Lucky Red's 400% Bonus

[Cleveland]

100.00 becomes 500.00 (25x playthrough, no max cashout, bonus money subtracted at withdrawal) etc etc.

I've never noticed a bonus that high so it seems to good too be true to me. Just curious if anyone who has played longer thinks it's a good deal? I've read good things about LuckyRed (part of CWG) but I wanted to hold off on depositing money using this bonus until I've heard from others.

On a side note: I've had good experiences with CWG just being cautious.

[takethemoney]

I played this same bonus twice; once as a sign up bonus and once again because they sent me a welcome back letter. Both times the casino was tight as hell. Did not come anywhere near playthough, making mostly 1 and less bets. I'd take the $100 you were thinking of depositing and go play somewhere with a lower % cashable bonus, or better yet, a decent paying casino (if there are any left) and NO bonus.

[Nate]

I agree with the above post... The worst part is you make the WR and you end up with $500 or less - You need to pay the $400 before you can withdraw.

If you are looking for playtime its another story altogether.

Nate

[Cleveland]

Thanks for the advice. I'll be passing on the bonus. Thanks again.

[KasinoKing]

100.00 becomes 500.00 (25x playthrough, no max cashout, bonus money subtracted at withdrawal) etc etc.

I've never noticed a bonus that high so it seems to good too be true to me. Just curious if anyone who has played longer thinks it's a good deal? I've read good things about LuckyRed (part of CWG) but I wanted to hold off on depositing money using this bonus until I've heard from others.

Personally I think bonuses like this are truly awful!
The wagering is insanely high for a phantom bonus. Using your figures for example:
Deposit $100, play with $500
WR = $500 x 25 = $12,500
Expected loss playing av. 95% RTP slots = $625
Then, after theoretical WR, they remove the $400 bonus.
So your $100 becomes:
$100 - $625 - $400 = -$925
In other words, unless you are EXTREMELY lucky (getting an RTP of over 100% on your $12,500 WR) you are virtually certain to lose.

IMO players should only take this type of bonus if they just want 4 x more playtime for their buck, or fancy some high-rolling, and are happy with having just a tiny chance of making a cash-out.

KK
PS: I have taken a couple of these myself!

[gerilege]

Personally I think bonuses like this are truly awful!
The wagering is insanely high for a phantom bonus. Using your figures for example:
Deposit $100, play with $500
WR = $500 x 25 = $12,500
Expected loss playing av. 95% RTP slots = $625
Then, after theoretical WR, they remove the $400 bonus.
So your $100 becomes:
$100 - $625 - $400 = -$925
In other words, unless you are EXTREMELY lucky (getting an RTP of over 100% on your $12,500 WR) you are virtually certain to lose.

IMO players should only take this type of bonus if they just want 4 x more playtime for their buck, or fancy some high-rolling, and are happy with having just a tiny chance of making a cash-out.

KK
PS: I have taken a couple of these myself!

KK, if the $400 is not added to the bankroll at the beginning, then there is no need to remove it at the end of your calculation.

[KasinoKing]

KK, if the $400 is not added to the bankroll at the beginning, then there is no need to remove it at the end of your calculation.

Ooops - yes, you're right - I got that wrong.
The final total should be -$525

KK

[H1_Roller]

Ooops - yes, you're right - I got that wrong.
The final total should be -$525

KK

It's still well and truly in the red though

[DiamondGeezer]

Looking at it another way - why not take the handbrake off, bet big and shoot for a massive score?

The most you can lose is $100. Yes you will lose nearly all the time but then if you lowroll that will be the case too.

They are worth a go once in a while.

[H1_Roller]

Looking at it another way - why not take the handbrake off, bet big and shoot for a massive score?

The most you can lose is $100. Yes you will lose nearly all the time but then if you lowroll that will be the case too.

They are worth a go once in a while.

As long as you stay within the limits. Don't most (all?) casinos have limits in regards to how much of a bonus you can wager at once?

Or did you mean doing this without taking a bonus?
If that's the case then ignore my first sentence D.G