Wouldn't the easiest way to kill of the rogues be to stop the flow of money?

[takethemoney]

After dinner, after dessert, I had some thoughts pinging around in my head. It's bad enough that the software provider, ie., RTG won't deactivate a rogue casino operator. This leaves me to wonder how they manage to stay plugged in to most means of funding? I logged into my old Virtual account and noticed a few things. They do not have any network jackpots, which doesn't surprise me, but what really surprised me is that they are able to still accept AMEX, VISA, Mastercard, web wallets, phone pay, click to pay, etc.

It seems that until they are completely cut off, they will be able to continue extracting money from the unsuspecting. As long as there are casino portals that are willing to promote them, there will always be the unsuspecting. Some of the bonuses look too good to pass up for people who don't know any better. Sigh...I guess you can't idot proof the world. Until everyone in the industry has decided they have had enough of rogues, there will be plenty. They will continue to hide behind countries who will do little, if anything to punish them.

[osulle]

After dinner, after dessert, I had some thoughts pinging around in my head. It's bad enough that the software provider, ie., RTG won't deactivate a rogue casino operator. This leaves me to wonder how they manage to stay plugged in to most means of funding? I logged into my old Virtual account and noticed a few things. They do not have any network jackpots, which doesn't surprise me, but what really surprised me is that they are able to still accept AMEX, VISA, Mastercard, web wallets, phone pay, click to pay, etc.

It seems that until they are completely cut off, they will be able to continue extracting money from the unsuspecting. As long as there are casino portals that are willing to promote them, there will always be the unsuspecting. Some of the bonuses look too good to pass up for people who don't know any better. Sigh...I guess you can't idot proof the world. Until everyone in the industry has decided they have had enough of rogues, there will be plenty. They will continue to hide behind countries who will do little, if anything to punish them.

I think that software platforms should be a little bit more responsible. The fact that RTG doesn't seem to give a flying f?*k who uses their software as long as they get paid. That makes the software just as rogue as the casinos.

I think RTG should pull the license of the rogue casinos. That would solve the problem for newbies out their getting ripped off by these clip joints but nooooooooo RTG doesn't do anything A little bit of accountablity from the software provider should not be an impossible dream.

All I gotta say it is time for some serious online regulation but for those of us in the US that is a long way if it ever happens at all. It is up to us the players to exercise due diligence where casinos are concerned. The rule of thumb I live by since I got stung by the hated virtual group (when I was a newbie) is that if something looks to good to be true then it damn well is and move on to the next casino.

Regards

[takethemoney]

Yeah, one of the very first things I would look for today are bonuses that are over 150%, with few exceptions. Actually, I used to play with 200% almost every weekend with Cherry Red.(not rogue) Playthru was only 20 x, which I feel is decent. I just got an email from Mighty slots a few weeks back for 600%, dep $100-$500. I looked at the terms and it's 50x rollover....but, this one is a no go anyway, because it's rogue. Funny enough, though, I noticed another deal where you deposit $20 and get $980! 120 x playthru / max cashout $300. Sorry, but that is imfuckingpossible, and even IF, you won't get paid.

[love2winalot]

Hiya: Do a google search, and you will find the information you are asking for. If everyone sacraficed the use of one service provider, the bad casinos would be bankrupt........

[Simmo!]

But it's not really fair IMO to penalise the casinos that are doing things honestly and right (iNet, CWC etc). I'd like to think they are also putting pressure on RTG but with the amount of money the rogues bring in, probably the only way to make RTG realise that they are basically facilitating dodgy ops is for the reputable operators to show RTG the door. And until there are good viable options for the USA that is probably not going to happen.

But the day where these options are available will come eventually and if any software provider entering the USA had any common sense, they would approach the best RTG operations and offer them good deals. Because let's face it, they are the glue that hold RTG together.

[Cant_Get_Right]

But it's not really fair IMO to penalise the casinos that are doing things honestly and right (iNet, CWC etc). I'd like to think they are also putting pressure on RTG but with the amount of money the rogues bring in, probably the only way to make RTG realise that they are basically facilitating dodgy ops is for the reputable operators to show RTG the door. And until there are good viable options for the USA that is probably not going to happen.

But the day where these options are available will come eventually and if any software provider entering the USA had any common sense, they would approach the best RTG operations and offer them good deals. Because let's face it, they are the glue that hold RTG together.

I respectfully disagree. If RTG won't shut down these rogues. Then it's the players responsibility to do it. That means boycotting the product. If Inetbet and CWC would feel the effect. Then maybe they will join in the fight and force RTG to get regulate their clients. One spoil apple does in fact spoils a dozen.

[Rusty]

But it's not really fair IMO to penalise the casinos that are doing things honestly and right (iNet, CWC etc). I'd like to think they are also putting pressure on RTG but with the amount of money the rogues bring in, probably the only way to make RTG realise that they are basically facilitating dodgy ops is for the reputable operators to show RTG the door. And until there are good viable options for the USA that is probably not going to happen.

But the day where these options are available will come eventually and if any software provider entering the USA had any common sense, they would approach the best RTG operations and offer them good deals. Because let's face it, they are the glue that hold RTG together.

I respectfully disagree. If RTG won't shut down these rogues. Then it's the players responsibility to do it. That means boycotting the product. If Inetbet and CWC would feel the effect. Then maybe they will join in the fight and force RTG to get regulate their clients. One spoil apple does in fact spoils a dozen.

You are both right aren't you?
On the one hand it is not fair that decent Casinos get tainted with the same brush as the rogues for using the same software but on the other hand every Casino has the choice of software they use

Inet and any other so called "honest" Casino must have been fully aware that the RTG platform supplied rogue Casinos that ripped players off, happily standing idly by and raking in the cash, when they made their choice of provider. How honest is that by the way?

Further they have the choice to switch provider at any time and prove their integrity/honesty but fail to do so.
The same is true of Casinos using other dodgy providers, they are all complicit in allowing the rogues to operate and people to be ripped off.

What about players?
Yes we have a responsibility to.
In the same way Casinos can choose their provider so can the player and I appreciate the contradiction of players moaning about software yet still playing it. Truth be known if all players simply refused to use the product it would solve the problem in the same way as Casinos doing likewise but this is a practical impossibility.

What about the affiliates?
They certainly have a responsibility to protect their clients from rogue Casinos.
Unfortunately for every rogue Casino there are a hundred rogue affiliates.
Again affiliates can choose which Casinos/software they promote and any that promote known rogues or ignore issues are really the lowest of the low because they make money off the back of this thievery. It's like mugging an old lady but asking your accomplice to hit her with the cosh because you don't have the stomach for it then gleefully going through her purse as she lies on the floor.
Players stay loyal to an affiliate you can trust, many of which exist here, rather than seeking out the best bonus offers, that is your responsibility again.


So let's be clear.
The onus is on the providers to ensure their product is fair and licensed only to Casinos which adhere to their standards of fairness.
It is then for Casinos to choose the software they feel best reflects on their brand.
Then the affiliates need to promote these brands and make players aware of the issues surrounding other brands.
Finally the players need to be more responsible when choosing which casino to donate their cash to.

None of that is going to happen without proper regulation though is it?
Certainly the industry has proved it is incapable of regulating itself.

[spike38]

I've been doing my part for months and don't miss these clip joints one bit. If I've deposited $100 over the last four months total I'd be surprised. Instead I spend more time in the garden, reading, and enjoying my grandkids which is way more rewarding in the end.
Also when needing a gambling fix it has been all horse racing for me which has also been way more rewarding. As a matter of fact I believe www.Xpressbet.com is running a special right now for new accounts, wager $100 in total bets and they give you $100 extra. The average person can wager $100 off a $50 deposit easy just making show bets. Plus the Derby is tomorrow. Serious good deal. Cheers !!

[Simmo!]

Inet and any other so called "honest" Casino must have been fully aware that the RTG platform supplied rogue Casinos that ripped players off, happily standing idly by and raking in the cash, when they made their choice of provider. How honest is that by the way?

It predates me so I can't be sure, but iNetBet made their choice in 1998 - not sure whether the Rogues were branded as rogues back then.

Further they have the choice to switch provider at any time and prove their integrity/honesty but fail to do so.

If they want to continue taking US, they only really have two choices right now. It's totally unreasonable IMO to expect a business to a) ditch a vast proportion of it's existing client base and b) significantly increase it's overheads at the same time just to try and shoot down another business. When there are sensible options, then you might find they do just this.

What about the affiliates?
They certainly have a responsibility to protect their clients from rogue Casinos.

Totally agree. Learned today that there is a prominent affiliate that should know better promoting a known rogue group which pisses me off. They have been notified btw

The onus is on the providers to ensure their product is fair and licensed only to Casinos which adhere to their standards of fairness.

No. That's how it *should* be. Not how it is unfortunately. Although some do.

None of that is going to happen without proper regulation though is it? Certainly the industry has proved it is incapable of regulating itself.

Agreed. Although IMO it was making very good headway until the UIGEA came along, forced out most of the good operators and left the door open for the rogues again.

[Rusty]

So it seems we have only one area of disagreement on this which is essentially whether a Casino should put profit before ethics?

After all the fact is there are viable alternatives so the only argument is whether rogue Casinos existed and the software provider was seen to be complicit before the Casino brand we are considering chose its provider, if they did it is fair to point out such brands are also ethically challenged.

If they chose the software before known issues then I may have more empathy but would still argue with your supposition;

"It's totally unreasonable IMO to expect a business to a) ditch a vast proportion of it's existing client base and b) significantly increase it's overheads at the same time just to try and shoot down another business."

Why would they need to ditch a vast proportion of their current client base? Ah yes because of chasing the mighty Dollar where many software companies and Casinos have pulled out - ethics?

Regardless, what you are saying in effect is that a Casino should always put profit before ethics because no matter how many dirty tricks or how much dirty money a software company makes the $ for the Casino is the bottom line.
I would suggest that is exactly the problem and why rogue Casinos exist.

You then ask why should they should switch to just shoot down another business and I would answer they shouldn't.
They should just do the right thing and everything else falls into place.

"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing"

Let me ask you this.
If in your business you were to discover your supplier is also associating with known crooks and profiting from this association would you consider it ok to ignore this just because you are making a nice buck?
Is that not exactly what the rogue affiliates are doing?

If that is ok or just realistically what is likely to happen then fine but lets not pat ourselves on the back and pretend we are honest and ethical.
I am no better than anyone else but let's at least tell it how it is.