Hi from Karolina @bgo

[goatwack]

Sorry but I just got this through from a certain casino. I've protected their discretion but found the desription 'apt' given our arguments

 

[Jono777]

Right, I've 'thanked' both sides of the coin as I can understand the points from both a players perspective as well as a casino operators.

The problem I have is this game is more Dead than Alive so would always err on the side of 'why ban' if I had to make a final decision.

Sure this game with the ability to pay huge is open to bonus abuse, especially if there is a syndicate of players involved which we've read about over the years and also an attractive 'SUB' they can abuse as mentioned.

The other part of me then thinks 'Well if there is 10 players who all deposit 100, taking 100 bonus (100%) then yes they can go for it at massive bet sizes BUT there is still no guarantee that they will profit

Casinos have far more in place than players do to protect themselves such as WR, AML procedures and T&C's as long as your arm on some instances.

In an ideal world I feel all players accounts and whether they are genuine, fraudsters or 'other' and whether they can play DOA, £10 a spin etc etc should be based on individual merit and previous activity.

The problem is then that this would take forever and a day to sift through, thus incurring more costs and less profit to casinos which is why we are all cast under the same shadow.

*This is a general post and not specifically aimed at BGO.

 

[andersson_hel]

hello there!
Hoping to hear allot form you!