1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

Captain Cooks Bonus Terms

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by Stanford, Sep 29, 2004.

    Sep 29, 2004
  1. Stanford

    Stanford Dormant account

    Location:
    USA
    I finally got around to checking out the Captain Cooks bonus terms. I don't recommend it.

    For the bonus, there is a bonus account and you have to play the required wagering pertinent to the bonus in the bonus account. That's fine.

    Your deposit is in your real account. You have wagering requirements on that as well. That's cool.

    Then if you are lucky and get through the wagering you can transfer the winnings and bonus to your real account. And guess what? You have wagering requirements on the amount transferred. That's right. This casino has Wagering requirements on winnings.

    So... example. Deposit 100 and get 200 bonus in the bonus account. Wager bonus in bonus account in blackjack 35 times or $7,000. And lets say you get lucky and win $100.

    Now transfer the $300 to your real account. And wager that and the $100 *both* 35 times (for blackjack). That's another $14,000 of wagering. Now you can cash out.

    In this example there is a total $21,000 of required wagering. Wouldn't you hate to hit a big jackpot in the bonus account? If you do, peddle fast because terms only give you 7 days to get done.

    In my opinion, players may want to shop for a casino that doesn't require wagering on winnings. There are lots of them. I suppose the pros can figure an angle, but for recreational players - shop around.

    imho,
    stanford
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2004
  2. Sep 29, 2004
  3. ayedub

    ayedub Dormant account

    Location:
    kelowna
    I agree 100%. Can you imagine hitting Major Millions for a million on the bonus account, then realizing you now have wagering requirements of $35,000,000?

    I'll take my business elsewhere, for sure. :)
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2004
  4. Sep 29, 2004
  5. Casinomeister

    Casinomeister Forum Cheermeister Staff Member

    Occupation:
    Homemaker
    Location:
    Bierland
    I'm about 100% sure that a progressive win would be exempt from any wagering requirement. :D

    I'll check on the rest. This must be a recent change since I play there often. Sometimes with a bonus - sometimes not. Never had a problem with the cash out process.
     
  6. Sep 29, 2004
  7. GrandMaster

    GrandMaster Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Mathematician by day, online gambler by night.
    Location:
    UK
    You cannot play progressives on the bonus account, so the problem does not arise.
     
  8. Sep 29, 2004
  9. trick

    trick Dormant account

    I'm currently trying to get through their requirements, but it IS ridiculous. I played the 200$ in my bonusaccount up to 298$ and then transfering it to my real account - actually RAISING my initial wagering requirement with 980$ for the extra 98$ PLUS I have to wager the 200$ bonus 10x AGAIN if I want to cash out PLUS I have to wager my initial deposit 10x too.

    All this despite the fact that I wrote their support:

    And the answer was:

    I'm currently trying to get through the additional wagering requirement, but after flatbetting 1000 hands of red dog, I have lost 122 units which is 4,5 times more the expected outcome. Needless to say, I feel screwed over by the fact that I had almost 400$ after completing the WR stated in the mail I first got and now I have only 156$ left - and still need to wager 2000$!!

    The WR have TRIPPLED!!!!!!!!! compared to what I was told in the first mail. Supporters are still giving out wrong information and because of this one of biggest danish portals have taken Captain Cooks off their list.
     
  10. Sep 29, 2004
  11. trick

    trick Dormant account

    -Deleted-
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2004
  12. Sep 29, 2004
  13. Vesuvio

    Vesuvio Dormant account

    Location:
    UK
    They changed to making you wager your winnings from the bonus account again at the same time they switched to a 35x wr. In fact I think for a few days it was even higher than 35x. It's understandable they didn't want to remain such an easy target for bonus hunters, but as you say it's not that appealing for recreational players...

    The only thing I really object to about Captain Cooks/Casino Kingdom is the high minimum amount to transfer from the bonus account to the real account (why have a limit at all?) & the high minimum withdrawal (assuming it's still 75) which is a nuisance - though you can get round it by just depositing more in order to have above 75 to withdraw.
     
  14. Sep 29, 2004
  15. chucho

    chucho Bonus Pimp

    If you get stuck in the trap, the best way out is to use the autoplay at $1 bets playing Vegas strip bj, dont forget to change the stategy chart from the default settings.
     
  16. Sep 29, 2004
  17. Stanford

    Stanford Dormant account

    Location:
    USA
    That is what is ironic. In their zeal to prevent bonus hunters, they reduce their recreational players or they should if the player is thinking. And the pros can still game it if they want.

    I have a neighbor who would love to play online. She plays games almost everyday on her computer and she loves going to brick and mortar casinos. But I won't show her how to set up Neteller and play online because I am sure some bright casino jockey will scream bonus abuser if she plays where I play - just because our address is similar.

    Casinos worry too much about bonus hunters (not talking fraudsters).

    Good point about the minimum transfer out of the bonus account. Again, not much issue for the pros, but another obstacle for the recreational player. As you say, what's the point of that?

    Stanford
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2004
  18. Sep 29, 2004
  19. Stanford

    Stanford Dormant account

    Location:
    USA
    You have a real complaint. CMeister is contacting them anyway so you should make sure he has your details, IMHO. If you received contradictory information in an offer, that should be controlling. If you went to the trouble to confirm with support, that also should be controlling.

    It won't kill them to make the occasional exception when there is conflicting information. I would advise to stop playing till you get it resolved, but that crazy 7 days rule makes it risky to stop to long. If you don't complete in 7 days, you lose the bonus - in this case again since you have already lost a sizable amount.

    imho,
    Stanford
     
  20. Sep 29, 2004
  21. jpm

    jpm Dormant account

    I don't understand why anyone would take a bonus at a place that has this wacky bonus account and double wagering requirements on bonuses. This is a formula for losing your money. Personally, I won't play anywhere that does this b.s.

    Stanford, your neighbor wouldn't have a problem if she doesn't play bonuses. That's where you get into trouble with 'similar' IP addresses (which probably wouldn't be an issue anyway, only identical ones with identical machine addresses would be a problem).
     
  22. Oct 2, 2004
  23. clj7221

    clj7221 Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Private
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Captain Cooks use to be my favorite casino. I hardly play there anymore since they started that Phony Bonus account thing as Golden Reef did .
    When I play on line casinos I want to feel as if I am playing in a real casino and they should have the same rules as a real casino, I have never known any real land casino to comp you or match a bonus on a phony bonus account.

    I have to say that if the on line casinos get anymore stupid more people will support Congress to pass the law here and ban on line gaming.What we should have here in The United States is tough regulation laws for on line gaming industry where they have rules to follow or else fined and/or shut down.

     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2004
  24. Oct 2, 2004
  25. Stanford

    Stanford Dormant account

    Location:
    USA
    Understand your point. I do talk to my Congressman and they are aware of current loopholes in the proposed legislation. They just not that concerned yet.

    The good part of online casinos is that they allow some entertainment value from the comfort of your home. Instead of hotel rooms, food, and cocktails you get cash bonuses.

    The bad part is they accentuate and increase complusive gambling; they contribute little or nothing to the local economy; they don't supply jobs; and they increase consumer fraud.

    It isn't that great of balance as it is.

    This case would not make me tip the balance towards banning online gambling. It is a dumb policy but not a dishonest one. The problems with some of the other casinos would push it that way. Thats why these watchdog sites are so importent.

    Stanford
     
  26. Nov 3, 2004
  27. Stanford

    Stanford Dormant account

    Location:
    USA
    Hi Meister,

    I am starting to get promotions from this group. Did you ever check with them?

    If there is a change in the wind, I would give them a look.

    Stanford
     
  28. Nov 3, 2004
  29. KasinoKing

    KasinoKing WebMeister & Slotaholic.. CAG MM PABnonaccred webmeister

    Occupation:
    House-Husband and Casino Advisor
    Location:
    Bexhill on sea, England
    Oh bugger! Guess who signed up to Cooks yesterday to 'sus out' this 'bonus account' system? :(

    I did have my eyes open, and read & understood all the T&C's first, but meeting this WR is proving harder than expected. I don't normally play Blackjack anyway, so the 35x didn't come into my equation, but I may have to try chucho's advice about auto-play... :oops:

    If anyone thought the WR was 10x, then they didn't read the T&C's properly! *

    If you managed the 10x on the 200% bonus & stayed level it would be:

    (Bx10) + (Bx10) + (Dx10). B is twice D, so WR = 50 x D, or 25 x B.

    'Stayed level" are the key words here - if you DID get a big win on a NON-progressive slot - it would make it pretty hairy!

    * Obviously I can read - but can't do maths, 'cos on my MG list I worked out WR as x15.
    Oh well - nobody's prefect! ;)
    .
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2004
  30. Nov 3, 2004
  31. CJack

    CJack Dormant account

    Location:
    USA
    They have made this far too complicated for a recreational gambler (me).

    Inetbet and Intercasino are just about all for me.
     
  32. Nov 3, 2004
  33. KasinoKing

    KasinoKing WebMeister & Slotaholic.. CAG MM PABnonaccred webmeister

    Occupation:
    House-Husband and Casino Advisor
    Location:
    Bexhill on sea, England
    .
    He-he! This might help me meet the WR! :cool:
    .
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2007
  34. Nov 3, 2004
  35. Stanford

    Stanford Dormant account

    Location:
    USA
    Congrats King. You do realize that when winnings are transferred, you have new WRs on those winnings. And the bonus too for that matter.

    Stanford
     
  36. Nov 4, 2004
  37. KasinoKing

    KasinoKing WebMeister & Slotaholic.. CAG MM PABnonaccred webmeister

    Occupation:
    House-Husband and Casino Advisor
    Location:
    Bexhill on sea, England
    Er... you haven't read all the posts in this thread, have you! ;)

    Hows' things? Rockin' n Rollin'? :thumbsup:

    PS. Started with 200 credits - am less that half way to WR, and was clearly 62 down when that hit. Shame it wan't during free spins! :(
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2004
  38. Nov 5, 2004
  39. KasinoKing

    KasinoKing WebMeister & Slotaholic.. CAG MM PABnonaccred webmeister

    Occupation:
    House-Husband and Casino Advisor
    Location:
    Bexhill on sea, England
    WR Update!

    For anyone who's interested (must be 1 out there!), this is how I'm getting on meeting the FIRST WR.

    Well - Captain Cooks has turned me upside down! Game I thought was OK (Stud) has turned to crap, games I thought a 'joke' (slots) have saved my bacon - BIG-TIME!

    First WR is 200 credits x 10 = 2000. So far done about 1450 and only lost 10.
    Stud is normally a game I can stay quite level on - but there is no polite way to describe CCC stud - it totally takes the p*ss! Lost 136 for only 776 wagered :what:

    This means the only other thing I have played - slots - have given me +126.
    This might not sound a lot, but for 674 wagered I rate that as amazing! :thumbsup:

    Also surprising, is slot I thought was 'poor' when I first played it 6 weeks ago - Thunderstruck - has given me 88 profit. Not only did I get that nice hit above, but also during 15 free spins got 3 staffs on 2 lines at the same time, both with Thor's in them = 3 x 2 x 2 x 25 x bet = Lots! (Won 59.52 total from 0.72 spin).

    And New Slot on the Block - Tomb Raider - has also been friendly! Made 40 from it.
    This was greatly helped by not 3, but 4 Laura's turning up together! (See below)
    This won 37.50 for 0.75 spin, before adding a pathetic 9.00 from the 10 free-spins.

    So I'm quite happy with my CCC experiment so far - but only 3/4 through first WR - so a long way to go yet! Mind you - I have been BLOODY lucky! :D
    Wish me more luck - see you on the other side! ;)
    .
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2007

Share This Page