Bonus Abuse . . . Bonus ADVANTAGE Player . . . give me a BREAK!

[vinylweatherman]

Wow, I just found out that I'm no longer eligible for bonuses at Buzzluck. Tried to redeem a lousy 75 % bonus and was also denied and offered the 35 % with a 30 times playthrough. Just for the record I have deposited over 50 times here and only cashed out twice , both times not for a very large amount. These CWC's are going to pot fast. Once they're done alienating all their loyal players they'll be in the crapper like all the rest of these RTG casinos.
Oh well, like Nifty likes to say, bonuses aren't an entitlement so I guess I'll just delete this software and close my account like all the rest and head to the brick and mortar five minutes down the road.
What a bunch of dummies !

It seems that they are now bonus banning the ordinary "recreational" players, not just the advantage players. Further, it is no longer based on being lucky enough to get ahead (and stay there) as it was when I got bonus banned years ago.

Times must be tighter than players are being told, and this could be risky as in many cases, players' funds are not separated from company funds.

The most obvious cause, apart from the global recession, is the US market and the high "leakage" of funds there to unintended parties (the DoJ for example, along with dodgy processors).

This could be a mass ditching of "low value" players, not because of anything they have done wrong in the way of "advantage play", but because their average deposits are not big enough for a profit to be made from their losses.

You can deposit 50 times and only manage to cash out twice, and get way below the expected RTP, yet the deposits be so small in total that the end result is a loss on your business.

 

[Nifty29]

For me that is a valuable distinction. We have a "bonus casino" product (not currently deployed) - all bonuses are post-betting so:

1.) They don't assist in achieving the WR.

2.) They don't assist in extending "play time".

I like your indication that these are thus "comps" and not "bonuses".



(Emphasis mine.)

Agreed - comps don't fly at all in the (typical) affiliate world. I agree with VWM that the Casinos are responsible for creating the "bonus trap". However, in my (admittedly limited) experience it is the Affiliates that are the primary fuel in keeping that engine running.

Chris

Is it your experience that mainly "low value players" that expect everything for nothing etc, such as players frequenting Casinomeister for example, use and demand bonuses?

Nice to see you back at CM Chris.

 

[Nifty29]

Wow, I just found out that I'm no longer eligible for bonuses at Buzzluck. Tried to redeem a lousy 75 % bonus and was also denied and offered the 35 % with a 30 times playthrough. Just for the record I have deposited over 50 times here and only cashed out twice , both times not for a very large amount. These CWC's are going to pot fast. Once they're done alienating all their loyal players they'll be in the crapper like all the rest of these RTG casinos.
Oh well, like Nifty likes to say, bonuses aren't an entitlement so I guess I'll just delete this software and close my account like all the rest and head to the brick and mortar five minutes down the road.
What a bunch of dummies !

Absolutely spike. Vote with your wallet mate.

Money speaks far louder than forum rants and a heap of slagging off casinos. The sooner others adopt your attitude, the sooner operators will be forced to revisit poor decisions.

Based on you depositing 50 times and cashing out twice, I would say you're a fairly loyal player who isn't trying to milk every last drop out of CWC.....and logic and common sense suggests that you are EXACTLY the kind of player they should be looking after, rather than bonus banning.

Whilst bonuses are not an entitlement, and operators have the right to bonus ban or whatever, there are ways they can and should go about it that both protects their profits in GENUINE cases of bonus hunting etc AND give players a chance to show they are willing to show loyalty without bonuses.

Inetbet have a good system. An email is sent informing a player that they are CONSIDERING removing access to bonuses, but that it can be avoided by making more straight deposits. There will always be some that get pissed either way, but I would much rather be warned in advance than find out I'm bonus banned the next time I try to redeem a code.

Casinos need to start thinking about the way their decisions about promotion eligibility are communicated, and consider how THEY would react if someone suddenly shouted "NO SOUP FOR YOU!!!" in their face, which is what an unannounced bonus ban is in reality.

On the thread title....IMO there is no such things as bonus abuse or bonus abusers.

 

[anniemac]

Couldn't have said it better, Nifty.

I am one of the loyal depositors at CW group that got demoted with no warning, although I've been told by Tom and Karolina that there is nothing different regarding my account.

If there is nothing different about my account, then the players that aren't VIP must be getting really low bonus offers. LOL! What is the point of taking a 65% bonus that has the same playthru as the 100% bonuses they use to offer? Right now, my bonus offers are as low as the continual bonuses they use to offer but with the same playthru.

The last big withdrawal I had a CW was last August. Don't think I am ahead yet.

Best way to piss off loyal players is to treat them like you don't want their business. And right now, CW is doing a fantastic job.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Couldn't have said it better, Nifty.

I am one of the loyal depositors at CW group that got demoted with no warning, although I've been told by Tom and Karolina that there is nothing different regarding my account.

If there is nothing different about my account, then the players that aren't VIP must be getting really low bonus offers. LOL! What is the point of taking a 65% bonus that has the same playthru as the 100% bonuses they use to offer? Right now, my bonus offers are as low as the continual bonuses they use to offer but with the same playthru.

The last big withdrawal I had a CW was last August. Don't think I am ahead yet.

Best way to piss off loyal players is to treat them like you don't want their business. And right now, CW is doing a fantastic job.

Clearly there IS a difference, they just don't want to make matters worse by telling you. They don't seem to think that NOT telling you, and thus coming across as "liars", could make things even worse.

It is hard to believe that they have made such a negative chance across the board, else they would lose their "high value" players along with the "low value" ones.


However, it may be that they have not downgraded players, but markets, and are "demoting" all players in a market they consider to be "finished" so that they can throw money at new or underutilised markets elsewhere. The reasons for demoting the US market are obvious, and even the Canadian market seems to have operators running scared of a threat that does not exist now, but might do in the near future.

If they changed all their RTG skins to the Euro, it will make the EU market much easier to penetrate. The drawback with RTG software is that each skin is tied down to a single currency, thus forcing many RTG casinos into using the US Dollar. Other softwares, such as MGS, offer multi currency support for individual skins. To achieve this, they have had to tackle a problem RTG has decided not to deal with, the network progressives where currency exchange has to be factored into the contributions to the pool, and the payouts.

 

[anniemac]

VWM,

Whatever they are doing, it's working as far as I am concerned. There are plenty of other RTG casinos that are willing to take my money. LOL!

If the casinos want to get rid of US players, all they have to do is what MG did. Quit sneaking around and just come out and say it. "We are done with US." Wouldn't be a big surprise to us anyway.

But they need to remember that someday the US will open up gaming and then where will they be. SOL as far as I'm concerned.

 

[vinylweatherman]

VWM,

Whatever they are doing, it's working as far as I am concerned. There are plenty of other RTG casinos that are willing to take my money. LOL!

If the casinos want to get rid of US players, all they have to do is what MG did. Quit sneaking around and just come out and say it. "We are done with US." Wouldn't be a big surprise to us anyway.

But they need to remember that someday the US will open up gaming and then where will they be. SOL as far as I'm concerned.

They are SOL anyway. They will not be allowed a US license because they operated throughout the UIGEA era. The big softwares pulled out because they had advice that by doing so, they would eventually be able to get a US license, even if this meant agreeing a settlement with the DoJ over pre 2006 activity.

If RTG casinos pull out, it is because they can no longer make a profit with the costs of smuggling the payments past the UIGEA measures.

Maybe they feel that by shaving the promotional costs they can run the US market a little longer as at the moment there is no legal alternative for casino games, and only an emerging legal alternative for poker.

Once US players experience trouble free deposits and payouts with US legal alternatives, they may decide this outweighs having to keep records for the taxman, and the IRS knowing their gambling habits in far more detail than at land casinos.

US players may even get Microgaming back, along with the others that pulled out early such as Playtech and the new improved Intercasino.

 

[Nifty29]

They are SOL anyway. They will not be allowed a US license because they operated throughout the UIGEA era. The big softwares pulled out because they had advice that by doing so, they would eventually be able to get a US license, even if this meant agreeing a settlement with the DoJ over pre 2006 activity.

If RTG casinos pull out, it is because they can no longer make a profit with the costs of smuggling the payments past the UIGEA measures.

Maybe they feel that by shaving the promotional costs they can run the US market a little longer as at the moment there is no legal alternative for casino games, and only an emerging legal alternative for poker.

Once US players experience trouble free deposits and payouts with US legal alternatives, they may decide this outweighs having to keep records for the taxman, and the IRS knowing their gambling habits in far more detail than at land casinos.

US players may even get Microgaming back, along with the others that pulled out early such as Playtech and the new improved Intercasino.

You don't know what will happen. You're making stuff up again.

We can only guess what will actually occur in the US, and who will or won't be granted a licence. My FEELING is that there will be few and they will go to government-friendly outfits who already have their snouts in the trough, and that it will be extremely difficult for ANY non-US operator to be green-lighted regardless of what they did or didn't do after UIGEA. It could well explain why some operators decided to keep allowing US players i.e. they figured they'd have a snowballs chance in hell when legalization came around anyway.

History also tells us that money speaks all languages...and loudly.

As I've said before, regulation costs money, and it is unlikely that US players will enjoy the same promotions and high RTPs they do now.

I also think that the US will stop short of making online gaming a crime if it is not done at a regulated licenced casino in the. US. It would be incredibly difficult to police IMO. As such, I can see current operators retaining a portion of their US player base, as all efforts to stop the money flow has still pretty much failed thus far. In fact, it has caused players to send even more money offshore via dodgy overseas processors.

I'm not passing this off as FACT. It is just my OPINION.

 

[anniemac]

We can all guess and surmise but that's all it is. However, CW has changed their promos to me and that's a fact. InetBet is still the same as is Intertops. So I surmise that it has something to do with CW group only.

What I feel will happen when, or if the US allows online gaming, is that the big casinos, which already have their online sites set up, will be the first ones allowed to open up. The player will have the option of playing online or going to a B&M casino with the same comp. points etc. They have already got them set up for play just not for real money.

That way, good old gov., will be able to get their hands on the money coming and going.

 

[nikantw]

While regulating the market is a good thing, that could protect players, most governments just use it as an excuse to take a large portion of the bets (and not just from the profits).

My country wants to "protect" me, and especially the kids, from gambling addiction and crimes related to it.

To do so, besides the few land based casinos, they give only one license to one private operator for 30 years

To protect me even more, the one private operator has an RTP of 60%, and the land based casinos an RTP of 70% - 77%.

No, I am not making a mistake. The only one legal online gaming provider in my country has an RTP of 60% - 70% in its games. And advertisements on every media every 15 minutes 24/7 (to "protect" me, and especially the kids, from gambling addiction and crimes related to it).

And European Commission is just about to give that hideous legislation a go.

To get back to bonuses, what do you think, a 300% on all deposit without wagering requirements can make up for the 60% RTP?
(no, they don't offer any bonus at all)

 

[Andy Walker]

A typical land based machine with the odd AWP system that is used here in the UK would typically be set to 78% (84% sometimes) pay-out, to go online and play at 60% seems a crazy and miserable experience, maybe they got the anti-gambling thing sorted, shame about all the other monetary issues.

 

[nikantw]

A typical land based machine with the odd AWP system that is used here in the UK would typically be set to 78% (84% sometimes) pay-out, to go online and play at 60% seems a crazy and miserable experience, maybe they got the anti-gambling thing sorted, shame about all the other monetary issues.

It's not anti-gambling. Just want to protect a privet company's interests by making the competition "illegal", and control the media via controlling the money flow (24/7 advertising on all media, is a lot of money).