Exterminating the low-roller from online casinos

:what:

Mockery? I want mocking anyone, least of all you...?? If its the picture, its just a play on words for those who watch Doctor Who to lighten the mood a little.

Dont take anything like that personally Mavin.....in fact, dont take anything I say to you personally as I dont have a problem with you at all. You post a lot of interesting stuff and I enjoy reading what you write even if I dont agree. At least you control your emotions and stick to the issues, and that is a big tick in my book. :)

Thank you Nifty, I can appreciate your compassion for your fellow human beings. Honestly, I do have my not so well controlled emotional moments and the worst ones are not posted, such as the one between my last comment and this one.
But it is an honor to engage with people like you, so I do sincerely thank you.
Evelyn
 
I honestly do not believe it is in the casinos interest to exterminate low rollers. Labelling players into a certain bracket does not always give an accurate picture of future revenues. Some of todays low rollers could well be tomorrows higher rollers. Lets suppose a low roller hits a big payout at one casino. The money from that, he might well plough straight back into another casino to try his luck.

Revenue from lower rollers may well have a lower mark up for the casino, but it is all profit. After all, even with low rollers we are not talking about people depositing 2 credits and withdrawing 3 credits. They still have to make minimum deposits.

Another fact to consider is a casinos player base is largely made up of these so called low rollers. So wiping out over half of its player base would not make sound business sense. Especially if some of those low rollers have a change in financial circumstances and decide to gamble at slightly higher stakes.

Most people will always gamble within what their budget dictates. Same as when people go shopping. But if that budget increases, for example if the player gets a higher paid job, then he may decide to spend more in the shops and in the casinos, as his disposable income will be higher.

Mike
 
a thought on low rolling ,i read in the newspaper a while back that the best buy on the /int market place is the 2.00 wager to win,place or show at any track in the usa ,world possibly

why ?
because the article stated that in i920's it was 2.00$ and with adjusted inflation figured in it was still available at a horrendous [i cant do the math ] discount at a unchanged price



on and on :noteworthy:noteworthy rockycatt

PS illustration of the low roller
 
I honestly do not believe it is in the casinos interest to exterminate low rollers. Labelling players into a certain bracket does not always give an accurate picture of future revenues. Some of todays low rollers could well be tomorrows higher rollers. Lets suppose a low roller hits a big payout at one casino. The money from that, he might well plough straight back into another casino to try his luck.

Revenue from lower rollers may well have a lower mark up for the casino, but it is all profit. After all, even with low rollers we are not talking about people depositing 2 credits and withdrawing 3 credits. They still have to make minimum deposits.

Another fact to consider is a casinos player base is largely made up of these so called low rollers. So wiping out over half of its player base would not make sound business sense. Especially if some of those low rollers have a change in financial circumstances and decide to gamble at slightly higher stakes.

Most people will always gamble within what their budget dictates. Same as when people go shopping. But if that budget increases, for example if the player gets a higher paid job, then he may decide to spend more in the shops and in the casinos, as his disposable income will be higher.

Mike



What I see here in the forum of those of you who do dispute the idea of win line payouts being smaller, casinos getting tighter and so on, is the same response and attitude that we who bring up these subjects are always the ones that are wrong and you and I'm sure most of you that dispute are affiliates for these casinos, won't step outside of your boxes to even consider that yes there is the possibility that something has changed or that low-rollers need to be done away with one way or the other.
Because you always give the same arguement, same stats, same attitude that creates a fortress to protect your interest.
Then ultimately when you know the poster will not relent on a subject, then you bring out the reason of, "You must be having a bad run, or you're not playing right, or maybe you have a gambling problem, or if you aren't happy why not quit". These are your weapons of defense and you are the police on the front line in charge of damage and crowd control. You do your job very well as you know that bottom line is that when people finally do decide they aren't buying the standard reasons of why they are losing daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, then they will quit wasting their money supporting a venue that has become greedy just as any other big corp/business/bankers what have you.
Just like this country of ours, over time the low and middle class is being eliminated as we are forced to pay higher gas prices, forced to pay higher grocery prices, forced to pay higher health cost, forced to pay higher housing prices, forced to pay higher insurance be it auto/home/health. The lower and middle class is either going to have to cough it up to be able to continue in this society or be forced eventually to be living on the streets or with friends and relatives. This has been a long slow process to keep society from realizing what is going on. It's the old put a frog in hot water he'll jump out, but bring him to a boil slowly and he'll stay in the pot.
So why would anyone think for a moment that the casino industry is any different? Do people honestly think it's camelot filled with knights in shinning armor that will always protect and look after the best interest of everyone? I mean really, how deluded do you think we all are.
The comment Simmo made about "Make them all high rollers", means two things, some will get very lucky and win a monster hit, while others will have to up the anty to stay in the game. This is how your force the low-roller to either up the anty or quit.
Since the casino player base is largely made of low rollers as you say and they wouldn't want to lose this big player base, then the casinos have to make them high rollers so as not to be brought down to it's own demise. Again this is done largely by making the low roller have to play the $1 rather than the 20 cents if they want to have more than just a long play session. Unfortunately there are many low rollers willing to accept this and they continue playing. If they deposit their $25 and get no return which I'm sure counts for the majority of $25 depositors, the casino has made $25x? and the player thinks well it was only $25. If the $25 depositor now decides they are tired of the same non productive play they now start depositing $50 and wagering more trying to catch the magic that so many here are always boasting about, giving screenshots of their awesome wins and so on.
It's like you are keeping the herd constantly running to graze in this pasture or that pasture, as long as they keep grazing because you all share an interest in each pasture and will profit from them. The grazing fields get salted so to speak with just enough low rollers finding the good grass to keep all the low rollers thinking they will find it too. Thus keeping the low rolling player in the game.
It is largely a psychology game that is used very effectively to keep the low rollers thinking the casinos are upright and righteous and you too can win. You have to protect your castle and this is what you do very well.
When a small handful of players come along and state things have gotten tight or it just isn't the same anymore they don't do it together to make their forces strong enough to break down the barriers the opposition has in place, thus they are picked off one by one and other players look at a thread and say yeah, they just don't understand the dynamics, or they are just having a bad run, or they feel they are being cheated and are just posting their sour grapes attitudes, or they should just quit if they aren't having any fun or think they are being cheated.
Yes for the few that would take you up on just quitting, you know you won't need to deal with them anymore, but you have to keep your armor on as there will always be another that will venture up to the front line in the battlefield.
It would be interesting to examine the winning the posts and see just how many are won by affiliates that have successfully done their job in defeating yet another rebellion.
 
Hi Mavin

Firstly let me clear one thing up here. I do not work in the gambling industry, nor am I an affiliate trying to protect my interests. Just like you I am an ordinary player.

Gambling by nature carrys an element of risk. Sometimes you might win, sometimes you might lose. Part of the problem is that some of the players who participate, in what is quintessentially a loss making hobby, seem to be under the impression that casinos must payout more to them. If casinos did pay out more to them, they still would not be happy, because then they would want even more.

The low roller is at no disadvantage to anybody else by playing at the stakes he chooses. Infact he probably has a financial advantage in that over time he will be losing less. So your suggestion that the low roller is somehow subsidising the industry is ludicrous. You the player choose how much you wish to deposit. You make your bets, sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. Exactly the same however much your stake is.

Anybody that has ever visited a landbased bookmaker will probably have seen those ultra low rollers, sitting their with their 10p roll ups. They will quite often enjoy watching all the races on the TV screens and get free warmth and comfort at the bookmakers expense. Who do you think is paying Ladbrokes electricity bills? Because it is not this kind of punter that is for sure. This kind of landbased punter is still treated the same as the next punter, because the bottom line is, he is still a customer.

Ask yourself this Mavin, who is paying for all those new games you the low roller enjoys? These are games paid for by depositing players, the higher rollers are putting up a lot of money towards this.

The only difference between a player like yourself Mavin and a player like me is that I accept the house has an advantage, I accept the games are fair and I accept that because of the inbuilt disadvantage I might lose money. If I want a hobby that can make me money I would do something like sell things on Ebay.

As your average player, I am just contented with the establishments I play at, and it really is as simple as this for mesometimes I win, sometimes I lose. By being over analytical towards results can make a player become paranoid and lose confidence in their own ability to gamble for pleasure.

Mike
 
Hi Mavin

Firstly let me clear one thing up here. I do not work in the gambling industry, nor am I an affiliate trying to protect my interests. Just like you I am an ordinary player.

Gambling by nature carrys an element of risk. Sometimes you might win, sometimes you might lose. Part of the problem is that some of the players who participate, in what is quintessentially a loss making hobby, seem to be under the impression that casinos must payout more to them. If casinos did pay out more to them, they still would not be happy, because then they would want even more.

The low roller is at no disadvantage to anybody else by playing at the stakes he chooses. Infact he probably has a financial advantage in that over time he will be losing less. So your suggestion that the low roller is somehow subsidising the industry is ludicrous. You the player choose how much you wish to deposit. You make your bets, sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. Exactly the same however much your stake is.

Anybody that has ever visited a landbased bookmaker will probably have seen those ultra low rollers, sitting their with their 10p roll ups. They will quite often enjoy watching all the races on the TV screens and get free warmth and comfort at the bookmakers expense. Who do you think is paying Ladbrokes electricity bills? Because it is not this kind of punter that is for sure. This kind of landbased punter is still treated the same as the next punter, because the bottom line is, he is still a customer.

Ask yourself this Mavin, who is paying for all those new games you the low roller enjoys? These are games paid for by depositing players, the higher rollers are putting up a lot of money towards this.

The only difference between a player like yourself Mavin and a player like me is that I accept the house has an advantage, I accept the games are fair and I accept that because of the inbuilt disadvantage I might lose money. If I want a hobby that can make me money I would do something like sell things on Ebay.

As your average player, I am just contented with the establishments I play at, and it really is as simple as this for mesometimes I win, sometimes I lose. By being over analytical towards results can make a player become paranoid and lose confidence in their own ability to gamble for pleasure.

Mike


First this statement was sparked by yours in your previous post.
And I am glad to know that I am bantering back and forth with a regular player. I can also appreciate the fact that some, will always enjoy online gaming like yourself and be successful at it. I don't have a problem with that one way or another. But there are plenty that do otherwise the questions would not arise almost daily.
And yes I am a seller on ebay and have been for a decade. :)
 
I think the low-roller is the bread and butter for casinos. A player that deposits $20 50 times is much more profitable than one that deposits $1000. The $20 player is not likely to withdraw $40 (at least not most of us), whereas the $1000 depositor is likely to withdraw $2000.

A low roller that does withdraw consistently when they have made a 20percent profit may cost the casino more in processing fees than they are worth, and might find their account cancelled. A high-roller that martigales red/black roulette and settles for $1 profit on a session consistently might find themselves in the same boat.

Some casinos require that all deposits be played at least 1X. This helps protect their profit margin. Others accept very small deposits by some methods but not others. Most have minimum amounts for withdrawals, and sometimes these vary according to method.

I would hope that any casino that was looking at dropping a low-roller because their play did not cover processing costs would at least contact the player and give them an option to vary their deposit/withdrawal patterns.

Some alternatives would be:

Reducing the number of free withdrawals per month.

Requesting a larger deposit amount.

Increasing the amount required for a free withdrawal.

Requiring one-time playthrough on deposits.

I think that many of us low-rollers are at least mid-range rollers when we are ahead on a deposit, or near the end of a bankroll, hoping for a decent hit.
 
If lowrollers are so important for casino's, I really wonder why Betway have altered their slots like this, if it is not to chase the lowroller away.
They succesfully chased ME away!
There's no way you can ajust the coins, you must play max. bet. and only through autoplay.
Some of the newer slots are normal, but by far the most of them are stripped like this.
I certainly hope this is NOT going to be a new trend, jeez...:mad:
 
They try to attract highrollers, but they will chase away their profits.
 
Thank you De Beuker, for showing some proof positive on this issue. I would imagine we will be seeing much more of this sort of thing going on, forcing the low roller to spend like a high roller or seek another outlet for fun.

I appreciate that some are earnestly looking at this point of view rather than making a joke of it to purposely kill a thread.

If all players think about it for even a moment, once all low rollers are phased out, who do you think is next in line for the big fleecing? So protecting and standing up for the low rollers is protection for all.
 
I'm sorry, not only do I disagree, but I see the exact opposite happening. For example, on one small site I've been registered at since 2006, they reduced the minimum deposit from $50 to $25. Further, you can still deposit a single dollar ($1.00) on Inetbet if you are depositing from UseMyWallet. If that isn't lowrolling, I don't know what is.
 
nisosbar:Further, you can still deposit a single dollar ($1.00) on Inetbet if you are depositing from UseMyWallet
That is because of a tourney a long while back that we all were invited to play for free but if you didn't deposit, you had to have at least made a $1 deposit ...so that is there not for low rollers but because of this one instance...if I remember correctly...

.
 
Jackpot Capital's minimum is $5, 3Dice is $10. They COULD in theory raise the minimums and be rid of the lowroller altogether.
 
I'm sorry, not only do I disagree, but I see the exact opposite happening. For example, on one small site I've been registered at since 2006, they reduced the minimum deposit from $50 to $25. Further, you can still deposit a single dollar ($1.00) on Inetbet if you are depositing from UseMyWallet. If that isn't lowrolling, I don't know what is.

What have this to do with low-rolling?

You speak about min. deposits and not about min. (line)bet size!
 
Jackpot Capital's minimum is $5, 3Dice is $10. They COULD in theory raise the minimums and be rid of the lowroller altogether.

like buzzluck did..:mad:

they ahd 5 min deposit on neteller. now all is 20 allthough on their neteller promotion it still states 5 min..


as they had the lower limit i put in sth more often just for fun.. now i stopped.

seems they had too many lowrollers on board ;-9


cheers

coxwel
 
I'm sorry, not only do I disagree, but I see the exact opposite happening. For example, on one small site I've been registered at since 2006, they reduced the minimum deposit from $50 to $25. Further, you can still deposit a single dollar ($1.00) on Inetbet if you are depositing from UseMyWallet. If that isn't lowrolling, I don't know what is.

Just to add to this thought, for years 32Red's minimum deposit has been $20. About a month or six weeks ago, they lowered this to ten dollars, which I was ecstatic about. Inetbet has always had the $1 minimum CC deposit, as far as I can remember. And someone mentioned 3Dice as well having a $10 minimum. I'm sort of curious if any other MG's have lowered their minimums from $20 or $25 to $10?

It just seems odd that if they wanted to get rid of low rollers, they would lower the minimum deposit to $10...especially given the fact that they pay processing fees on each deposit and withdrawal. I'm sure they'd much rather have someone deposit $50 once, as opposed to $10 five times, from a fee standpoint. When 32Red (maybe MG altogether?) lowered the minimum altogether, I sort of looked upon it as them catering to the low roller. Don't really know what to think. They certainly won't get me to raise my bets...I'm the Queen of the low rollers, and intend to stay that way.
 
Just to add to this thought, for years 32Red's minimum deposit has been $20. About a month or six weeks ago, they lowered this to ten dollars, which I was ecstatic about. Inetbet has always had the $1 minimum CC deposit, as far as I can remember. And someone mentioned 3Dice as well having a $10 minimum. I'm sort of curious if any other MG's have lowered their minimums from $20 or $25 to $10?

It just seems odd that if they wanted to get rid of low rollers, they would lower the minimum deposit to $10...especially given the fact that they pay processing fees on each deposit and withdrawal. I'm sure they'd much rather have someone deposit $50 once, as opposed to $10 five times, from a fee standpoint. When 32Red (maybe MG altogether?) lowered the minimum altogether, I sort of looked upon it as them catering to the low roller. Don't really know what to think. They certainly won't get me to raise my bets...I'm the Queen of the low rollers, and intend to stay that way.

32RED, Nedplay, Ladbrokes and Purple Lounge are as far as I know the only MG casino's where the minimumdeposit is $10.-
JackpotCity used to be $10.- too but they raised it to $20.- last summer.
For Betway I think its $20.- , but whats the use of depositing $20 if you can only play 8 friggin' spins?!?:eek2:
 
if any body thinks for a minute that the majority of online players are going to deposite in each session to spin at 1.00 dollar and over
per spin as there min bet , [ exception the bonus users ]

i say let some air out of the balloon and come closer to earth :D:D
 
Posted by BMSTACK on Casino33 thread
mavin i see what your saying, but because its you i have to dismiss your issue. ive seen you on here before making comments about not liking online casinos. Why do you even bother being in these forums?


I want to address this statement on this thread as I would like to keep the issue together. First, I have never said I don't like online casinos. If I didn't like them I certainly would not struggle so hard to get everyone together on the same thread that have the same or similar feelings as I do. I certainly have no problem with those that dissagree, we as people will not always agree with everything that everyone says, that is human nature and each of us have our own convictions and perceptions that are just as endearing as the other persons. I am just as human as anyone else and have feelings about things too and find it difficult sometimes not to let some of you hurt me emotionally because I am human.
The first person I had contact here with back in June, was Pinababy and I admired her greatly for her strong stance and conviction on the Top Game issue, still do, she can be a very powerful force and commands some notice. She may dissagree with me, but that's okay as she is considerate and mature enough not to be insulting in the process. She will always have my respect even if we don't think alike.
The next people of whom I have come to know and admire immensely is Silcnlayc and Vegetagirl, my first encounter with them was not the best, but they being true people with great compassion and convictions have and always will have my greatest respect and admiration as well as KasinoKing and many others. This forum is so diversified with so many different personalities that it is very difficult for anyone not to upset someone.

But yes, I very much enjoy online casinos and have for 9 years and although things may seem to some as not having changed and to others that it has, I see no reason why the discussion cannot be brought together on one thread rather than spread out all over.
I do not whine that I have never won on line, I have many times, but this is not the issue.
Feeling that maybe we should ban together an hold our deposits for a bit, is just a form of protest, not because we are constant bitchers and moaners, but because we genuinely feel there has been changes that are not affecting everyone, but does effect many.
It is not just a matter of protecting the online casino business for itself, but also to protect our right to play and enjoy online gaming and not just for the low roller but for everyone.

So if my trying to bring all these spread out opinions together in one thread upsets some people that can't be helped as some will be upset no matter what and that is just human nature as well.
 
Jackpot Capital's minimum is $5, 3Dice is $10. They COULD in theory raise the minimums and be rid of the lowroller altogether.

And when they do, they will have lost one very loyal player, i make small deposits but steady ones, sure i could deposit 20.00 or 50.00 even higher at one time but for me its the thrill of depositing less amounts and building up my bankroll.It has worked for me and if a casino doesnt want to cater to the low rollers, then i just hope they have enough whales out there to keep them a float in this ever changing business................laurie
 
And when they do, they will have lost one very loyal player, i make small deposits but steady ones, sure i could deposit 20.00 or 50.00 even higher at one time but for me its the thrill of depositing less amounts and building up my bankroll.It has worked for me and if a casino doesnt want to cater to the low rollers, then i just hope they have enough whales out there to keep them a float in this ever changing business................laurie

No, I don't think they wil limit the deposits, many ppl deposit like that.
Me too!:D
But some casino's already do limit the withdrawls.
Red Flush, Rich Reels and Villento have a minimum withdrawlimit of $100.-

These casino's also succesfully chased me away.
 
If lowrollers are so important for casino's, I really wonder why Betway have altered their slots like this, if it is not to chase the lowroller away.
They succesfully chased ME away!
There's no way you can ajust the coins, you must play max. bet. and only through autoplay.
Some of the newer slots are normal, but by far the most of them are stripped like this.
I certainly hope this is NOT going to be a new trend, jeez...:mad:


A picture paints a thousand words, and this demonstrates a CLEAR INTENT to prevent players from BETTING below a certain amount per wager, unless they play fewer LINES in this case. Many low rollers prefer to bet less per line, rather than bet far fewer lines, and see a big win come on a line they left out.

This also shows something else; PROOF that MGS DO INDEED change the OLD games. I have NEVER seen this configuration option on ANY MGS game at ANY MGS casino before.
 
vinylweatherman:This also shows something else; PROOF that MGS DO INDEED change the OLD games. I have NEVER seen this configuration option on ANY MGS game at ANY MGS casino before.
That is called an adjustment, not change. Ask all that are in the "know" because that is what I am told everytime I have tried to show something has "changed"...so VWM...I hope you have better luck convincing them then I ever had...because you will be in an uphill fight since there really has been no changes... :rolleyes: because it wasn't "announced" as one..but as I understand it, "adjustments are allowed without "notice" to the players..

.
 
A picture paints a thousand words, and this demonstrates a CLEAR INTENT to prevent players from BETTING below a certain amount per wager, unless they play fewer LINES in this case. Many low rollers prefer to bet less per line, rather than bet far fewer lines, and see a big win come on a line they left out.

This also shows something else; PROOF that MGS DO INDEED change the OLD games. I have NEVER seen this configuration option on ANY MGS game at ANY MGS casino before.

And I'm just guessing that the fact they've done this on a High Variance slot is just a coincidence eh? If, as a low-roller, you're prepared to take a chance on a HV slot, you know you can hit big even at small stakes. Bet they don't do the same with Liquid Gold - which is probably the lowest variance slot that MG has.

And agreeing with you (as I always seem to do lol) on your 2nd point - As I suggested previously; Ladies Nite didn't used to be HV, but it is now.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top