Eurolinx/twolinx None payment of Affiliates

biggambler567

Dormant account
PABaccred
PABnononaccred2
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Location
Trinidad
Hi, I am an affiliate with eurolinx/twolinx, and I have been waiting for my affiliate payments for the month of june. Up to today I have not recieved my payment, I have contacted the rep on here and he has not responded and I have also sent them emails and also got no response, furthermore I spoke to the last affiliate manager and he told me he left because of issues like this, All i woant to know is if and when i will be paid my commission, it seems they are just ignoring me at this point in time, can anyone help?
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
Actually - we have a PAB that's going pearshaped at the moment - non payment issue and I suspect it's a cashflow prob. There was an earlier one that the player agreed to a lesser payment I believe. Warning is in the making.
 

same_old

Dormant account
webmeister
PABaccred
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Location
Australia
She's been sounding like a sinking ship for a while now. They will never admit to being short of funds, they need the money to keep rolling in.
Best bet people is withdraw now and cross those fingers.
 

JHV

<a href="http://www.casinomeister.com/meister_awar
Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Location
Perennial Traveler
I just heard about this today - this really sucks. There are lots of good people working at Eurolinx, and the company was incredibly unfairly punished for guilt via association with the Prima jokers that allowed the TUSK fiasco.

I've blown 6 figures on there of late so guys getting small payments, feel free to ship gratitude in my retarded direction :)

Jokes aside though, it will be terrible to see Prima crash and burn - and I would think a Prima without Eurolinx wouldn't last long...
 

Tengil

Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2006
Location
Finland
I just heard about this today - this really sucks. There are lots of good people working at Eurolinx, and the company was incredibly unfairly punished for guilt via association with the Prima jokers that allowed the TUSK fiasco.

I've blown 6 figures on there of late so guys getting small payments, feel free to ship gratitude in my retarded direction :)

Jokes aside though, it will be terrible to see Prima crash and burn - and I would think a Prima without Eurolinx wouldn't last long...
If Eurolinx folds it will be last blow to Prima as you said. Sorry for the players but the software provider deserves it. There will only be Ladbrokes/Unibet left and they only share players with the rest of the network for 3/6 and higher.

I know players liked Eurolinx, they should have changed network after the TUSK scandal. It must be stressing to have a big roll at Eurolinx as the players knows what will happen if they go bust.

For those unfamiliar with TUSK check this site out (redirects to the 2+2 thread) www.microgamingscandal.com
 

JHV

<a href="http://www.casinomeister.com/meister_awar
Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Location
Perennial Traveler
Really sad to see Eurolinx crash and burn like that.

Sympathy to everyone that got stung by unpaid withdrawal requests, active balances and unpaid affiliate payments.

-------

Boy, it's hard to see the road ahead for Prima from here. How they didn't bring in iPoker-style Cashier / Cage rules for all skins after TUSK debacle is just mind-blowing.

I don't know who or whom has / have been running the poker department of MG, but it's stunning that incompetence at levels that extreme can exist at Executive or VP levels - even the CEO's head should probably roll (I say this with emotion for I had friends who lost a fortune when Battlefield sunk, and now more friends who lost a lot when Eurolinx sunk).

I'm currently playing on Purple Lounge, but boy am I nervous.

Why aren't these people stepping into fix the threats to their brand...hell, the threats to their entire network? I could literally solve their problems from a theoretical standpoint in a 500-word solution.

iPokerNetwork (who I'm not the greatest fan of) realised the danger and actively protected themselves against it by forcing skins to use large, approved, responsible cages for their finances.

How could Prima be so foolish as to get burned not once, but TWICE?!
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Really sad to see Eurolinx crash and burn like that.

Sympathy to everyone that got stung by unpaid withdrawal requests, active balances and unpaid affiliate payments.

-------

Boy, it's hard to see the road ahead for Prima from here. How they didn't bring in iPoker-style Cashier / Cage rules for all skins after TUSK debacle is just mind-blowing.

I don't know who or whom has / have been running the poker department of MG, but it's stunning that incompetence at levels that extreme can exist at Executive or VP levels - even the CEO's head should probably roll (I say this with emotion for I had friends who lost a fortune when Battlefield sunk, and now more friends who lost a lot when Eurolinx sunk).

I'm currently playing on Purple Lounge, but boy am I nervous.

Why aren't these people stepping into fix the threats to their brand...hell, the threats to their entire network? I could literally solve their problems from a theoretical standpoint in a 500-word solution.

iPokerNetwork (who I'm not the greatest fan of) realised the danger and actively protected themselves against it by forcing skins to use large, approved, responsible cages for their finances.

How could Prima be so foolish as to get burned not once, but TWICE?!
I have to agree. Unlike casinos, POKER skins do NOT risk their OWN funds when players win. Players are winning from each other, so any funds on deposit should NEVER be placed in the general operating pot. Poker operators make their revenue from charging rake, so if they go under, player's funds should STILL remain intact. The ONLY conclusion seems to be that PLAYER funds on deposit are being "borrowed" by the business rather than being "ring fenced". Provided the skin is making a profit, this model will not only work, but will ENHANCE profits since ZERO interest is being paid on money "borrowed" from player balances, whereas if they "ring fenced" player funds, and borrowed from a bank, they would have to pay interest to the bank on the funds borrowed.

The TUSK failure should have been a big wake up call to Microgaming. They have had more than TWO YEARS to ensure this knid of spectacular failure could not happen again. MGS opted for doing nothing, perhaps thinking this would never happen again to their esteemed brand, and they didn't want to hurt their revenue by enforcing something that might drive some operators onto different software.
Now, it has happened AGAIN, an almost carbon copy of TUSK, and now we KNOW from past experience with TUSK that players will NOT get their money back from ANYONE, not even YEARS later.
This has now cast in stone that player deposits are NOT safe when held in a Prima skin, and the existing skins will suffer, since this failure is making players nervous, and they may seek to keep less of their bankroll on deposit in future.
IF any skin is "borrowing" player balances interest free because in the past players had the confidence to leave their bankroll on deposit for extended periods, a sudden lack of confidence might trigger a removal of funds that the skin may not have enough liquidity to honour straight away. This will further undermine confidence and even drive a perfectly solvent skin over the edge.

Skins currently operating should make sure they can demonstrate they have enough cash to operate by ensuring they have enough liquidity that they can cope with the scenario of almost all their players calling in their balances.

There is still doubt about what is happening to casino players, since they did NOT lose their funds when TUSK folded. IF CASINO players end up losing balances this time, it will further erode confidence in the MGS brand, which was once believed to hold a surety in the event of operator failure such that no player would lose their money.

Interestingly, those who deposited by CREDIT CARD may have a claim against their card company for any lost DEPOSITS (not winnings).

Here in the UK this could come under our consumer credit act, protecting any single payments of 100 and over in the event that the merchant cannot meet it's obligations. Once the liquidator has confirmed that there is little or no money, players could claim against card companies.

This could damage the market even further, with card companies seeing ever more failures of online gaming operators, and leaving them to pick up the bill. Banks might react by blocking such transdactions altogether, even where it it legal, as here in the UK. I have already found that MOST of my cards, both credit and debit, DECLINE any attempt to deposit at a casino, and even deposits at Neteller are blocked.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top