beravek7 VS Fortune room

[dunover]

There's very little that can be done with a few strokes. (Trust me. I know. )

This is simply a piece of software like any other piece of software. If I wrote the software myself I would give operators the option to limit bet sizes and games available according to bonus selections. This would be done from the back end and apply to anyone taking the bonuses. It's really not as hard as it sounds but it would require a substantial upgrade.

You do realize that 3Dice software already does this with their tournaments? When you join a table games tournament the software automatically locks you out of the slot games. When you play a slot tournament you're locked out of table games. They can even lock you out of all games but one depending on the tournament you're playing. If I play a free all games tournament at 3Dice and you play a VIP Payola tournament at the same time the software locks you out of all the games except Payola and I can play any game I like. The reps aren't doing this manually. The software does it automatically when you join a tournament. Why do people believe it would be so hard to do this with bonus selections instead of tournament selections?

We already know that at least some casinos can raise and lower the max bet on a player by player basis. Why would it be so hard to program the software to do it when a player takes a bonus?

This is not rocket science. In fact it's pretty simple compared to making the actual games themselves.

The software providers can do it. There's no doubt of this.

I'm not saying it can't be done, but 3dice have their own bespoke software, team and only their casino uses it. Their system and features are great, like 'lock a balance in the safe' (when you want to make a new deposit and get a different bonus like Chopley showed us.) Rainy day, and other stuff you mention. They are miles ahead for player interface features.

Unfortunately if say MG did this, a one-size-fits-all may not be suitable for all their customers, or not facilitated by all their casinos. Necessity is the mother of invention, which leads me to wonder why it hasn't been. Most casinos wouldn't know how to do it. They have shared CS, outsourced payment processors and merely provide a platform from MG for paying customers - I doubt they could enact this stuff if they wanted to, unlike 3dice who have a complete team in-house.

 

[dunover]

Dunover, you seem to be very active in this thread. You made 11 posts of total 48 (It is more than 1/5). The problem is nobody likes what you write. You have only 4 likes ( 3 of which come from Nifty). May be it would be a better idea if you send your thoughts straight to Nifty's PM box? I never read anything more prejudiced in my whole life.

I'll make 25 posts if I deem it necessary and they are replies to comments relating to my other posts. Unfortunately I don't shrink back because people disagree with some or all that I say and I'll defend my point of view. Your idiotic contradiction aside (" The problem is nobody likes what you write. You have only 4 likes..") nobody has proven me wrong yet, I have backed up my opinions with figures and common terms from casinos rather than bluster and pitchfork-raising.

Perhaps you should keep your juvenile playground comments about who-likes-who etc. to yourself - if you don't like what I post, counteract it in a polite and appropriate manner, and if that is beyond you ignore the thread.

 

[lovator]

I'll make 25 posts if I deem it necessary and they are replies to comments relating to my other posts. Unfortunately I don't shrink back because people disagree with some or all that I say and I'll defend my point of view. Your idiotic contradiction aside (" The problem is nobody likes what you write. You have only 4 likes..") nobody has proven me wrong yet, I have backed up my opinions with figures and common terms from casinos rather than bluster and pitchfork-raising.

Perhaps you should keep your juvenile playground comments about who-likes-who etc. to yourself - if you don't like what I post, counteract it in a polite and appropriate manner, and if that is beyond you ignore the thread.

do you accept that slots are random and that a player cannot influence on it in any way?
what you speak of a "spirit of a bonus" is lol to me.. casinos have been moved to rogue using this term,so dont tell us about a " spirit bonuses"
you are doing everything you can eagerly to discredit op here with no valid proof,like admin of this forum said,we dont know what is going on,op should do pab and wait an investigation,because if thats the truth and this casino gets away with this it will infest every casino with low sense of moral,and you wont be safe to play anywhere,this casino should implement simple php code to its page to limit users that are winning to lower their bets from 10 euros to 3,this way user or to direct user via chat what bets to do and where (being sarcastic)

if i got from 150 euros to over 1000 euros you can bet i would also lower my bet,you can call it advantage,but also you can call it common sense,he had virtualy no chance to win and yet he did,and trying to keep what he already won is cheating?

 

[Nifty29]

I'll make 25 posts if I deem it necessary and they are replies to comments relating to my other posts. Unfortunately I don't shrink back because people disagree with some or all that I say and I'll defend my point of view. Your idiotic contradiction aside (" The problem is nobody likes what you write. You have only 4 likes..") nobody has proven me wrong yet, I have backed up my opinions with figures and common terms from casinos rather than bluster and pitchfork-raising.

Perhaps you should keep your juvenile playground comments about who-likes-who etc. to yourself - if you don't like what I post, counteract it in a polite and appropriate manner, and if that is beyond you ignore the thread.

Unfortunately dunover, replies like the one you quoted are the first resort of the uneducated and feeble-minded, who are unable to put forward a proper argument based on facts.

In this case, it is a serial AP (and who knows what else) who absolutely always takes the player's side in disputes and does nothing else but troll complaint threads with comments whining about how evil casinos are and how they deliberately make terms to "trap" players and confiscate their winnings. The FACT is that if a player READS the terms BEFORE they play, it's just not possible to be "trapped" by anything...only if you can't be arsed understanding what you're agreeing to, in which case you deserve whatever happens.

You're wasting your time arguing with trolls. Whenever you make a valid point, which is almost always, and they don't have a counter-argument, which is almost always, they will just make it personal and draw attention away from the fact that they are lacking in the intelligence department and attempt to drum up support from other "Casinos are evil but I still play at them all the time" serial whiners.

IMO, members like this are just "ignore" button fodder.

 

[chuchu59]

Hey guys,

Like most of you, I disagree with Dunover's views but look he is only speaking his mind and we should respect his views. I honestly cannot see Wim not being responsive to this thread as many of us could well be placed in the same position. In future, you need to be very careful when playing with a bonus lest they monitor your play and confiscate your winnings at the drop of a hat. To be safe, play slots with equal paylines throughout and make the betsize constant. Definitely, all the fun will be taken away from it if you do.

 

[The Viking]

Like i said it is scary if you cant up and lower your bet few bux when playing with a bonus incase you lose all your winnings .
but i agree wth Dunover,to deposit 100 or 200 then top it up with 100% bonus then bet $10 bux is just plain silly unless you got a big account, and just goes around casinos taking bonuses and hoping for that 1 big hit on a big bet
i usually do it other way around then OP here when playing on a bonus, i start with low bets then if im well ahead i up my bet
to more then what i usually do.

Hey guys,

Like most of you, I disagree with Dunover's views but look he is only speaking his mind and we should respect his views. I honestly cannot see Wim not being responsive to this thread as many of us could well be placed in the same position. In future, you need to be very careful when playing with a bonus lest they monitor your play and confiscate your winnings at the drop of a hat. To be safe, play slots with equal paylines throughout and make the betsize constant. Definitely, all the fun will be taken away from it if you do.

 

[Nifty29]

do you accept that slots are random and that a player cannot influence on it in any way?
what you speak of a "spirit of a bonus" is lol to me.. casinos have been moved to rogue using this term,so dont tell us about a " spirit bonuses"
you are doing everything you can eagerly to discredit op here with no valid proof,like admin of this forum said,we dont know what is going on,op should do pab and wait an investigation,because if thats the truth and this casino gets away with this it will infest every casino with low sense of moral,and you wont be safe to play anywhere,this casino should implement simple php code to its page to limit users that are winning to lower their bets from 10 euros to 3,this way user or to direct user via chat what bets to do and where (being sarcastic)

if i got from 150 euros to over 1000 euros you can bet i would also lower my bet,you can call it advantage,but also you can call it common sense,he had virtualy no chance to win and yet he did,and trying to keep what he already won is cheating?

Your post makes absolutely no sense....and it's not a language thing.

Nobody is "discrediting" the OP. I think we all accept his version of events i.e. he started off betting $10 and then dropped it to $3. If he he was trying to "discredit" the OP, he would be pointing out flaws in his story where it doesn't sound right....and he hasn't, and neither have I.

The point is NOT about the credibility of the OP. It's about the TERMS that the OP AGREED to when they accepted the bonus.

Yes, the bonus term about decreasing bets IS non-specific and subjective...and I stated earlier it needs to be changed immediately to remove any room for argument, such as that which exists in this case.

HOWEVER.....why would anyone AGREE to such terms? The OP was not forced to take the bonus...it wasn't mandatory AFAIK. So, they had the opportunity to DECLINE the bonus based on the terms not being clear. Instead, they just decided that their own interpretation would suffice, which is asking for trouble, considering the terms also state the casino will have the final and binding say on all matters.

If the OP had read these terms and thought "Hmmmm....what do they mean by "substantial" etc?" (and let's face it...who wouldn't think that after reading that particular term), and then contacted support to clarify the matter...and THEN discovered that the term really IS non-specific...THEN they would have had my full support in complaining about it on in the forums and campaigning to get FL to change it.

The trouble is you just went ahead and took the bonus, and hoped it wouldn't be an issue when you cashed out. Unfortunately for you, it was and is an issue.

We, as adults, have choices. You made a bad one i.e. accepting something you didn't understand. Take responsibility for your own choice. It's my hope the casino will take responsibility for their unclear term, and change it moving forward. Problem is, you accepted the terms as they were and should be bound by them.

It's another classic example and reminder for all players......Make sure you READ and UNDERSTAND the terms of a bonus BEFORE you play. Afterwards is way too late.

 

[The Dude]

Dunover, you seem to be very active in this thread. You made 11 posts of total 48 (It is more than 1/5). The problem is nobody likes what you write. You have only 4 likes ( 3 of which come from Nifty). May be it would be a better idea if you send your thoughts straight to Nifty's PM box? I never read anything more prejudiced in my whole life.

Forced my hand - fair warning was not headed. That was strike three, buddy. (Actually strike four, but I've been lenient).

If anyone wonders what was so trollish, Hakapuku has a history of troll infractions and has been given time off from the forum in the past for his behavior.
I encourage free expression in this forum, but if you feel that you need to target either the membership or administration with disrespectful comments or contempt, then it's time to part ways. There are other forums that either condone or encourage this sort of posting behavior; this is not one of them. Happy trails. Bye.

Edited to add: For more information on our banning/suspension policies, please read the following:
https://www.casinomeister.com/forum-faq/forum-policies/

 

[Nifty29]

Hey guys,

Like most of you, I disagree with Dunover's views but look he is only speaking his mind and we should respect his views. I honestly cannot see Wim not being responsive to this thread as many of us could well be placed in the same position. In future, you need to be very careful when playing with a bonus lest they monitor your play and confiscate your winnings at the drop of a hat. To be safe, play slots with equal paylines throughout and make the betsize constant. Definitely, all the fun will be taken away from it if you do.

Who is "confiscating winnings at the drop of a hat"?

You must be reading a different thread Chu.

NOBODY should be losing winnings as a result of this term.....because nobody should be ACCEPTING those terms.

If people want to be hand-fed like children, then they obviously aren't responsible enough to be gambling. What do want casinos to do Chu? Have a pop-up saying "are you SURE you accept the terms?" followed by "are you REALLY sure you accept the terms?" followed by "what about term 3.2? Are you sure you accept that one?" etc etc.

What I think is amazing is that a large number of members have NEVER had this kind of issue at ANY casino, and have never had winnings confiscated etc. Why do you think that is? Just lucky? AP's are the sole reason that there ARE terms such as these, and also why we are all subject to ridiculous WR and restrictions these days. Casinos need to protect their bottom line, and I personally don't have a problem with players who skate on the thinnest ice falling through it.

 

[albrco123]

I cannot play at FL due to country restrictions so cannot speak from experience but from reading thru this thread if they are using the term "Substantial" when referring to a drop in bet size instead of stating "no more than 50%" or similar this is inviting problems as everyone's definition of "Substantial could be different".

I am sure this term mostly catches out AP's as most of us would never bet that way but it just makes sense to spell it out so that there is no doubt as to whether the rules were broken.

JMHO

Al

 

[The Dude]

...

What will you advise me guys? To use this pitch a bitch service? Is it worth the time?

As I mentioned here:
https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/beravek7-vs-fortune-room.61306/

You need to PAB so we can figure out what happened.

 

[The Viking]

Good point i have been gambling for 10 years deposit and withdrew from 100´s of them, i have never had to PAB, or have my win ever been confisticated, or my withdrawal denied simply by one rule i always do when taking a bonus
I read what games are allowed and how much i am allowed to bet, i might not always read through every part,but thos are the 2 main think i look at

Who is "confiscating winnings at the drop of a hat"?

You must be reading a different thread Chu.

NOBODY should be losing winnings as a result of this term.....because nobody should be ACCEPTING those terms.

If people want to be hand-fed like children, then they obviously aren't responsible enough to be gambling. What do want casinos to do Chu? Have a pop-up saying "are you SURE you accept the terms?" followed by "are you REALLY sure you accept the terms?" followed by "what about term 3.2? Are you sure you accept that one?" etc etc.

What I think is amazing is that a large number of members have NEVER had this kind of issue at ANY casino, and have never had winnings confiscated etc. Why do you think that is? Just lucky? AP's are the sole reason that there ARE terms such as these, and also why we are all subject to ridiculous WR and restrictions these days. Casinos need to protect their bottom line, and I personally don't have a problem with players who skate on the thinnest ice falling through it.

 

[maphesto]

AP's are the sole reason that there ARE terms such as these, and also why we are all subject to ridiculous WR and restrictions these days.

No! The casino placed that term there! This term is a win-win for the casino. Just think of it, how many SUB related issues haven't we seen about FL group? Did they change the rule to look like BETAT's? No! The casino want that rule to look like it does now because then they attract ALL kinds of players and they want the money.

BETAT (and Sloto with their 6$ max bet with bonus) took action and probably lost some players, FL haven't done this.

Fortune Lounge have to change this rule (this you agree with), and no one should blame players for a shady term placed by a casino.

To FL:

Pay the player (if he's legit) and change the term if you want a change. If you want to still attract ALL players, then keep it, but I don't think that the term match standards for accreditation which Bryan has setup.

I read what games are allowed and how much i am allowed to bet, i might not always read through every part,but thos are the 2 main think i look at

Great! Now, take a look at this:

Placing high value bets with the single intention of increasing your balance, thereafter you substantially decrease your bet size, while
reasonably not decreasing your bankroll.

This is two combined problems. First, we have to decide what a high value bet is. Then we have to decide what a "substantially decrease" is. When we have done these two steps we can begin our play. This is exactly what OP did:

I thought that in my case it could be something less than 1 euro. So I made 3.19 bets
on slots being sure that those bets are not small at all.

I agree with OP thinking 3.19 bets are "not to small".

 

[dandan]

And where is Wim to discuss any of this?

Nowhere it seems...

 

[skiny]

NOBODY should be losing winnings as a result of this term.....because nobody should be ACCEPTING those terms.

If nobody should be accepting these terms, by definition the terms are unacceptable. So the question remains, why is an accredited casino allowed to have unacceptable terms?

AP's are the sole reason that there ARE terms such as these,

No, APs are the reason clearly written, well defined terms exist.

If you're going to write terms that invite APs, don't complain when they show up and take advantage.

 

[skiny]

I'm not saying it can't be done, but 3dice have their own bespoke software, team and only their casino uses it. Their system and features are great, like 'lock a balance in the safe' (when you want to make a new deposit and get a different bonus like Chopley showed us.) Rainy day, and other stuff you mention. They are miles ahead for player interface features.

Unfortunately if say MG did this, a one-size-fits-all may not be suitable for all their customers, or not facilitated by all their casinos. Necessity is the mother of invention, which leads me to wonder why it hasn't been. Most casinos wouldn't know how to do it. They have shared CS, outsourced payment processors and merely provide a platform from MG for paying customers - I doubt they could enact this stuff if they wanted to, unlike 3dice who have a complete team in-house.

It's not up to casino support to set up the bonuses. It's up to the promotions team. If the in house promotions teams aren't smart enough to learn the software then they hire people who are.

 

[Dinahnana]

Good point i have been gambling for 10 years deposit and withdrew from 100´s of them, i have never had to PAB, or have my win ever been confisticated, or my withdrawal denied simply by one rule i always do when taking a bonus
I read what games are allowed and how much i am allowed to bet, i might not always read through every part,but thos are the 2 main think i look at

I had my winnings confiscated once at 10bet when I bet something like .50 over the 10% of the deposit amount rule. I didn't realize it at the time and I was a bit upset losing out on $700 or so but I took it on the chin because it was my own fault for not reading the terms clearly. I haven't played at 10bet since though.
I think casinos should clearly state in their terms that the max bet on a bonus should be x amount or a certain percentage like 10% or something like that. Having vague terms that are open to interpretation by the casino is predatory IMO and should not be allowed in an accredited casino. All terms should be clear and concise.
That is my 2 cents

 

[Nifty29]

No! The casino placed that term there! This term is a win-win for the casino. Just think of it, how many SUB related issues haven't we seen about FL group? Did they change the rule to look like BETAT's? No! The casino want that rule to look like it does now because then they attract ALL kinds of players and they want the money.

BETAT (and Sloto with their 6$ max bet with bonus) took action and probably lost some players, FL haven't done this.

Fortune Lounge have to change this rule (this you agree with), and no one should blame players for a shady term placed by a casino.

Of course the casino placed the term there. Who else would have? Elvis? Honestly.

So why do you THINK the casinos need to HAVE such terms (not this one but others like high WR and excluded games and max cashouts and max bets)....?? The advantage players i.e. those who use particular strategies to take advantage of specific bonuses with no intention of becoming genuine regular and loyal players..pretty much bonus whores but smarter and more selective. Actually, I have no problems with APs per se, I just don't feel sorry for them when they fall foul of terms specifically designed to deter and/or punish this kind of behaviour....and this includes players who accept bonuses without fully understanding the terms, however crappy they might be (such as this case). It's really so simple....if you don't LIKE the terms or don't understand them, DON'T take the bonus. So, so simple. Complain about the term in the forum and email Bryan etc etc...but don't wait until AFTER you signed off on it by taking the bonus.

I can assure you that the players Sloto, and in this case FL, lost are the kind of players they do not want at their casino anyway....hence the type of terms such as max bets etc. Sloto are very upfront and clear about what they consider advantage play, and FL could learn from that IMO.

Oh, and I am not blaming the player for the casino having awful terms. I'm blaming the CASINO for having an awful term, and the PLAYER for saying "Yep, that's cool, I'm OK with that....now give me that juicy bonus".

What do you think would have happened if the OP had lost using this bonus? I'd be interested to hear your prediction.

If nobody should be accepting these terms, by definition the terms are unacceptable. So the question remains, why is an accredited casino allowed to have unacceptable terms?



No, APs are the reason clearly written, well defined terms exist.

If you're going to write terms that invite APs, don't complain when they show up and take advantage.

Nobody should be accepting such terms. An accredited casino should not be allowed to have such terms.

AP's ARE the reason that ALL these types of terms exist. Whether they are well-written or not is an entirely different issue. Just because a term is bad, doesn't mean the reason it was placed there is any different.

I agree that casinos should avoid writing terms that attract APs. I would have thought that any AP worth their salt would have given this one a wide berth, given the clause in question. No doubt in my mind the OP is an AP...maybe they just aren't a very good one.

It's not up to casino support to set up the bonuses. It's up to the promotions team. If the in house promotions teams aren't smart enough to learn the software then they hire people who are.

Of course the promotions team setup the promotions.

The teams might well be quite well-versed in the software operations....I know that some of them actually are.

The fact is, however, that these teams, and in most casino the operators, have NO CONTROL over the backend capabilities of the software. Most casinos use software under licence, and it is supplied to them with limitations set by the suppliers. It might well be that MGS just doesn't want to go down the road of setting up intricate micro-management options, and I equally doubt that they would want to develop such options on an operator-specific basis. The operator/s would have to bear the cost in this case, and it's just not financially viable I wouldn't think.

What I do agree with is that the promotions teams should formulate their promotions and rules around whatever limitations the software actually has at the time. The exceptions to this IMO would be tangible, specific stipulations like max bet, or excluded games etc. It would be great if the software could limit these things automatically, but it seems MGS and some other big providers don't want to do it....probably for the reasons I outlined above, or perhaps other reason that we aren't aware of...who knows? Point is...they don't generally exist at the moment, so the onus is on the player (and reasonably so) to READ and UNDERSTAND the terms they are being asked to accept.

I like the Rival software options, as they make it pretty much impossible to breach terms. Shame many of the operators are crappy. Remember though, that this software was pretty much designed with this stuff in mind from the word go, and was developed much later than MGS software. Could MGS do it? Of course, but it might mean a very large investment and some major changes, which may not be financially viable in the end, given that the average Joe doesn't have an issue with the vast majority of anti-AP terms, so the only ones it would really benefit in the end are the APs themselves, and the operators do not want to make things easier for them (and I don't blame them).

The problem is even deeper when we look at the newer multi-platform operations. The games are supplied by several vendors "as is", so unless the vendors themselves introduce bet limiters and other anti-AP options, it is up to the operator to formulate and enforce terms as they see fit. Even if they wanted to implement such things, they basically couldn't (AFAIK...Igor can correct me if necessary).

IMO, the answer is not dozens of software limitations and spoon-feeding. The answer is CLEAR and PRECISE terms that leave NO room for argument nor debate. Like any situation where agreement is required, these must be an opportunity for the customer/player etc to read and understand the terms before they sign/play. Once they have signed/taken the bonus, they are bound by what they agreed to be bound by. Any discussion about the legitimacy of any of those terms is an argument for afterwards at the point, and IMO has no impact on previous events.

 

[maphesto]

Of course the casino placed the term there. Who else would have? Elvis? Honestly.

Nice spotted! :machinegu

So why do you THINK the casinos need to HAVE such terms (not this one but others like high WR and excluded games and max cashouts and max bets)....?? The advantage players i.e. those who use particular strategies to take advantage of specific bonuses with no intention of becoming genuine regular

You are talking about terms written to avoid AP. In the post I quoted you put the awful term at FL together with the ones you find at BETAT (an example, you should give me some free cash now BETAT ) and other casinos with well written terms.

The term we find at FL isn't made to avoid AP! It's made by them to be a bit fuzzy by purpose. I can promise you Nifty, that if one of their fishes (big depositor, not so big when it comes to withdrawals ) had started their session with 20 spins at 10€ and continued with bets over 3€ they wouldn't do a thing. They want the cake and eat it. They want a win-win, that's why they have that term. Definately not because of AP, as you seem to think. Or seemed, I would write. You seem to change your mind now.

Oh, and I am not blaming the player for the casino having awful terms. I'm blaming the CASINO for having an awful term,

Thanks!

So who wrote this then?

AP's are the sole reason that there ARE terms such as these,

Was it.....Elvis?




EDIT: I know you claim that the player agreed to the terms at FL. You are right! He did! Still, this is an accredited casino and they should not use their terms in this way. I would never take that bonus and bet 10€/spin for 20 times in a row myself but I would maybe bet 2-3€ for a couple of spins and then play with more modest bets around 0.20-0.60. Would that make me a player who broke their terms? I would reduce my betsize more then he did.
This is an accredited casino, it's not LokkodjungelKasino from TinkyWinky land. All players should expect more from FL than this.

 

[Nifty29]

Nice spotted! :machinegu



You are talking about terms written to avoid AP. In the post I quoted you put the awful term at FL together with the ones you find at BETAT (an example, you should give me some free cash now BETAT ) and other casinos with well written terms.

The term we find at FL isn't made to avoid AP! It's made by them to be a bit fuzzy by purpose. I can promise you Nifty, that if one of their fishes (big depositor, not so big when it comes to withdrawals ) had started their session with 20 spins at 10€ and continued with bets over 3€ they wouldn't do a thing. They want the cake and eat it. They want a win-win, that's why they have that term. Definately not because of AP, as you seem to think. Or seemed, I would write. You seem to change your mind now.



Thanks!

So who wrote this then?



Was it.....Elvis?

TERMS such as these.

I wasn't a statement of whether the term was well-written or not....it was a statement that terms SUCH AS these ARE formulated to deter APs.

We are, and I was, talking about the INTENTION behind having that term...which IS to deter APs. I was also referring to two different aspects in those two statements maphesto....the recent statement was about the casino being at fault for the CONTENT of the term, and the former one was about the APs being at fault for the EXISTENCE of the term.

So, no....I didn't and haven't changed my mind. My argument is entirely consistent i.e. if it were not for APs, terms like this one would NOT exist. SO.....APs ARE the sole reason for terms such as these.

Hope that clears things up for you....although I'm sure you knew exactly what I was saying, but merely deflecting attention away from...a lack of reasonable counter-argument perhaps? I don't know. Either way, I wasn't contradicting myself, and you know it. Nice try.

Elvis has left the planet.

 

[dunover]

I have played all the FL sites. I have converted several bonuses and never had issues cashing out. On some, like Viking says, I started small, won a bit and slowly raised my stake before cashing out. The terms are flaky, and indeed that is the first half of this discussion - how specific do they need to be, what is their definition of an AP and do they believe the 'we'll know it when we see it' ethos is satisfactory?
I know the patterns of an AP and the OP was clearly doing this - to use the argument 'they wouldn't have done this to an established player' is neither here nor there. AP's use bonuses of at least 100%, ideally 150% to work their maths which are on FL only available to NEW players as with many casinos. Therefore AP'ing is usually restricted to new players using SUBs, therefore new players will spark an alert.
As Nifty says, most here including myself have never violated bonus terms because we are aware of the pattern of AP used and also aware of what 'substantial' infers - plus, and most importantly we read the terms.

The second half of the discussion 'was the OP guilty of AP'ing?' - I personally believe yes, he was. By his own volition. He accepted the 'vague' terms before he did so, then bleated he'd been spotted basically. The bonus is intended to lure new players indeed, but also to extend playtime and enjoyment of the games. I'm sorry, but to make a deposit and take the SUB and then play in a way that could potentially wipe your balance out on high stakes in 2 minutes flat OR give you a massive EV+ scenario in 2 minutes flat has 'AP' written all over it. They know exactly the risk they take, and go around site after site knowing overall the gains will greater than the deposits lost.

Again, look at Chopley's videos - that's near-enough how most people play slots and convert a bonus, including myself. I simply start on a slightly higher bet then he does. He plays for hours, sometimes gets lucky and sometimes doesn't. Terms aside, that is what the bonus is intended for, not for clever dicks to attempt 'smash-and-grab' with.

Maybe FL should set (if they haven't as I haven't read their terms for a while) a specific bonus £3 limit per spin say - that would mean a less substantial part of the bonus being played per spin and also any drop, say to £1 after a big win would by their definition not be substantial.

The thing is, FL and many other accredited sites have had these terms for years and they seldom cause issues because rarely do people take the SUBs with AP intent, especially after reading the terms. If you ask sites to define AP in their terms too specifically, you then tell every chancer how to AP and then set the mark for the next bunch of chancers to work out their next strategy.

 

[aceking123]

never had any problems with them regarding big bets up & downs never pulled me for it . only problem ive had is slow payments but apart from that theyve always paid & if i do get any grief as such i would contact the vip manager fabz , they always respond to anything ive asked them , had a account for years there, wish they would speed up time frame on withdrawals but other than that , theyre a good group ( speak as i find )

 

[slotplayer]

I won't play online but when I did I never took a bonus. I like the power in my hands and not the casinos.

 

[dunover]

It's not up to casino support to set up the bonuses. It's up to the promotions team. If the in house promotions teams aren't smart enough to learn the software then they hire people who are.

How do you even know that the software provider (MG) has any facility or provision that the client casino's 'promotion teams' can make settings to the games on a bonus-by-bonus basis? I doubt that FL even have a promo team, but just use generic %age based offers and free games. Don't forget MG software is standard and until a Viper rep. or MG spokesman comes on here to confirm or deny exactly what the client casino can do or change, then that is simply speculation.

I just don't think it's as straightforward as you suggest, and TBH I wish someone who can actually say yea or nay would arrive here and advise us of the possibilities.

 

[skiny]

How do you even know that the software provider (MG) has any facility or provision that the client casino's 'promotion teams' can make settings to the games on a bonus-by-bonus basis? I doubt that FL even have a promo team, but just use generic %age based offers and free games. Don't forget MG software is standard and until a Viper rep. or MG spokesman comes on here to confirm or deny exactly what the client casino can do or change, then that is simply speculation.

I just don't think it's as straightforward as you suggest, and TBH I wish someone who can actually say yea or nay would arrive here and advise us of the possibilities.

Of course the promotions team or department create their own bonuses and the casinos make up their own terms and conditions. Why do you think that the bonuses and T&Cs are different from MGS casino to MGS casino?

My point was that IF MGS built the capability for the providers to set player restrictions, it would be up to the promotions department to do it when they created the bonuses. This is not a support rep function as far as I'm concerned.

Software can be built to do pretty much anything these days. The question isn't if it can be done, it's why isn't it being done? Even with the limited programming knowledge I have and the limitations I have programming in flash, I can still do it myself.

But like I said, if they don't want to go the fool proof route of using built in restrictions then they have to go the AP proof route and clearly state what people are allowed and not allowed to do.

This isn't the first time this casino has had this problem. The same questions were asked last time. Why does an accredited casino have vague terms and conditions? The question wasn't answered last time and here we are again. It should be completely unnecessary to mention advantage play or bonus abuse in the terms and conditions. The terms and conditions should be clear and concise and if you break them you lose. The fact that the rules were broke is the only reason the casino needs.

If the rule says "The maximum you're allowed to wager is $6" then I can't wager more than 6 dollars. Period. End of story. Telling people they're not allowed to bet high and then bet low is just stupid. If I bet high and then start losing and bet low it's ok. If I bet high and start winning and then bet low it's not ok. If I bet high and then start winning but then start losing and start betting low before I lose too much is it ok? Who knows?

Just tell me the most I'm allowed to bet at once and then mind your business.

 

[dunover]

Of course the promotions team or department create their own bonuses and the casinos make up their own terms and conditions. Why do you think that the bonuses and T&Cs are different from MGS casino to MGS casino?

My point was that IF MGS built the capability for the providers to set player restrictions, it would be up to the promotions department to do it when they created the bonuses. This is not a support rep function as far as I'm concerned.

How do you know that? Many casinos share a common CS for example, and who knows if the promotions are done by subcontractors or in house? I can't imagine a full-time employee being paid to do a few hours a week creating promos which are limited in scope anyway, as they are usually simply a % of a deposit with x playthrough and a jazzy graphic chucked in. The bonuses vary slightly but in the end are simply different dishes from the same menu....

And as for the second point you make, IF MG built this capability it would be so simple to enact the tea boy could type the limits and WR in for each promo. As you say, it's not rocket science. I can see you have your own idea of how an online casino is run, how many staff they have and who does what and what is done in-house, but until we are told by someone (unlike both of us) who really knows then it remains speculation. I am of the opinion many of the casinos we play at are far smaller and more compact operations than many think.

 

[SkBurner]

Regardless of intentions etc. the payer's deposit should be refunded if no act of fraud has taken place. AP is not fraud.

Would like to know the justification the casino feels they have to keep the deposit?

It's easy to see both sides of the story here though with some good points but seems clear to all this term could be misinterpreted and needs to be amended fast (but the player did agree to it when accepting the bonus).

My opinion is the OP knew exactly what they were doing and a $10 bet vs a $3 bet is substantial whichever way you look at it. Like I said, they should refund the deposit (and re-write the term).

 

[Nifty29]

Regardless of intentions etc. the payer's deposit should be refunded if no act of fraud has taken place. AP is not fraud.

Would like to know the justification the casino feels they have to keep the deposit?

It's easy to see both sides of the story here though with some good points but seems clear to all this term could be misinterpreted and needs to be amended fast (but the player did agree to it when accepting the bonus).

My opinion is the OP knew exactly what they were doing and a $10 bet vs a $3 bet is substantial whichever way you look at it. Like I said, they should refund the deposit (and re-write the term).

Absolutely the deposit should be refunded!

I didn't realize it was being confiscated as well.....a definite no-no IMO.

 

[SkBurner]

Absolutely the deposit should be refunded!

I didn't realize it was being confiscated as well.....a definite no-no IMO.

Fortune Room casino locked my account and confiscated my deposit and winnings - 1354 euro (150 euro deposit).

(Edited as I was looking at the wrong casino website!!)

They mention confiscation of bonus funds but nothing about deposit in the Irregular play term (no. 30). OP should PAB for refund of deposit.

 

[skiny]

How do you know that? Many casinos share a common CS for example, and who knows if the promotions are done by subcontractors or in house? I can't imagine a full-time employee being paid to do a few hours a week creating promos which are limited in scope anyway, as they are usually simply a % of a deposit with x playthrough and a jazzy graphic chucked in. The bonuses vary slightly but in the end are simply different dishes from the same menu....

And as for the second point you make, IF MG built this capability it would be so simple to enact the tea boy could type the limits and WR in for each promo. As you say, it's not rocket science. I can see you have your own idea of how an online casino is run, how many staff they have and who does what and what is done in-house, but until we are told by someone (unlike both of us) who really knows then it remains speculation. I am of the opinion many of the casinos we play at are far smaller and more compact operations than many think.

Regardless of who is creating the promos they have to be ok'd by management and someone with access to the casino has to implement them. The last time I signed up for a new account at an MGS casino the sign up bonus was credited to my account automatically after I made my first deposit. Somebody made the software do this when the decision was made to enact this promo.

If they can make the software automatically add bonuses to my account they can make the software automatically limit what games I can play and how much I can wager. And I find it hard to believe that the casinos can't find someone to punch the numbers in.

Anyone who doesn't understand this doesn't understand basic computer programming.

 

[Nifty29]

Regardless of who is creating the promos they have to be ok'd by management and someone with access to the casino has to implement them. The last time I signed up for a new account at an MGS casino the sign up bonus was credited to my account automatically after I made my first deposit. Somebody made the software do this when the decision was made to enact this promo.

If they can make the software automatically add bonuses to my account they can make the software automatically limit what games I can play and how much I can wager. And I find it hard to believe that the casinos can't find someone to punch the numbers in.

Anyone who doesn't understand this doesn't understand basic computer programming.

Just to clarify.

The automatic first deposit bonus is an option shipped with all MGS software and has been for a long time. It's a very simple thing...the software detects if it is the first deposit and adds the appropriate bonus (as you say, punched in by the promo team etc).

It's quite a different animal to discuss bet limitations and game restrictions etc in the same way. MGS software doesn't (AFAIK) come bundled with these options, and operators most certainly cannot change the software code themselves to suit their requirements...it would have to be done by MGS, and AFAIK tailored solutions for individual operators (provided they're even possible) cost money, and this cost has to be borne by the operator. In the cost vs outcome calculation, it just wouldn't be worth it for the operator. We see complaints here at CM about bonus terms etc, but the vast majority of players don't have issues with such things, so it's not feasible nor reasonable for an operator to outlay more money just to assist players who, in most cases, just don't bother reading or understanding the terms.

If winnings confiscation and breach of terms was a problem for a majority or large portion of players, then I could see the introduction of software limitations as reasonable. However, the actual portion of players who have such issues is very small....and, as I said, is usually the result of their laziness or lack of understanding (both of which are the player's problem). If it's OK for the vast majority of players to read and follow terms and receive their winnings without a hassle, then it's OK for everyone else. People who tie their cash up with bonuses and don't bother to be across the relevant restrictions just don't deserve leniency, and certainly not my sympathy.

MGS may well be able to implement a host of changes to physically restrict bonus play, but why should they when most people don't have a problem with bonus terms? Operators are not going to spend more money just to make it easier for APs, and I don't see why they should.

 

[skiny]

Just to clarify.

The automatic first deposit bonus is an option shipped with all MGS software and has been for a long time. It's a very simple thing...the software detects if it is the first deposit and adds the appropriate bonus (as you say, punched in by the promo team etc).

It's quite a different animal to discuss bet limitations and game restrictions etc in the same way. MGS software doesn't (AFAIK) come bundled with these options, and operators most certainly cannot change the software code themselves to suit their requirements...it would have to be done by MGS, and AFAIK tailored solutions for individual operators (provided they're even possible) cost money, and this cost has to be borne by the operator. In the cost vs outcome calculation, it just wouldn't be worth it for the operator. We see complaints here at CM about bonus terms etc, but the vast majority of players don't have issues with such things, so it's not feasible nor reasonable for an operator to outlay more money just to assist players who, in most cases, just don't bother reading or understanding the terms.

If winnings confiscation and breach of terms was a problem for a majority or large portion of players, then I could see the introduction of software limitations as reasonable. However, the actual portion of players who have such issues is very small....and, as I said, is usually the result of their laziness or lack of understanding (both of which are the player's problem). If it's OK for the vast majority of players to read and follow terms and receive their winnings without a hassle, then it's OK for everyone else. People who tie their cash up with bonuses and don't bother to be across the relevant restrictions just don't deserve leniency, and certainly not my sympathy.

MGS may well be able to implement a host of changes to physically restrict bonus play, but why should they when most people don't have a problem with bonus terms? Operators are not going to spend more money just to make it easier for APs, and I don't see why they should.

Why should they do it? Because it's better. Better for the player and better for the operator. It's a fool proof method of offering bonuses that is risk free to the operator and guarantees the player is never accused of breaching bonus terms.

The cost should be negligible spread out over all the licensees. We're talking about software that is updated all the time. In fact there was a time when I couldn't open this software 3 times in row without some kind of update being applied. Obviously MGS has programmers that they use for various purposes. If they didn't the software would never be updated.

This is just my opinion based on what I know about computer programming. It's not something that requires imagination, fancy graphics or any new ideas. This is just the software providers saying "This is what we want the operators to be able to do. Now write the code."

I remember when the max bet button was an issue at 3Dice. I got tagged by it at least once but it wasn't a serious issue for a large number of people. In fact from what I can remember there were only a few complaints but they rewrote the code and changed the function so people could set the max bet button not to change the wager. The casino made no money off this and I'm sure it cost them something to do it. The only beneficiaries were the players but the change was still implemented.


In my opinion, the fact that they're not doing it tells me they either don't want to or they don't care. People spend a great deal of money playing these games and as a player, I would personally prefer not to be able to accidently breach a term. I seriously doubt this would put much of a dent in the MGS pocket books and even if they did pass the cost down to the casinos - so what? Take some of the 50 dollars an hour it cost to play these games at minimum bet and update your software. lol

 

[slotplayer]

Why should they do it? Because it's better. Better for the player and better for the operator. It's a fool proof method of offering bonuses that is risk free to the operator and guarantees the player is never accused of breaching bonus terms.

The cost should be negligible spread out over all the licensees. We're talking about software that is updated all the time. In fact there was a time when I couldn't open this software 3 times in row without some kind of update being applied. Obviously MGS has programmers that they use for various purposes. If they didn't the software would never be updated.

This is just my opinion based on what I know about computer programming. It's not something that requires imagination, fancy graphics or any new ideas. This is just the software providers saying "This is what we want the operators to be able to do. Now write the code."

I remember when the max bet button was an issue at 3Dice. I got tagged by it at least once but it wasn't a serious issue for a large number of people. In fact from what I can remember there were only a few complaints but they rewrote the code and changed the function so people could set the max bet button not to change the wager. The casino made no money off this and I'm sure it cost them something to do it. The only beneficiaries were the players but the change was still implemented.


In my opinion, the fact that they're not doing it tells me they either don't want to or they don't care. People spend a great deal of money playing these games and as a player, I would personally prefer not to be able to accidently breach a term. I seriously doubt this would put much of a dent in the MGS pocket books and even if they did pass the cost down to the casinos - so what? Take some of the 50 dollars an hour it cost to play these games at minimum bet and update your software. lol

I've been programming since the mid 1980's so I have pretty good idea of the code involved. While I can't play MG casino since I'm usa I can say as far as hard coding a bonus/max bet its not unlike the code that executes when you're down to your last few credits and an insufficient funds or similar message pops up as in the RTG's.

the reason it is not done is mostly like a cost issue as said by others but I can't understand why (and maybe they are since I can't try any MG slots) the newly released games do not have some of the bonus restrictions hard coded in.

I suggest players go over and look at the New Jersey casino bonus terms, as comparison.

 

[bpb]

MGS may well be able to implement a host of changes to physically restrict bonus play, but why should they when most people don't have a problem with bonus terms? Operators are not going to spend more money just to make it easier for APs, and I don't see why they should.

I'd love for you to attempt to justify your conclusion that the vast majority of winnings confiscations happen to APs. The opposite is clearly true.

 

[slotplayer]

I'd love for you to attempt to justify your conclusion that the vast majority of winnings confiscations happen to APs. The opposite is clearly true.

MGS may well be able to implement a host of changes to physically restrict bonus play, but why should they when most people don't have a problem with bonus terms? Operators are not going to spend more money just to make it easier for APs, and I don't see why they should.

could it be that most players that take bonuses lose so the issue doesn't materialize?

 

[Beravek7]

I suppose they must pay me not only my deposit but also what I won. If the rules of bonus play allow
casino to do whatever they want those rules are not for an accredited casino then. By the way, what does AP means?
Can't find anything about this in Fortune Room terms & conditions. Many say here that because I spin 10 euro per bet
it means casino should not pay me. Why? Where does it say I cannot bet 10 per spin? They have 30% of bonus maximum bet limit.
So I was allowed to bet even 30 per bet. And I like betting big. I am not a person who sits for hours spinning 0.10 cents per spin. I don't like that. What is bad about me loving risky play? If I only knew I will be treated like that at this casino I would never ever deposit my money there! They steal my fully deserved wins and even my deposit they steal and some guys here say it is okay.
Do they have a license to steal?

 

[The Dude]

I suppose they must pay me not only my deposit but also what I won. If the rules of bonus play allow
casino to do whatever they want those rules are not for an accredited casino then. By the way, what does AP means?
Can't find anything about this in Fortune Room terms & conditions. Many say here that because I spin 10 euro per bet
it means casino should not pay me. Why? Where does it say I cannot bet 10 per spin? They have 30% of bonus maximum bet limit.
So I was allowed to bet even 30 per bet. And I like betting big. I am not a person who sits for hours spinning 0.10 cents per spin. I don't like that. What is bad about me loving risky play? If I only knew I will be treated like that at this casino I would never ever deposit my money there! They steal my fully deserved wins and even my deposit they steal and some guys here say it is okay.
Do they have a license to steal?

I've PMd you twice to submit a PAB, and I've asked you at least twice publicly to do so as well. So far we only have your side of the story. No one is stealing anything as far as I am concerned.

 

[dunover]

I suppose they must pay me not only my deposit but also what I won. If the rules of bonus play allow
casino to do whatever they want those rules are not for an accredited casino then. By the way, what does AP means?
Can't find anything about this in Fortune Room terms & conditions. Many say here that because I spin 10 euro per bet
it means casino should not pay me. Why? Where does it say I cannot bet 10 per spin? They have 30% of bonus maximum bet limit.
So I was allowed to bet even 30 per bet. And I like betting big. I am not a person who sits for hours spinning 0.10 cents per spin. I don't like that. What is bad about me loving risky play? If I only knew I will be treated like that at this casino I would never ever deposit my money there! They steal my fully deserved wins and even my deposit they steal and some guys here say it is okay.
Do they have a license to steal?

Have you submitted a PAB yet? Then you will find the answer.

P.S. Appears not, Bryan posted while I was typing.

 

[dunover]

This is just my opinion based on what I know about computer programming. It's not something that requires imagination, fancy graphics or any new ideas. This is just the software providers saying "This is what we want the operators to be able to do. Now write the code."

So you now agree that the improvements you advocate need to be actioned by the software provider as opposed to the vendors/casinos or their 'promo teams'?

That's the point I've been trying to make all along.

Anyway, although I don't, or never have needed such 'protections' it is clear some players do and they would provide us all with a comforter, but don't hold your breath Skiny!

 

[maphesto]

@Beravek7:

Go ahead and make that PAB! Why are we supposed to argue about your issue if you don't do what you can do to solve it?

If your issue is as you described it, my opinion is that they should pay you both deposits and winnings! If you don't have the balls to make that PAB I have to think that something with you or your issue isn't as it supposed to. Please don't make another post here before your PAB (if there is one soon) is settled.

One little thing:

They steal my fully deserved wins and even my deposit they steal and some guys here say it is okay.

Even Nifty thinks that the deposit is a no-no to ..hmm..."steal"...

Absolutely the deposit should be refunded!

I didn't realize it was being confiscated as well.....a definite no-no IMO.

 

[SkBurner]

I'd like to ask Beravek7;

Have you played at any other Fortune Lounge casino with a welcome bonus? If so did you bet in the same manner?
Have you played any other online casino's in the past in the same manner? If so have you experienced any problems before with regards betting patterns and making a withdrawal?

You imply you're not an advantage player but I would like to know your history of online casino's and your understanding of bonus terms & conditions. I imagine Fortune Lounge imposed this term for a reason.

 

[The Dude]

I'd like to ask Beravek7 what is the purpose of joining this forum and posting here without submitting a formal complaint against the casino. But forgive my skepticism - I've seen this behavior before. It doesn't take an Einstein to figure out we are only getting the part of the story the OP wants us to hear.

 

[maphesto]

@Bryan:

Do you know more about this poster? As I said to him, why do we argue about his issue if he doesn't PAB. It's the same if you have info, is he a fraud?

 

[SkBurner]

A genuine player does not refrain from submitting a PAB without a reason. I'd say he has 1500+ reasons to submit one (the amount of his withdrawal ).

I said he should get his deposit back if no act of fraud has taken place, Fortune Lounge would not confiscate it without a damn good reason.

I still believe the term should be rewritten but then again how far do casino's need to go to stamp out bonus abuse. I do sympathise with them.

Would a genuine player get caught up in something like this?

 

[skiny]

So you now agree that the improvements you advocate need to be actioned by the software provider as opposed to the vendors/casinos or their 'promo teams'?

That's the point I've been trying to make all along.

Anyway, although I don't, or never have needed such 'protections' it is clear some players do and they would provide us all with a comforter, but don't hold your breath Skiny!

Sorry, I didn't know you misunderstood my original post. It would certainly fall on the software providers to update or upgrade their own software.

I'd like to ask Beravek7 what is the purpose of joining this forum and posting here without submitting a formal complaint against the casino. But forgive my skepticism - I've seen this behavior before. It doesn't take an Einstein to figure out we are only getting the part of the story the OP wants us to hear.

This is why I haven't made any assumptions either way about this individual case. Although I am obviously against any form of vague bonus abuse or advantage play rules, until this member submits a PAB we have no way of really knowing what happened in this particular instance. I would dearly like to see the OP submit a case because the rule he's claiming was implemented is completely open to interpretation. If the OP really did take a bonus and then place 10 dollar wagers followed by 3 dollar wagers, simply using the word "substantial" in a bonus term doesn't adequately describe the casino's betting limits. For me 10 dollar and 3 dollar wager are both high. For others 10 and 3 dollar wagers are both low.

If he thinks the casino is going to just pay up if he rallies some support in a casino forum he's barking up the wrong tree. If it was that that easy we could just open one big thread entitled "Type here to get paid" and you and Max could just go sit on the beach.

If he wants help from this forum he's going to have to follow procedures like everyone else.

 

[dunover]

A genuine player does not refrain from submitting a PAB without a reason. I'd say he has 1500+ reasons to submit one (the amount of his withdrawal ).

I said he should get his deposit back if no act of fraud has taken place, Fortune Lounge would not confiscate it without a damn good reason.

I still believe the term should be rewritten but then again how far do casino's need to go to stamp out bonus abuse. I do sympathise with them.

Would a genuine player get caught up in something like this?

This affair convinces me more and more as to why Wim hasn't come on here to comment - it may embarrass the OP and he therefore in the interests of privacy and integrity Wim needs to stay away.
Unless of course the OP can demonstrate otherwise, and he has been very recalcitrant in doing so thus far. Until he tells us more, or PABs I think any more comments from myself would be superfluous. I'll keep an eye on it, but have nothing useful to add any longer.

 

[SkBurner]

Beravek7 : PAB'd yet?

 

[Dinahnana]

This affair convinces me more and more as to why Wim hasn't come on here to comment - it may embarrass the OP and he therefore in the interests of privacy and integrity Wim needs to stay away.
Unless of course the OP can demonstrate otherwise, and he has been very recalcitrant in doing so thus far. Until he tells us more, or PABs I think any more comments from myself would be superfluous. I'll keep an eye on it, but have nothing useful to add any longer.

Okay if the OP does not PAB them we will assume that there is something hinky going on. That being said Fortune Lounge Group still needs to update their T&C's so that they are clear and concise. Other casino's don't have a problem doing it so why shouldn't they? When we deposit and play we are trying to have a good time sometimes we up or bets or reduce our bets depending on the slots we play or how our session is going. We should not have to worry about having our winnings confiscated over this vague AP player T&C's.

 

[The Dude]

@Bryan:

Do you know more about this poster? As I said to him, why do we argue about his issue if he doesn't PAB. It's the same if you have info, is he a fraud?

All I have is what you see.

Beravek7 : PAB'd yet?

Nope, not yet.

 

[SkBurner]

Nope, not yet.

Looks like Fortune Lounge made the correct decision then, 1500 euro's is a fair chunk of change to lose out on if you have a valid complaint.

I think the business regarding the Irregular Play term should be discussed in another thread. I'm now on the fence with that and can see both sides of the argument but at the end of the day Fortune Lounge can include any term they want and the player has the choice of whether to accept it or not. I'm not so sure it is a vague term having thought about it, the word substantial is pretty clear to me and their intention in including it is as well. It's all subjective I guess