Oh dear, I've been bonus banned by All British Casino.

[fun4all]

Player wager(s) the bonus to the exact point the WR has been fulfilled

If you want the players to wager more then raise the WR.

 

[Jono777]

I think she means the 'second' or 'click' that the WR is met the player 'dives' straight into the Cashier and withdraws the majority of their balance and does this every time, leaving next to nothing to 'risk back'.

Increasing WR will go against all players and would be unfair.

On the rare occasion I manage to clear WR when accepting a bonus I do tend to at least wager £100 or so over and above the requirement, for several reasons which maybe include...

*Finally my balance is high enough to have a few bets above my usual minimum

*It shows 'fair play' from both sides, I have always had a 'secret paranoia' NEVER to W/D the moment any WR is met and to play for a short while with all cash balance first (cheers for confirming my thoughts Jan )

 

[psychogene]

"Player wager(s) the bonus to the exact point the WR has been fulfilled"

Is it bad to do this every time you receive a bonus ? I think its hard enough clearing a WR thats above x35 (which seems to be the minimum I see these days) that as a player there must be a sense of relief and satisfaction they receive once they have managed to clear the WR. Even if they do this ALL the time they withdraw from a bonus isn't this a bit unfair to the player since they technically have not broken any rules of the bonus T&C?

I kind of feel for those that take the bonus regularly because it may be something that have enticed them to play that casino in the first place. No doubt they could just leave and find other places where taking bonuses is not a privilege but a right if offered. I think its kind of counter intuitive to just ban players bonuses outright because not only does it lower their status in that casino and probably make them stop playing there but it just makes the casino look rather greedy in my own opinion.

Might be a good idea to raise the conditions for repeat bonus users (not abusers) will make them stop using it all together if the conditions are too strict but at least it gives them an option to play with bonuses - which I am sure would have attracted alot of people to that casino in the first place. Seems rather heavy handed to just bonus ban outright.

 

[muziq]

Ty casino rep

first of all i want thank L&L rep there was a lot of complaint against bonus banning and a rep find a time to reply for this

first the casino find time for the players to send a mail regarding this that's a really good gesture

and the reasons seems genuine too today i was bonus banned at 32 red and i didnt get any mails or anything like that

i played there all days this year and i was so disappointed with this ...

so Thanks and kudos

 

[Jono777]

I have just had a 'spark of brilliance' that will probably turn out to be discarded as a used nappy

How about if the last players deposit was cash only then their next deposit they can accept / use a bonus.

If they played with a bonus on last deposit (whether or not WR was cleared) then they must play 1x cash only deposit before the 'system' will allow a new bonus to be accepted / played.

May need some 'tweaking' but good concept and foundations to build upon maybe.....????

I can see me getting rich on this one, all you casino reps, I'm off to the copywriters as we post......

This time next year I'll be a millionaire............................

 

[muziq]

not a bad idea jon

i dont mind making a cash deposit at any where im treated well and get frequent bonus

 

[Nate]

I have had nothing but good experiences at All British. Bonus banning is common even at places like Guts, 32Red etc.

To put things into perspective:

1. Player deposits 30 (The Casino gets charged a fee from Neteller / Skrill etc)

2. Player receives 100 Free Spins (There is a cost associated to that)

3. Player withdraws 30 (Another cost associated)

4. This is a 7 day offer - Rinse and repeat this 7 times and the casino fits the bill and it seems the only intention is to claim the free spins, try and win, if not head for the hills in anticipation of day 2 with the same balance.

Not saying this is the case with you brianmon and no disrespect intended. Just putting things into perspective. There are lots of players who do this and its not a sustainable business model for any casino.

All British have been rather generous with this offer - NO OTHER Casino offers this. Free spins are instant, not credited the next day either. Other places try to grab your money and dish out 20 or 50 Spins for a 100 Euro deposit. They also offer this at All Irish and All Australian Casino. Add several players claiming this across all brands and you now have the casino removing the offer for genuine players.

Nate

 

[L&L-Jan]

If you want the players to wager more then raise the WR.

Hi,

We have decided that 35x bonus is a fun challenge for players and pretty competitive in the market.

I'm not a fan to apply a higher wagering on our bonuses.

Kr. Jan

 

[L&L-Jan]

I have just had a 'spark of brilliance' that will probably turn out to be discarded as a used nappy

How about if the last players deposit was cash only then their next deposit they can accept / use a bonus.

If they played with a bonus on last deposit (whether or not WR was cleared) then they must play 1x cash only deposit before the 'system' will allow a new bonus to be accepted / played.

May need some 'tweaking' but good concept and foundations to build upon maybe.....????

I can see me getting rich on this one, all you casino reps, I'm off to the copywriters as we post......

This time next year I'll be a millionaire............................

To be really honest:
If the above what you describe would have been applied by the players who have received our email yesterday they wouldn't have received the email.

I dont see any player to become excluded for bonuses at any casino if, on occasion, a deposit is done without any bonus offer.

Kr.

Jan

 

[brianmon]

I have had nothing but good experiences at All British. Bonus banning is common even at places like Guts, 32Red etc.

To put things into perspective:

1. Player deposits 30 (The Casino gets charged a fee from Neteller / Skrill etc)

2. Player receives 100 Free Spins (There is a cost associated to that)

3. Player withdraws 30 (Another cost associated)

4. This is a 7 day offer - Rinse and repeat this 7 times and the casino fits the bill and it seems the only intention is to claim the free spins, try and win, if not head for the hills in anticipation of day 2 with the same balance.

Not saying this is the case with you brianmon and no disrespect intended. Just putting things into perspective. There are lots of players who do this and its not a sustainable business model for any casino.

All British have been rather generous with this offer - NO OTHER Casino offers this. Free spins are instant, not credited the next day either. Other places try to grab your money and dish out 20 or 50 Spins for a 100 Euro deposit. They also offer this at All Irish and All Australian Casino. Add several players claiming this across all brands and you now have the casino removing the offer for genuine players.

Nate

Even though I was never intending to make 7 deposits.

Is that not the whole point of the offer? to get a player to make 7 daily deposits? Or am I missing something here?
Or is it just a problem if you happen to win?

Well whatever the case may be. I actually reversed my withdrawal last night and played it down to zero. So now I can just close my account and forget about All British casino

 

[vinylweatherman]

It doesn't help that players can claim the offer at each casino in the group, rather than having to pick one.

It also seems that the ban hits without warning, so the player has no reason that their behaviour is out of line with what the casino expects.

Perhaps they should look at offering personal bonuses based on an individual player's recent activity rather than an across the board "one size fits all" promotion that has to be geared to the average player.

For example, if a player decides to only deposit for the 100% bonuses, the system reacts by no longer offering 100% bonuses. If the player then concedes after waiting "ages" for the next 100% offer to come along, and takes the 50% ones, the system can then react again after a while by only offering 25%, then 10%, then only free spins. The bonus terms will simply state that the offers one receives depend on past activity.

This would either steer a player's behaviour back towards the average if they want to start seeing the higher bonuses, or it will gently ease them out, rather than inflicting an abrupt ban.

Conversely, players that play a fair bit outside of the offers will see their offers respond accordingly, and they will see more in the way of 100% bonuses, and they will have bigger maxima.

The 32Red Dish of the Day appears to respond in such a manner, but it can't be perfect as there are still reports of players getting bonus banned.

The same player being able to claim a daily offer at all four 32Red sites seems to be an anomaly that for the average player 32Red has allowed to stand, but that for others, it has decided to enforce the policy of only one bonus offer per household/player per day.

 

[Harry_BKK]

This would either steer a player's behaviour back towards the average if they want to start seeing the higher bonuses, or it will gently ease them out, rather than inflicting an abrupt ban.

Conversely, players that play a fair bit outside of the offers will see their offers respond accordingly, and they will see more in the way of 100% bonuses, and they will have bigger maxima.

The 32Red Dish of the Day appears to respond in such a manner, but it can't be perfect as there are still reports of players getting bonus banned.

The same player being able to claim a daily offer at all four 32Red sites seems to be an anomaly that for the average player 32Red has allowed to stand, but that for others, it has decided to enforce the policy of only one bonus offer per household/player per day.

Nope, 1x 100% / week up to 100$, 2 x 50% and the rest 10% and 25%. And i deposited some 35K this year at 32RED alone. So plenty of deposits without bonus chips and nothing has been increased.

I had once in the past 3 months 2 x 100% up to 100$ in a week, but therefor only 1 x 50% and the rest 25% and 10%.

Hence, i can't say that with more deposits without bonuses the DOTD is increased or giving higher maxima.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Nope, 1x 100% / week up to 100$, 2 x 50% and the rest 10% and 25%. And i deposited some 35K this year at 32RED alone. So plenty of deposits without bonus chips and nothing has been increased.

I had once in the past 3 months 2 x 100% up to 100$ in a week, but therefor only 1 x 50% and the rest 25% and 10%.

Hence, i can't say that with more deposits without bonuses the DOTD is increased or giving higher maxima.

I have found that when I have been depositing without bonuses when chasing the 999 continue tournaments, I have been offered 50% up to £250, whereas it's usually 50% up to £100. I have also seen it dip to 50% up to £50, and numerous 10% up to £20 offers when my deposits fall off.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I have found that when I have been depositing without bonuses when chasing the 999 continue tournaments, I have been offered 50% up to £250, whereas it's usually 50% up to £100. I have also seen it dip to 50% up to £50, and numerous 10% up to £20 offers when my deposits fall off.

Nope, always the same for me. Had days where i deposited $5-10K, the utmost part without a bonus and nothing changed. But then, i got used to being ignored by them.

 

[brianmon]

Nope, always the same for me. Had days where i deposited $5-10K, the utmost part without a bonus and nothing changed. But then, i got used to being ignored by them.

Maybe the problem is that you're depositing so much, that they don't need to offer you any incentive to make deposits

 

[hedgehok]

Nope, always the same for me. Had days where i deposited $5-10K, the utmost part without a bonus and nothing changed. But then, i got used to being ignored by them.

I am pretty sure you have a personal note as a "unwelcomed player". I feel sorry because it seems you have been a very loyal player and you feel truly disappointed about the decreasing value 32red sees in you compared to the past. It's probably best to say Good-bye. Someone with you deposit-sizes will get welcome-kisses all over the places.

 

[brianmon]

I've just found out that L&L also have a site called 'FreeSpins Casino', which is identical to 'All British Casino' and even offers the same promotions.
Where EVERY deposit comes with free spins. So it's Even more obvious that I was bonus banned for completing the wagering requirements and withdrawing too often.

 

[Jono777]

They also run/own a casino called 'No Bonus Casino' which does exactly what it says on the tin!

Aimed at players who prefer straight cash gambling, no wagering, no bonus t&C's etc etc

 

[Nate]

L&L operate quite a few places - Apart from All British and Free Spins Casino, they operate:

All Irish Casino
Adler Casino (German)
All Australian Casino
Karl Casino
NorgesCasino (Norwegian)
Norskeautomater (Norwegian)
Polder Casino (Dutch)
No Bonus Casino
Klaver Casino (Dutch)

Each of these casinos target a specific market. Some of them accept players from different countries and they may claim welcome bonuses but only through affiliates (Or the Rep). The Casino layouts are very similar BUT Casino layouts don't bother me too much. Id rather have a smooth play session than have 50 000 graphics spoiling my experience.

Nate

 

[shadieb]

Like many others I play with bonus to extend game play with the hope of a win along the way. I also got the bonus banned email from all British last week, and I am also bonus banned from 32RED.

In all honesty if it wasn't for the bonus I would have never deposited at All British casino. I did only ever use them if there was a bonus available (like many other places I play at). However no bonus means I just won't play there again.
Considering they have wage requirements attached to the bonuses, and as players we don't moan if we don't meet the WR or get a cash out, it all seems a bit one sided in my opinion.

There is a wide range of other places to play at that do let me use bonuses and don't whine if I make the wage requirements. These are the places that will continue to get my money. Simple as that.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Like many others I play with bonus to extend game play with the hope of a win along the way. I also got the bonus banned email from all British last week, and I am also bonus banned from 32RED.

In all honesty if it wasn't for the bonus I would have never deposited at All British casino. I did only ever use them if there was a bonus available (like many other places I play at). However no bonus means I just won't play there again.
Considering they have wage requirements attached to the bonuses, and as players we don't moan if we don't meet the WR or get a cash out, it all seems a bit one sided in my opinion.

There is a wide range of other places to play at that do let me use bonuses and don't whine if I make the wage requirements. These are the places that will continue to get my money. Simple as that.

Shoots down the usual explanation then.

"we offer bonuses to genuine players as a means to extend their gameplay......... these players need not worry.............".

It appears that the player body has been duped into believing that it's "advantage players" that cause all the bonus related problems, but these cases seem to suggest that it has less to do with "advantage players" and more to do with trying to make over a set amount of revenue over a set amount of playing time, and that these "genuine players" really DO have to worry if their extended playing time leads to less per hour being made by the casino than their established floor amount.

Fruit machine operators dealt with this revenue per hour played issue by pressing for ever higher stakes per spin, and introducing games that played through a bet much faster (removing the more entertaining and lengthy bonus features in favour of line wins and simplistic features). Online casinos accept some very low spin stakes compared to their land based counterparts, so maybe they would rather balance out the problem by bonus banning "slow players" who generate too little edge per hour for the house than raise the minimum stakes on the games.


Our machines start at 25p, for £100 jackpot and £1 for the £500 jackpot. Thunderstruck can be played for 9p per spin online. The online TRTP is also higher, leaving much less per spin in earnings for the house.

 

[Jono777]

Most grateful for the above post VWM!

I've been playing AWP's since, well since I was legally old enough too!! (Calmed down a lot over last 2-3 years)

Had an idea but was never 100% sure why all the feature based machines disappeared over a period of time and we were surrounded by 'Bar-X' type machines everywhere. So now I know!

To be honest I used to make a fortune back in the 'good ol days' from fruities but switched to online when I had not come across a legal 'emptier' (refusing wins, forcing machine etc) for yonks or the proper advantage I relied upon in that with the more complicated featured and skill based slots, inexperienced players would leave them 'gagging' for me to jump on - Could fill an entire thread with stories.

May I ask, did MG remove their Fruit machines as these could be forced by refusing the wins non stop on low bets and then getting the top feature at a higher bet size once the machine was 'boiling'?

Cheers

 

[vinylweatherman]

Most grateful for the above post VWM!

I've been playing AWP's since, well since I was legally old enough too!! (Calmed down a lot over last 2-3 years)

Had an idea but was never 100% sure why all the feature based machines disappeared over a period of time and we were surrounded by 'Bar-X' type machines everywhere. So now I know!

To be honest I used to make a fortune back in the 'good ol days' from fruities but switched to online when I had not come across a legal 'emptier' (refusing wins, forcing machine etc) for yonks or the proper advantage I relied upon in that with the more complicated featured and skill based slots, inexperienced players would leave them 'gagging' for me to jump on - Could fill an entire thread with stories.

May I ask, did MG remove their Fruit machines as these could be forced by refusing the wins non stop on low bets and then getting the top feature at a higher bet size once the machine was 'boiling'?

Cheers

MG have refused to explain why they vanished so suddenly, and so UNUSUALLY. All we have is speculation. Not all could be "forced", and a machine that can be forced does not result in the RTP changing (unlike an emptier).

We used to have 10p stake machines, but the industry lobbied for a step change to 20p stakes because they were not able to make money fast enough on 10p. They were granted a doubling of the stake, and a modest 80p increase in the jackpot to £4.80. They claimed that this would allow them to increase the RTP to 92%, and give the players more playing time for each pound, but as soon as the fuss died down, the RTP was quickly reduced to the standard 72%-78% in most places. It was a good era for the pro player though, as many new innovations came along with the higher stake, and many included true skill bonus features, and "hidden" features that players would learn as they played.

We now have a general dumbing down. Machines do not have "hidden" features, they announce what one has to do, even do it for them, so even a new player would see that they had to hold all three, let them spin, etc. I have been in a service station where a coach traveller has put 10p into a machine, and then asked me for help because "it won't play". I would tell them it's 20p now, and their response was often "what a rip off" and walking away. I feel the rot set in when the industry suddenly fast tracked the changes so that players were facing large changes almost annually, as opposed to the 3 yearly review and modest changes. The higher stakes also made the machines more "hardcore gambling" than "amusement with prizes", and playing them was more tightly regulated.

In the glory days, I would often had to wait for even ONE machine to become free on a popular Saturday in the summer (at the motorway services). Now there is no problem finding a free machine, and often the entire arcade is empty, even at peak travel times. Increasing the stakes further and offering ever higher jackpots doesn't seem to have helped, people just play their set amount faster and walk out, which seems to be why the place is often so empty. Many probably gave up playing as a result of how quickly and "unentertaining" their play was for a given amount. This was happening BEFORE online gambling took off.

I suspect the trend towards "idiot proof" games is an attempt to convince the casual players that they are no longer at such a disadvantage compared to the "pro". Some players DID back away from playing because they always experienced a "tight game" due to the earlier attentions of a more skilled player. I have even been ejected from arcades with this explanation/excuse being cited. Now, the trend is to emulate the online or "Vegas" experience with 5 reel video slots replacing traditional fruit machines. These cost between £1 and £2 to play, and a maximum jackpot of £500.

I have also seen the growth in kiosks that offer a choice of several games, some "video fruit machines" included. Presumably this is to offer more choice without having to supply a large number of individual machines.

Currently, it seems a "Deal of no deal fad" is driving the industry, with EVERY fruit machine in some places being a variant of the theme. This could be fun if a fundamental "emptier" emerged that covered the entire franchise. Past emptiers have involved scouring the land for a small number of affected machines. Being able to empty all 20 machines at a given motorway services would make it worth paying the ridiculous charge for parking there all day to do it. I might even pay the bloated hotel charge in order to empty both sides, and rinse and repeat the following day after the supplier visited to refill the machines.

Oddly enough, the "bonus" was never really used as a marketing tool to get people to play fruit machines. For me, the biggest lure was the SKILL element involved, where there was a chance to learn individual machines and improve greatly on the set RTP. Online casinos are based on randomness, and seem to have used the bonus right from the start as the standard lure, and have now become entrapped by a "monster" of their own creation, as the ONLY way to exercise any skill online is in the way one plays a bonus. The ever tightening rules are stripping away the skill element in online play, and this could result in a similar loss of interest among the online regular, which would be crystallised when something new and better comes along, maybe online fruit machines that are even closer than the old MG offerings, perhaps a "virtual reality arcade" which simulated not just the games, but the art of "sharking" games, and choosing them based on how much other players had pumped into them.

 

[Finn]

Shoots down the usual explanation then.

"we offer bonuses to genuine players as a means to extend their gameplay......... these players need not worry.............".

It appears that the player body has been duped into believing that it's "advantage players" that cause all the bonus related problems, but these cases seem to suggest that it has less to do with "advantage players" and more to do with trying to make over a set amount of revenue over a set amount of playing time, and that these "genuine players" really DO have to worry if their extended playing time leads to less per hour being made by the casino than their established floor amount.

I guess this depends of definition. Some people might find only find high variance slots entertaining and define themselves as recreational player, whereas some casino might define a player who only deposits when bonus is available and then only plays high variance slots like Dead or Alive, Immortal Romance or its MG relatives as an advantage player.

shadieb's slots related discussion history consists only of high variance slots and he has posted 3 screenshots of hits in 1.7k-2.6k times the bet range. There is nothing wrong with finding only high variance slots as entertaining, just like there is nothing wrong with casinos bonus banning people who only deposit when bonus is available, and only play high variance slots. Bonus banning is much better compared to having complex rules and using them to confiscate winnings, and much better than balancing wagering requirements for all customers around some kind "deposits only when there is a bonus available and then plays only DOA or IR" habits.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I guess this depends of definition. Some people might find only find high variance slots entertaining and define themselves as recreational player, whereas some casino might define a player who only deposits when bonus is available and then only plays high variance slots like Dead or Alive, Immortal Romance or its MG relatives as an advantage player.

shadieb's slots related discussion history consists only of high variance slots and he has posted 3 screenshots of hits in 1.7k-2.6k times the bet range. There is nothing wrong with finding only high variance slots as entertaining, just like there is nothing wrong with casinos bonus banning people who only deposit when bonus is available, and only play high variance slots. Bonus banning is much better compared to having complex rules and using them to confiscate winnings, and much better than balancing wagering requirements for all customers around some kind "deposits only when there is a bonus available and then plays only DOA or IR" habits.

It's not for the casinos to narrowly define one's tastes, and then suggest that if one's tastes are a little odd, one is a "fraudster", or "out to rip them off". They are OFFERING these slots to players, so they shouldn't complain. These slots also seem to be the most popular, so it's clearly FACT that in general, people find such games more entertaining. This has also been backed up by research into why and how people get a buzz from gambling, and it is NOT from playing a boring game that slowly drains their money down over a prolonged period of time. If the human mind worked like that, the "petrol heads" would be driving as slowly as possible in order to "extend their journey time" rather than get their buzz from "seeing what she can do" when they climb into their nice motor.

Rather than beating around the bush and blaming the players, address the REAL problem, the trap that has grown from the early use of bonuses to grow the industry in it's early days. Bonuses worked then because the whole thing was pretty new to everyone. Now in it's maturity, most players know how to get the best out of a bonus, and for the few that don't, there are thousands of websites to teach them the art before they ever have to part with their first deposit.

The problem is only going to get worse, and eventually bonuses in their current form will go extinct as the majority of players will end up getting bonus banned. The problem now is that a player who is told they are bonus banned will often just walk away in the long term after a quick bitch & moan about it, so the casino STILL has a player base consisting mostly of players who play only when there is a bonus on offer. We are seeing this already as the bonus ban hammer is coming down in cases that only a couple of years ago would not even merit an audit.

I remember that not too long ago, slots players would NEVER get bonus banned, this was reserved mainly for Blackjack players who would routinely "grind out" the WR for a small profit.