Hi,
Few things:
First: Not sure to whom it was related, but the bonuses we promote and post on our site are exactly the bonuses players get, but.. We do use the Rival banning system and that is why some of you don't see all the promotions. I'm sorry for that.
I assume the next question will be "if you are a stand alone brand and not a white label, why are you using it?" - the answer will be - exactly for that reason. Since we have our own processing system and support, not shared with any other Rival brands, we decided to start on the safe side and use the Rival banning system. We are planning to review the use of it after we pass the launch stages.
Nifty, i think that even if you get the best treatment from us than in any other casino, you will still find something to complain. That’s ok. Can’t do nothing about it. The support told you that the security department decided not to allow you redeem bonuses. That’s ok. I assume the CS rep just wanted to be polite and that’s why used the “security department decision” instead of “you are bonus banned”. Don’t see any problem with that.
Please note: all the statements about max cashouts are NOT related to us, but to another brand, not related to us. We don’t have max-cashout on any deposit bonuses. The only max-cashouts we have are on Free chips.
(i would prefer if you could open another thread and it will also help that casino rep to see the post).
Emmeline: Yes, sorry. The 300% bonus is not cashable.
Kind regards,
Daniel
You may as well toss a coin - nearly everybody knows that the Rival system is "junk", and as an independent, you should have more respect for players' personal information, since as an independent, the ONLY information you should have access to on a shared basis is TRUE "security related" information. The system simply tells you that a player is "blacklisted" when it comes to promotions, it does not tell you why, and it often gets it wrong, yet you seem to have absolute faith in it.
On the website, if you claim a promotion is available to "everybody", then it is MISLEADING to advertise this, if in fact eligibilty is conditional on attaining a certain "rating score" from Rival.
I am surprised Rival are not getting an even HARDER roasting over this than they are, it would be like All Jackpots telling you that you were not eligible for the "available to everybody" bonus because Go Wild told them that they had decided to bonus ban that player at THEIR casino. All Jackpts and Go Wild would get such a roasting over this that they would struggle to regain any credibilty, which is why casinos powered by such top tier software DON'T DO IT. The ONLY information such top tier operators will share relates to fraud, and players with a history of making chargebacks.
Your claim to be independent is undermined by the mere fact that you DON'T seem to want to poach players from other Rival casinos, who after all, are COMPETING with you for players. Not using the crap centralised CS should make it pretty EASY for you to poach players from these white label operators, and unless they are FRAUDSTERS, you have a decent chance of turning a profit from them in the long term.
One BIG mistake Rival makes is to show a player to the door as soon as they have a half decent win, thus depriving the casino the opportunity to win it back, and then some, as mathematically, the house ALWAYS wins in the end, provided they can stand the VARIANCE that often means that at some point, the PLAYER is the one ahead.
Claiming "Security" for an issue unrelated to security is LYING, whether you believe it to be "more polite" or not. Surely in business, lying to a customer is downright RUDE! as it demonstrates a contempt for those who are actually the ones paying your wages.
I received a third promotional e-mail an hour ago, still "promotions are coming soon"
so I contacted CS again
rep: Unfortunately, I cannot offer you the promotions that were offered in the mailer
rep: I have added some promotions that I'm allowed to credit
rep: It's a decision by our security department
Two other promos were added, and as pointed out no max cash-out, that's good news.
Security department, doesn't have a nice ring to it, does it
I have no opinions about that decision, but I would have appreciated if I had been informed on my first inquiry.
Emme
Despite telling this player they cannot have these promotions, you STILL SEND THEM, so that each time the player might feel inclined to log on, or contact CS, at which point you get to play "bait & switch" yet again.
The problem with this approach is that you don't merely get rid of one player that you consider a "security risk", you generate further bad publicity for the Rival brand as a whole, not that the brand even NEEDS any further help with this
Whilst this is more of a "bitch & moan" situation, rather than one of confiscation of funds, it is going to put off many players from trying ANY Rival casino, let alone your own.
I am known here as a long time player, and a bit of a high roller, so how many Rival casinos do you think I have tried?
Well, to save time, the answer is a big fat ZERO! This is down to that fact that almost as soon as Rival came on the scene, a brief promising start where they tried to get players involved degenerated into chaos, mainly driven by the Rival central ratings system, and the attempts by Rival to cover up the mere fact of it's existence, which they did rather badly, yet even when presented with overwhelming evidence continued to lie about it. Not NOW of course, Rival gave up the pretence a while ago, and now freely admit they share information in some considerable detail with Rival themselves, who use it to generate these "rating scores" which are made available to ALL operators, many of whom have such faith in the PERFECTION of this scheme that they accept these "ratings" as the "absolute truth", and if a player questions their own "score", they have to be lying con artists out to scam them.
For some reason, Emme has misbehaved so badly as to earn herself the "don't touch with a bargepole" rating from Rival, so presumably would suffer similar levels of discrimination at almost EVERY Rival casino, yet can never know why since it is a "security matter", a rather convenient label to hide behind, even though we all know this has nothing to do with "security".
With all the above, HOW does a NEW Rival operator compete with the existing ones, since many players who are drawn to Rival software already have a number of accounts at the current operators, and this alone drags down their "player rating" in the Rival database, even without them doing anything "wrong".
We have also seen that even a SINGLE win of as little as $1000 can be enough to "flip the switch" and earn a total bonus ban at all Rival casinos, and this is WELL within the expected variance of play, especially when it comes to a few of the Rival slots like Scary Rich, and is all down to CHANCE that the big win happened earlier, rather than later, in their play history.
I have experienced such variance in my own play (not at Rival though, see above
), often surging WELL ahead at a particular casino, however in most cases, continued play has seen the casino win it back, and more. Where I HAVE been "shown the door" after a lucky streak, I have STAYED ahead there, and a COMPETITOR has benefited from winning it back over the longer term.
My lifetime records are rather skewed as a result, because where I have NOT had a big win, I get all the offers going, and often a few extra ones. At many of these places, even if ahead at one stage, I am now DOWN, and in some cases by a considerable amount.
Where I HAVE won, and been kicked off the list that contains "everybody", I have sharply reduced my deposits, and in many cases given up altogether in favour of the places where I am DOWN, and thus STILL get all the offers going. This is why I am UP at so many casinos where I have been "shown the door" from the promotional department, and DOWN at almost EVERY casino I still get promotions from.
This shows that whether a player has a great win or not bears NO relation to the overall long term trend, except that money moves from casinos where I am already ahead, to ones where I am down, rather than back to the ones I originally won it from.
There are a few that can see past this "operators fallacy" that players who hit a lucky streak are inherrently likely to just keep on winning long term, and need to be got rid of, and these are the ones where I went ahead, didn't get banned from anything, and so they started to win it back, and in some cases I have gone from being well ahead, to being down by a considerable amount.
Unless Emme really IS a "security risk", you have just thrown away a potential source of profit, as well as persuaded many others that you are "just another crappy Rival" like the rest, rather than something new & special.
(can barely put two words together at the moment so I won't make any further comments) 
