Brandon Walsh vs Curacao egaming

danofthewibble

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Location
UK
Weird really. We know the licensing is weak, and there are interesting conversations to be had. But clearly not by that person, who is just angry at the world.

With Curacao the essence is this: the licensing is weak, but well-managed casinos still use it for their own reasons. So long as those casinos remain well-managed, you can trust them. If things change in future, I’m sure we’ll hear about it quickly. But ultimately, you pay your money, you take your chance.

And it’s not as if there aren’t rogue operations happily continuing to operate under MGA or UKGC licenses.
 

BitStarz

Accredited Casino BitStarz Representative
Joined
Nov 25, 2014
Location
Malta
Weird really. We know the licensing is weak, and there are interesting conversations to be had. But clearly not by that person, who is just angry at the world.

With Curacao the essence is this: the licensing is weak, but well-managed casinos still use it for their own reasons. So long as those casinos remain well-managed, you can trust them. If things change in future, I’m sure we’ll hear about it quickly. But ultimately, you pay your money, you take your chance.

And it’s not as if there aren’t rogue operations happily continuing to operate under MGA or UKGC licenses.

I couldn't have said it better. Just because of a Curacao license, it doesn't mean by definition that the casino is bad, although UKGC and MGA might offer additional security for the player if shit hits the fan.

As for BitStarz, no other licensing than the Curacao one allows us to be as flexible with cryptocurrencies (which is a substantial part of our business), and that would again be our reason for sticking with it.

But as for the Curacao Licensed casinos, I think it really puts an extra emphasis on us as operators to show that we take responsibility, are active in forums and try to be transparent, despite having a license that might not be as highly regarded as others.

Olle
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
But as for the Curacao Licensed casinos, I think it really puts an extra emphasis on us as operators to show that we take responsibility, are active in forums and try to be transparent, despite having a license that might not be as highly regarded as others.

I think this pretty much nails it. Some Curacao operators are unadulterated crap and deserve all the scorn they rightly receive. Others are some of the best and most trusted operators that we've worked with in the 20 years that Bryan and I have been in the business.

Clearly it's the operators that matter, the licensing jurisdiction itself is virtually a non-entity. This is not news. It wasn't too many years ago when that same observation applied to the industry as a whole. Curacao just happens to be a bit of a dinosaur in that it hasn't evolved (much) with the times.

As to the OP's crusade that Curacao licenses "don't exist" I think I'd rather have someone who knows what they are talking about comment on that. Frankly the legalese of it isn't of particular interest to us because, as indicated above, until relatively recently Curacao was not significantly different than anywhere else. The legal status of a good many licensing jurisdictions is a matter of debate, it often depends who you talk to.

So yes, today Curacao is a feeble excuse for a licensing jurisdiction, but so is Panama and Antigua and Costa Rica and ... etc, etc, the list goes on. TBH Gibraltar, for instance, isn't a whole lot better IMO -- it was a few years ago but that was then and this is now -- in that players get treated as Gib sees fit and there is nothing in place to allow players to appeal their decisions or seek arbitration. We could continue in this vein for quite some time.

The bottom line is that decent licensing jurisdictions -- meaning those backed by and accountable to the laws of the state, with proper regulatory oversight, good principles of operation and/or codes of conduct for their licensees, and a meaningful appeals and arbitration process -- are very much rarer than most people realize.
 
Last edited:

Harry_BKK

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Location
Balcony
I think this pretty much nails it. Some Curacao operators are unadulterated crap and deserve all the scorn they rightly receive. Others are some of the best and most trusted operators that we've worked with in the 20 years that Bryan and I have been in the business.

Clearly it's the operators that matter, the licensing jurisdiction itself is virtually a non-entity. This is not news. It wasn't too many years ago when that same observation applied to the industry as a whole. Curacao just happens to be a bit of a dinosaur in that it hasn't evolved (much) with the times.

As to the OP's crusade that Curacao licenses "don't exist" I think I'd rather have someone who knows what they are talking about comment on that. Frankly the legalese of it isn't of particular interest to us because, as indicated above, until relatively recently Curacao was not significantly different than anywhere else. The legal status of a good many licensing jurisdictions is a matter of debate, it often depends who you talk to.

So yes, today Curacao is a feeble excuse for a licensing jurisdiction, but so is Panama and Antigua and Costa Rica and ... etc, etc, the list goes on. TBH Gibraltar, for instance, isn't a whole lot better IMO -- it was a few years ago but that was then and this is now -- in that players get treated as Gib sees fit and there is nothing in place to allow players to appeal their decisions or seek arbitration. We could continue in this vein for quite some time.

The bottom line is that decent licensing jurisdictions -- meaning those backed by and accountable to the laws of the state, with proper regulatory oversight, good principles of operation and/or codes of conduct for their licensees, and a meaningful appeals and arbitration process -- are very much rarer than most people realize.

Great summary.

I think you don't even have to go as far as Gibraltar. The MGA was not much of a licence in the first years of its existence either. In fact, they changed only in the last few years with the last major change being in Jan 2019. Until then, any casino could have just ONE single game running under the MGA licence and the rest under whatever they preferred, yet were still allowed to display the MGA logo. And that is just one aspect, I am sure some of the veteran casino managers/reps can remember the Wild West days in Malta. :D

And let's not forget that many casinos that are today at the top of the list started with a Curacao licence before acquiring one from the MGA, UKGC etc. once the were able to afford them.

EDIT: Just for nostalgic reasons, we should all remember the days of Kahnawake. At the time, it was the only licence a player could trust.
 
Last edited:

Kroffe

เ๓ ค Ŧคภςץ ๒єคг
MM
Joined
Mar 2, 2019
Location
sweden
Haha, thanks man. Only half Swedish, but I do speak the language though : )

That counts.
Then we can communicate in the superior language.
To make sure the "others" dont try to cheat with google-translate, i will do it in the code all Swedes know.
;)

Dodetot äror lolitote foföror momycockoketot enongogelolsosmomänon hohäror, vovisossostot?
 
Top