Ask me anything (about slots)!

[mack341]

Trance this question sort of carries on from the bbw bonus round farce but is more of a generalisation regarding reel strips.

Do you think as players we should have access to reel strips? I find it quite strange that most things you can bet on have odds but a slot doesn’t have to display this. Only the overall rtp.

I know it’s probably expecting a lot to see the true odds of every outcome but when a slot advertises win up to 20,000x stake it would be nice to know the true odds of hitting that at least. I think @mack341 touched on this somewhere.

Regarding reel strips and being able to use different ones during the bonus round is something most players wouldn’t be aware of. Strictly I find it morally wrong that you can do this legally and not have to inform the player in the rules. It must be one of the only industries where you can legally deceive the customer.

I would also like to know the explanation for why some games appear to have fixed reel strips and some make it up as they go along so to speak.

Take a game like Gonzo’s Quest that appears to have fixed reel strips in that if you play it enough you know what symbols will appear after a cascade. Compare it to Napoleon (I know it doesn’t cascade) and that game is displaying symbols below the actual 15 that count. That if you shuffled all the reels up one position can’t possibly occur in those positions. For example the soldier in view and one directly below which can never happen.View attachment 107734

I also recall you saying somewhere that it’s best the player doesn’t know everything and I guess this falls into that category. A bit like ‘breaking the magicians code’ so to speak.

Snorky when I tried to look into this issue of odds being displayed, I'm sure I found the legislation or directive from the UKGC which said either the odds or rtp needs to be displayed, so the slot makers and casinos had an option and obviously chose rtp as the odds may have put people off.

I still feel if they advertise a particular maximum win in order to attract players then the odds for 'that' win should be displayed.

One game that I've played off and on for 3 years [don't know why because its mostly ripped me off remorsely ] is Giant's gold, and in the help page it does say the reels in the bonus round are different, I'm not sure I've read that in the other WMS games like rhino and spartacus, but I'm pretty certain the reels are different.

Recently from my slot play I'm coming more to the conclusion that all the games I've been playing [bonanza, rhino, spartacus to name 3] are all glorified scratchcard games [can't remember how chopley describe them now in his jammin jar vids, ball bag games ] the reason being the too frequent blocking symbols which conveniently stop a further win. So I'm sure the rng pulls a possible result from the paytable e.g. 0.5x, 48x, 0.2x etc.. and the front end program displays it, and it has a degree of flexibility of how it does so, the megaways engine provides a broader degree of flexibility.

If slots are basically scratchcard games then I think there's a stronger argument for the odds, just like national lottery cards, to be displayed. However I do see the argument that part of the excitement and fun can come from the mystery of not knowing the odds.

In my opinion from a strictly responsible gambling viewpoint and moral fairness some illustrative [rather than exhaustative] odds should be dispayed, but I can understand the pragmatic solution, from a business viewpoint, that the industry have come up with in just giving us the rtp information.

 

[trancemonkey]

Trance this question sort of carries on from the bbw bonus round farce but is more of a generalisation regarding reel strips.

Do you think as players we should have access to reel strips? I find it quite strange that most things you can bet on have odds but a slot doesn’t have to display this. Only the overall rtp.

I know it’s probably expecting a lot to see the true odds of every outcome but when a slot advertises win up to 20,000x stake it would be nice to know the true odds of hitting that at least. I think @mack341 touched on this somewhere.

Regarding reel strips and being able to use different ones during the bonus round is something most players wouldn’t be aware of. Strictly I find it morally wrong that you can do this legally and not have to inform the player in the rules. It must be one of the only industries where you can legally deceive the customer.

I would also like to know the explanation for why some games appear to have fixed reel strips and some make it up as they go along so to speak.

Take a game like Gonzo’s Quest that appears to have fixed reel strips in that if you play it enough you know what symbols will appear after a cascade. Compare it to Napoleon (I know it doesn’t cascade) and that game is displaying symbols below the actual 15 that count. That if you shuffled all the reels up one position can’t possibly occur in those positions. For example the soldier in view and one directly below which can never happen.View attachment 107734

I also recall you saying somewhere that it’s best the player doesn’t know everything and I guess this falls into that category. A bit like ‘breaking the magicians code’ so to speak.

No, i don't think you should have access to the reel strips for a number of reasons:

1. They are the single most important piece of IP that we own. They are the one thing competitors would love to get their hands on (of successful games of course).
2. Even if you got the reel bands, it would be meaningless unless you had access to the maths in it's entirety, because there may be weighted reels, multiple different sets of reel bands, or a whole host of other things that you would need to know to make sense of things. Maths are rarely simple.
3. You mention you get odds for things, but you have no idea how those odds are worked out - there is still a margin calculated in to odds for anything, otherwise bookies wouldn't make any money.
4. Mack mentioned the max prize odds - this is something we have to do in some jurisdictions, and i have no problem with this, but in games where the theoretical max prize is unknown (Bonanza for example), how would you treat that game?

Some providers do NOT spin through the reel bands that are actually being used in the game - Blueprint i'm pretty certain do this. I don't believe they show the correct reel bands. In online markets it is actually quite hard to do this without downloading all the reel bands to the client, but that then means that they can be sniffed - so providers don't want to do this - and there is no rule that says the reel bands that spin have to be the ones you use. The rules are around the outcome. That said, i think it's quite obvious that the bands that spin should not be misleading.

With regards to reel bands in the free games, i think it's quite obvious to most players that the reel bands in bonus rounds are different to base game reel bands. In most online markets, we have to make it clear that the game is in a different "mode" by writing "BONUS REELS IN PLAY" somewhere, although this is not in all jurisdictions, and doesn't exist online. But most players aren't daft - they know bonus rounds play quite differently to the base games on most games.

And @mack341 - most games are NOT scratchcards, although some (Jammin Jars) are.

 

[dionysus]

No, i don't think you should have access to the reel strips for a number of reasons:

1. They are the single most important piece of IP that we own. They are the one thing competitors would love to get their hands on (of successful games of course).
2. Even if you got the reel bands, it would be meaningless unless you had access to the maths in it's entirety, because there may be weighted reels, multiple different sets of reel bands, or a whole host of other things that you would need to know to make sense of things. Maths are rarely simple.
.

I had always assumed knowing the permutations of reel bands was moot without knowing the maths/programming.
I gather unto themselves, they're meaningless...if I'm right (and truly, I dont understand a lick about programming), that it isnt a case they 'fall where may' and maths 'guide' outcomes regardless....random, still yes....weighted though, yes.

But brings 2 Qs -
Any there any regulations about where say, in one game, you 'see' symbols spin by V lazy graphics of spun images (blurred/untrue) that are pointless and TRUE eye candy

and 2- what is your opinion, about old school games where what you saw was chopped spun images, vs reels/symbols, falling into place

Apologies if Qs arent clear; didnt want to write an essay of explanation

 

[snorky510238]

No, i don't think you should have access to the reel strips for a number of reasons:

1. They are the single most important piece of IP that we own. They are the one thing competitors would love to get their hands on (of successful games of course).
2. Even if you got the reel bands, it would be meaningless unless you had access to the maths in it's entirety, because there may be weighted reels, multiple different sets of reel bands, or a whole host of other things that you would need to know to make sense of things. Maths are rarely simple.
3. You mention you get odds for things, but you have no idea how those odds are worked out - there is still a margin calculated in to odds for anything, otherwise bookies wouldn't make any money.
4. Mack mentioned the max prize odds - this is something we have to do in some jurisdictions, and i have no problem with this, but in games where the theoretical max prize is unknown (Bonanza for example), how would you treat that game?

Some providers do NOT spin through the reel bands that are actually being used in the game - Blueprint i'm pretty certain do this. I don't believe they show the correct reel bands. In online markets it is actually quite hard to do this without downloading all the reel bands to the client, but that then means that they can be sniffed - so providers don't want to do this - and there is no rule that says the reel bands that spin have to be the ones you use. The rules are around the outcome. That said, i think it's quite obvious that the bands that spin should not be misleading.

With regards to reel bands in the free games, i think it's quite obvious to most players that the reel bands in bonus rounds are different to base game reel bands. In most online markets, we have to make it clear that the game is in a different "mode" by writing "BONUS REELS IN PLAY" somewhere, although this is not in all jurisdictions, and doesn't exist online. But most players aren't daft - they know bonus rounds play quite differently to the base games on most games.

And @mack341 - most games are NOT scratchcards, although some (Jammin Jars) are.

Ok thanks for the honesty in that post. As you know I have always believed that slots aren’t entirely random. If what you have told us there is satisfactory to meet the requirements of governing regulations (and it obviously must be) then I will accept that.

In as much as I think for me that is still ‘random’ via a bit of manipulation, at least now I understand how it is being done and explains 99% of the problematic jigsaw I have been trying to piece together. You still have the 1% I am missing but I am prepared to call a truce at this point.

 

[dionysus]

Ok thanks for the honesty in that post. As you know I have always believed that slots aren’t entirely random. If what you have told us there is satisfactory to meet the requirements of governing regulations (and it obviously must be) then I will accept that.

In as much as I think for me that is still ‘random’ via a bit of manipulation, at least now I understand how it is being done and explains 99% of the problematic jigsaw I have been trying to piece together. You still have the 1% I am missing but I am prepared to call a truce at this point.

snorky - if trance and others, have brought you this side of the line, there's hope for all
and that's not a dick comment; meaning, it's worth the discussions to have members have a better understanding of slots beyond preconceptions

 

[snorky510238]

snorky - if trance and others, have brought you this side of the line, there's hope for all
and that's not a dick comment; meaning, it's worth the discussions to have members have a better understanding of slots beyond preconceptions

Well I guess it’s about as close to finding some ‘common ground’ as we are ever likely to come, as in developers/providers work within permitted parameters. In my eyes a bit loose to be called truly random but as long as I know how and to what degree I am being shafted then I can live with it.

 

[dionysus]

Well I guess it’s about as close to finding some ‘common ground’ as we are ever likely to come, as in developers/providers work within permitted parameters. In my eyes a bit loose to be called truly random but as long as I know how and to what degree I am being shafted then I can live with it.

aint noone ever gonna claim, odds arent forever in the casino's favour
as long as we have a 'fair' game within the parameters of fair, and we're informed of said fairness, we all good

 

[SlotGrinder]

I expect this question has been asked already but how do yggdrasil games where you collect things in order to eventually launch special features pass the "strict tests" ?
Some of their games literally take 1000s of spins to collect enough "symbols" to launch the special features (wolfhunters , vikings go bezerk , vikings go to hell etc) and some games like Baron Samedi constantly have a cycle of collecting to launch one special feature whilst the other ones will be mid progress. But say you've collected 9 out of 10 special symbols towards an extremely good feature .

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

. Now if you now collect the last symbol you would get 3 freespins with 8 random wilds (plus 2 other random features on top) .How are spins now of equal chance / rtp to spins when you dont have 9 symbols already collected ?
Clearly the rtp can't be measured spin by spin on these games and must be calculated as a cycle of many many spins ? So how does this not fall into the realm of being classed as a compensated game ?
Also how does locking a player into collecting enough symbols to eventually after a looong time unlock a special feature sit with responsible gaming laws ?
Because having played these games a lot I would say that games like Vikings Go to Hell , whilst you are collecting the symbols in normal game the rtp is rly quite low . Basically , you're losing money , losing money for 100s prob 1000s of spins and then you're hoping to get it all back + more in a big special feature at the end

I should have just asked about holy diver as that's an even more obvious example of this type of game

 

[trancemonkey]

I expect this question has been asked already but how do yggdrasil games where you collect things in order to eventually launch special features pass the "strict tests" ?
Some of their games literally take 1000s of spins to collect enough "symbols" to launch the special features (wolfhunters , vikings go bezerk , vikings go to hell etc) and some games like Baron Samedi constantly have a cycle of collecting to launch one special feature whilst the other ones will be mid progress. But say you've collected 9 out of 10 special symbols towards an extremely good feature .

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

. Now if you now collect the last symbol you would get 3 freespins with 8 random wilds (plus 2 other random features on top) .How are spins now of equal chance / rtp to spins when you dont have 9 symbols already collected ?
Clearly the rtp can't be measured spin by spin on these games and must be calculated as a cycle of many many spins ? So how does this not fall into the realm of being classed as a compensated game ?
Also how does locking a player into collecting enough symbols to eventually after a looong time unlock a special feature sit with responsible gaming laws ?
Because having played these games a lot I would say that games like Vikings Go to Hell , whilst you are collecting the symbols in normal game the rtp is rly quite low . Basically , you're losing money , losing money for 100s prob 1000s of spins and then you're hoping to get it all back + more in a big special feature at the end

I should have just asked about holy diver as that's an even more obvious example of this type of game

You have to remember that the RTP is not on a "per spin" basis, although there are a very small number of land-based jurisdictions where this is the case - although i believe one of those is removing that requirement soon.

Where the lines blur for me is where you have games where you would have to play thousands and thousands of games to have any hope of achieving all the parts of a game that input towards the RTP.
With progressives / jackpots, it's quite clear that they pay infrequent large amounts, and that that proportion of the RTP is locked away unless you win one - but that's why most games state RTP with and without jackpots.
I don't mind games with binding features, and i understand that many players like them too, but there comes a point where most players would just never see the full potential, and therefore overall the game would not hit it's RTP.

Think of it like this - if a game has 5% of it's RTP in a feature that you need to play 10,000 spins you achieve (and pays 500x), then for all the players that NEVER play 10,000 games (and that will be a large percentage of them) the game simple is NOT running at target percentage, but 5% under.
If i was writing rules to do with these types of featrues, i would probably limit the maximum number of games you can "bind" a player for before they are paid off to an average of 1,000. That's still a lot, so it gives designers something to play with, and players some sort of achievable target.

But currently, the tests we have to stick to can, in theory, allow a 1m game binding feature where only after you play 1m games do you win 10,000x (for example).

 

[SpinUk]

“But currently, the tests we have to stick to can, in theory, allow a 1m game binding feature where only after you play 1m games do you win 10,000x (for example).”

Good example being Immortal Romance with the five reel wild desire paying circa 10,000x. Only seen two ever but the RTP will account for these - if you have never had one you have effectively been playing a lower RTP game.

 

[SlotGrinder]

" if a game has 5% of it's RTP in a feature that you need to play 10,000 spins you achieve (and pays 500x), then for all the players that NEVER play 10,000 games (and that will be a large percentage of them) the game simple is NOT running at target percentage, but 5% under. "

Yes and I don't understand how this is allowed for games like wolfhunters which take a very very long time to reach the end feature (you need to collect 600 wolves) . Well over that many spins you're playing at say 5% less so rtp is roughly 91% (from a stated 96% rtp) so it's very very difficult to show any sort of profit for long with that rtp . So the casual players get screwed over because they won't ever manage to collect the whole 600 wolves . But for the more committed player because of the sheer number of spins you need to make to ever collect all the wolves which is definitely 1000s of spins it will be difficult to deviate much from the 91% rtp figure over that sample . So when they finally have collected all the wolves an average bonus will just take them to 96% rtp overall and so they still lost money...
Seems like a way of forcing people into playing a large volume of spins thus increasing the likelihood they end up in the negative and of course the more you spin the more the casino makes , whist making it virtually impossible for them to win in the short term either ?

 

[SlotGrinder]

“But currently, the tests we have to stick to can, in theory, allow a 1m game binding feature where only after you play 1m games do you win 10,000x (for example).”

Good example being Immortal Romance with the five reel wild desire paying circa 10,000x. Only seen two ever but the RTP will account for these - if you have never had one you have effectively been playing a lower RTP game.

But at least the 5 reel wild desire can potentially activate on any spin so it's not really the same as a special bonus that will activate only after you have collected something for 1000s of spins . Like , for example , if you were guaranteed a wild desire with at least 3 reels if you had collected 1000 scatters or something

 

[SpinUk]

But at least the 5 reel wild desire can potentially activate on any spin so it's not really the same as a special bonus that will activate only after you have collected something for 1000s of spins . Like , for example , if you were guaranteed a wild desire with at least 3 reels if you had collected 1000 scatters or something

Good point. It wouldn’t be too hard a point to argue that this is at odds with RG practises also.

 

[trancemonkey]

" if a game has 5% of it's RTP in a feature that you need to play 10,000 spins you achieve (and pays 500x), then for all the players that NEVER play 10,000 games (and that will be a large percentage of them) the game simple is NOT running at target percentage, but 5% under. "

Yes and I don't understand how this is allowed for games like wolfhunters which take a very very long time to reach the end feature (you need to collect 600 wolves) . Well over that many spins you're playing at say 5% less so rtp is roughly 91% (from a stated 96% rtp) so it's very very difficult to show any sort of profit for long with that rtp . So the casual players get screwed over because they won't ever manage to collect the whole 600 wolves . But for the more committed player because of the sheer number of spins you need to make to ever collect all the wolves which is definitely 1000s of spins it will be difficult to deviate much from the 91% rtp figure over that sample . So when they finally have collected all the wolves an average bonus will just take them to 96% rtp overall and so they still lost money...
Seems like a way of forcing people into playing a large volume of spins thus increasing the likelihood they end up in the negative and of course the more you spin the more the casino makes , whist making it virtually impossible for them to win in the short term either ?

Yes, it is - but don't forget that the game (if it is 5% under, which i doubt) will play a bit shit. And players will then just vote with their wallets and play elsewhere. So for all the good a binding feature can do, it can also work against you if you do it badly.

 

[goatwack]

Superb dupe by the industry. State games run at 96% but make getting that nigh-on impossible, as no sucker's gonna spin 100,000 spins. Thereby indirectly making said game 91% in actuality!

Love it

 

[trancemonkey]

Superb dupe by the industry. State games run at 96% but make getting that nigh-on impossible, as no sucker's gonna spin 100,000 spins. Thereby indirectly making said game 91% in actuality!

Love it

And i agree that if that were to happen (and i very much doubt it does) that i would be one of the ones joining in the choruses of "that's not fair"...

 

[Slottery]

Can somebody remind me which are minimum RTP:s fir MGA and UKGC? @trancemonkey is more reliable than millions of affiliate sites google gave me and just don't find these from my "well organized" notes....

But if i'm not mistaking (again) there are games (progressive Jackpot ones) which in basic play are under these license providers minimums (and hitting JB make "little" correction to total numbers). There are players who wan't be JB winners (yes, me too but so many of these are so boring in basic play) and these are played a lot, just not my cup of tea

Like HV games yes, but these multimillion JB slots are bit too much for me to hit big lifetime (jinxing myself hopefully now).

 

[Reelsoffun]

Yes, it is - but don't forget that the game (if it is 5% under, which i doubt) will play a bit shit. And players will then just vote with their wallets and play elsewhere. So for all the good a binding feature can do, it can also work against you if you do it badly.

Well I know of at least 5 slot playing friends that dont play them at all, and me included if i load a game and see that it has any kind of collectible feature its an instant close, with the exception of extra chilli.

So if its done badly or not its a no go from me, and as soon as more people realize they potentially giving RTP away hopefully these dreadful games will cease. But as some people enjoy and streamers play them that might be wishful thinking LOL

 

[Slottery]

Well I know of at least 5 slot playing friends that dont play them at all, and me included if i load a game and see that it has any kind of collectible feature its an instant close, with the exception of extra chilli.

So if its done badly or not its a no go from me, and as soon as more people realize they potentially giving RTP away hopefully these dreadful games will cease. But as some people enjoy and streamers play them that might be wishful thinking LOL

Do they bother you if you don't just play them? Providers will quite sure see in long term if some particular developed slots start to be behind from other kind of ones, amount to spend games should keep providers on map quite well (not playing kind of slots either where you have to spend hours and hours to build up your feature).

 

[trancemonkey]

Can somebody remind me which are minimum RTP:s fir MGA and UKGC? @trancemonkey is more reliable than millions of affiliate sites google gave me and just don't find these from my "well organized" notes....

But if i'm not mistaking (again) there are games (progressive Jackpot ones) which in basic play are under these license providers minimums (and hitting JB make "little" correction to total numbers). There are players who wan't be JB winners (yes, me too but so many of these are so boring in basic play) and these are played a lot, just not my cup of tea

Like HV games yes, but these multimillion JB slots are bit too much for me to hit big lifetime (jinxing myself hopefully now).

Unlike most jurisdictions in the world, the UKGC has no minimum RTP requirements in any category of machine either online or in land-based.

I believe the MGA made the minimum 92% in 2016 - New Malta RTP regs

But I admit I'm not sure whether that is still true or not...

 

[Bloatgoat]

@trancemonkey

If i start affiliatting products related to gambling, i know there alot of operators who pay a pretty big comission based on the losses of a signup player. Could you explain to me how they do it? I remember a long time ago i did something with online affilliates. There was one particular casino that would offer up to 60% on a affiliate deposit's loss. So if the affiliate would deposit a 100$ 60% of his loss would be coming to me. I'm still curious on how this all is numbered within any math. I know a casino is not going to give away free money. I know the 60% revenue over someone's loss should come from somewhere.

Or is the casino happy enough with just 40% overall loss of a player while having lesser margings on playing on their platform?

Second: If i would start a online brand, get all the licences, license all that i need and get a fancy website, how would a game provider protect me from not going bankrupt when a 'random player' wins a random 5000x win or so on 10 euro spin? Is this again all calculated within the maths and so? As a player i recognized the typical 'limit'. I coud'nt pass a certain amount of cash when playing slots. It would hit but only after i played a certain amount of money or so and get back at it again. Could casino's prevent a player from winning more then whatever percentage or fixed odd is setup on forehand?

I know your not going to answer all in very detail, but i'm pretty curious on how the above works. I might as well signup and start a own brand, still figure that out anyway.

 

[trancemonkey]

Hey Bloaty

With regards to the affiliate question, i'm afraid i don't know enough (if anything) about this, but i'm sure that someone (@dunover for example) might be able to help here. But it's pure economics right? It's why YouTube pays the content creators - without them, YouTube wouldn't really exist, and certainly wouldn't do well. Well, affiliates are basically "advertising", and you would normally pay for adverts right? So if an affiliate can bring you 1000 players, then either you pay them per acquisition or you do a rev share kind of deal - a percentage of losses would be the easiest thing to do. I would fine 60% of someones loss to be very high (in my head) but i don't know this side of the industry.

With regards to the second question - games providers don't provide any protection at all to my knowledge. It is up to the casino to determine whether they want a specific game or not, and they can (probably) also choose the max bet they want to allow on a game - but even if they can't, they can have a maximum payout rule in the T's & C's. Now of course, if you set your max payout to €5k, but allow people to bet at €20 a spin, you are going to piss the high rollers off and you won't run a very profitable casino. You need a reasonably high bank balance in order to cover winnings - i don't know how high this would need to be, but i would expect you would need a fair few million in the bank!

 

[dunover]

@trancemonkey

If i start affiliatting products related to gambling, i know there alot of operators who pay a pretty big comission based on the losses of a signup player. Could you explain to me how they do it? I remember a long time ago i did something with online affilliates. There was one particular casino that would offer up to 60% on a affiliate deposit's loss. So if the affiliate would deposit a 100$ 60% of his loss would be coming to me. I'm still curious on how this all is numbered within any math. I know a casino is not going to give away free money. I know the 60% revenue over someone's loss should come from somewhere.

Or is the casino happy enough with just 40% overall loss of a player while having lesser margings on playing on their platform?

Second: If i would start a online brand, get all the licences, license all that i need and get a fancy website, how would a game provider protect me from not going bankrupt when a 'random player' wins a random 5000x win or so on 10 euro spin? Is this again all calculated within the maths and so? As a player i recognized the typical 'limit'. I coud'nt pass a certain amount of cash when playing slots. It would hit but only after i played a certain amount of money or so and get back at it again. Could casino's prevent a player from winning more then whatever percentage or fixed odd is setup on forehand?

I know your not going to answer all in very detail, but i'm pretty curious on how the above works. I might as well signup and start a own brand, still figure that out anyway.

You have scaled RS (revenue share) or CPA (cost per acquisition payment, fixed say £100 for a new depositing player *NDP* depositing 20+ win or lose) or Hybrid which is both, say £75 per new player depositing 20+ plus 30% lifetime revenue share. You recruit larger numbers, you can negotiate better deals but most are standardized like 25% 1-5 NDP per month or say up to 5k RS per month, and if you are a super affiliate you may find if you achieved 50k + per month revenue your share would go to 45% or more.

Sounds great? Yeah, very hard in reality though. You must beware of NCO (negative carry-over) whereby if your players win one month, you must pay that -ve RS off over the coming period until you earn again. Most reset to zero at the month's end and you start again, getting paid if you've exceeded a threshold say 100euros.

You essentially get a lifetime revenue share from your player losses but won't ever get 40 quid if a player loses 100 and you are on 40% RS - this is because you're paid net of local gaming taxes, aff programme costs/cut, developer fees, bonus costs and UK gaming tax. So on 40% RS depending on how straight the affiliate programme is you would end up with anything between 10 and 25% of the 100 the player loses. As we've heard, Videoslots make it very hard to take much home with their costs structures and you end up with about 10% of player net losses according to other threads here. Some you'd exceed 30% if they're very favourable, on a 40% RS.

This will sound bad to some readers, that people make money from your losses, but remember somebody is ALWAYS being paid from losses. Google Ads take huge amounts for casino keywords so if you join that way, you pay. TV/Radio ads are hugely costly and you pay those companies. Affiliate marketing is efficient in that specialist sites provide your platform, the affiliate in most cases gets paid nothing unless his/her players earn the casino money so cash flow is not affected generally as affiliates are paid in arrears from income already earned by the casino who then pays the programme later. When you consider some big outfits expect to pay £200-£300 per NDP average cost via media advertising, affiliates are quite cheap in comparison.

 

[Slottery]

@trancemonkey
Second: If i would start a online brand, get all the licences, license all that i need and get a fancy website, how would a game provider protect me from not going bankrupt when a 'random player' wins a random 5000x win or so on 10 euro spin? Is this again all calculated within the maths and so? As a player i recognized the typical 'limit'. I coud'nt pass a certain amount of cash when playing slots. It would hit but only after i played a certain amount of money or so and get back at it again. Could casino's prevent a player from winning more then whatever percentage or fixed odd is setup on forehand?

License providers (in Europe at least) demand that you can proof to have some sufficient funds to start and be able to pay your players. These days when we see these very high volatility slots with huge potential, we also see that more casinos have capped maximum payouts (at least for welcome bonuses some operators to very low amounts) and also weekly max cashout, no matter if there is bonus included or not. These are kind of insurances what we see from operators who don't have huge amount of money to guarantee winnings to players. If you cap your max pay out like 2000€/week, then even somebody win huge amount, you are able to pay it 2k weekly.

Remember that discussion here and in newspapers when one lady won progressive jackpot and casino (even it was progressive though) kept their T&C:s and only allowed to withdraw so small amounts that it would have taken over 30 years to get all winnings (somebody can for sure refer to that correct article here and in newspapers). She then agreed to take lump sum only half of winnings right away instead of few thousands monthly.

 

[Bloatgoat]

Hey Bloaty

With regards to the affiliate question, i'm afraid i don't know enough (if anything) about this, but i'm sure that someone (@dunover for example) might be able to help here. But it's pure economics right? It's why YouTube pays the content creators - without them, YouTube wouldn't really exist, and certainly wouldn't do well. Well, affiliates are basically "advertising", and you would normally pay for adverts right? So if an affiliate can bring you 1000 players, then either you pay them per acquisition or you do a rev share kind of deal - a percentage of losses would be the easiest thing to do. I would fine 60% of someones loss to be very high (in my head) but i don't know this side of the industry.

With regards to the second question - games providers don't provide any protection at all to my knowledge. It is up to the casino to determine whether they want a specific game or not, and they can (probably) also choose the max bet they want to allow on a game - but even if they can't, they can have a maximum payout rule in the T's & C's. Now of course, if you set your max payout to €5k, but allow people to bet at €20 a spin, you are going to piss the high rollers off and you won't run a very profitable casino. You need a reasonably high bank balance in order to cover winnings - i don't know how high this would need to be, but i would expect you would need a fair few million in the bank!

I dont think you understand me here. There are a dozen of casino's who offer a webmaster affiliate program. Some offer up to 50% on the first 4 months or so on every player that signup using your link. So 50% on all the affiliate's losses come straight into your account. This is based on the deposits of the initial player. So in short: if i bring you to a casino in general, you start depositting and playing, i get 50% of your loss basicly.

Youtube is a thing apart; i've done some things in the past as well but mostly users can choose to monetize their channel or not. With monetizing your basicly allowing youtube to force ads within the video, that is unless your using a decent adblocker and none of that will ever appear. It's just that how can a casino offer 50% over a players losses and still stick within the maths, numbers and all? It almost sounds like it's calculated within the avg RTP and all that. You gotta be extremely lucky to hit big overall.

As for the overal bankroll of casino's themself; i think the montly withdrawl limit is to make sure there's a decent amount of cashflow going on. There are some cheap online brands out there and i'm sure their bankroll is'nt in the millions. I think any starter with like 25 to 50k could setup and get it going themself. It's bin written before, casino's can select games and have their own desired RTP. Some of them obviously dont show this or come up with a different math about, 96% on overall deposits being returned to players.