone a chance and the benefit of the doubt. Like I always say (well okay, to myself)...you never know unless you try. Some of these questions relate to things that have been bugging me for a very long time, if I didn't take the opportunity when it was presented....to at least TRY and get some answers, then I don't really have much room to bitch about things I don't like.

My understanding is that Andrew will either post his reply/replies himself, or someone (I guess a rep from eCOGRA, not sure) will post. I don't believe that it will be me. Personally, I'd love to see him here to interact directly with the players, but that could be pretty time consuming.

Good questions, altough I would have left out Grand Prive. They actually had it in their T&Cs for affiliates. So they didnt actually breach the contract.

Thanks Spider...and you're right. I had forgotten that it was in the T & C's. I don't think I would have wanted to leave it out, as IMO, it's important. Legalities aside, what they did is unethical, and I'm a firm believer in the fact that each faction of this industry is inextricably tied together. And that each and every one of those factions needs to conduct itself in an upfront, honest and ethical manner...whether that be players, casinos, software suppliers, affiliates, industry overseers, etc. I bitch and complain all the time about unethical affiliates, but that doesn't mean I enjoy seeing the good ones getting shafted as well. Fair treatment for everyone...in a perfect world, lol.

Couple that with the fact that eCOGRA is branching out into awarding seals to affiliate programs now, I thought that it was relevant. I could have worded it differently though....ahhh, the beauty of hindsight.

Thanks for the correction though..that's what I get for doing six things at once.

[GrandMaster]

4. The casino itself now definitely falls under the eCOGRA umbrella. Given the fact that you "certified" this operation while these complaints were outstanding, would you be willing to revisit this issue with the 15 or so players who were affected by this?

I know the answer to this one. I was in a similar situation when Casino Kingdom pulles a bait and switch trick on me shortly before becoming ecogra certified. I suggested that it should be advertised widely when a casino wants to become ecogra certified, and players should be asked to send their grievance to TeX Rees, and the seal should only be awarded if all the outstanding issues have been settled satisfactorily.

[vinylweatherman]

Many casinos have those "we can do what we like" clauses in their terms and conditions.

What eCogra SHOULD be looking at is whether these terms comply with consumer protection legislation in the UK and EU. If not, eCogra should ban such non-compliant terms before granting a seal, and if they find such a term in a casino already bearing the seal, should strike it out when investigating a player complaint. The UK gambling commission, and particularly the office of fair trading, can advise on the legality of individual clauses.

One grey area is whether an affiliate is considered a consumer, or another business, since there is far stronger protection for consumers against unfair contracts. Clearly, a player is a consumer.

[dominique]

Good questions, altough I would have left out Grand Prive. They actually had it in their T&Cs for affiliates. So they didnt actually breach the contract.

Where in the T&Cs did it say they did not have to pay monies owed?


Great job, Pinababy!

[mojo]

My understanding is that Andrew will either post his reply/replies himself, or someone (I guess a rep from eCOGRA, not sure) will post. I don't believe that it will be me. Personally, I'd love to see him here to interact directly with the players, but that could be pretty time consuming.

Great job putting those questions together and it must have been time consuming.

Just an fyi..

As a result of the previous eCOGRA thread I had written Mr. Beveridge with my question about Grand Prive seals (which you covered, ty). To his credit Mr. Beveridge did write me back promptly. He indicated he agreed to respond to a list of questions from Pinababy and would respond to mine as well at that time. Which makes sense since otherwise he would have been all over the place trying to answer.

[Pinababy69]

Where in the T&Cs did it say they did not have to pay monies owed?

Hey Dom, here is the term, as it was on their website at that time.

TERMINATION IS AT WILL, FOR ANY REASON, BY EITHER PARTY.

The Webmaster (Affiliate) will not be entitled to referral fees occurring after the date of termination.

I know that some can argue that it is open to interpretation. In my mind, it is clearly an FU clause, which is the type of thing that players have been dealing with for ages...yet one which many affiliates have never taken into consideration when deciding which programs to promote (ie. is the casino arm of the program fair to players, in all aspects of their operation, including T&C's).

Many casinos have these FU clauses in their terms and conditions, yet not all of them invoke them at will. In MY perfect online world, they wouldn't exist at all. Like I said to Spider, I'm less concerned with the legality of things, and much more concerned with the ethics. The ethics of eCOGRA, casinos, affiliate programs, affiliates, industry overseers and yes, the ethics of players as well. Each part of this industry goes hand in hand with the next part...with the player being the one who supplies the money who makes it all work. The player is the engine, with all the other factions being the parts of the engine. When one part breaks down, the whole thing is broken.

Those of us who want to see true progress made have to start seriously working together, it's the only way. Affiliates have to put players AHEAD of themselves, agencies who say they are in the business of player protection have to have some teeth and put the player first, and players have to start caring about more than just if they get paid when they win. They SHOULD care about other players, about affiliates, and about a company (casino's) general business practices. Am I dreaming too big?

Mojo, I'm ecstatic to hear that you took the initiative and wrote to Andrew.

I really wish more people would do the same, be that affiliate, player, whatever. People find it very easy to bitch and moan about one thing or another, but very few want to take the time to actually try and do anything about it at all.

[lots0]

When is Mr. Beveridge supposed to answer your questions?

I have been awaiting his response to your questions with some anticipation.

BTW - Damn good job Pinababy69