- Joined
- Oct 4, 2008
- Location
- At the end of the rainbow
Now if this won't frost ya.....Forbes has an article on Grand Prive'. And they even have a comment section.......this is gonna be good
Old / Expired Link
Old / Expired Link
What's the deal with Grand Prive Casino?
I read through the Rogue Casinos section and I did not
see any reason (besides kicking affiliates to the curb and
not being loyal when they departed from the U.S.) to
not play there. I haven't opened up an account there yet,
but I skimmed through past threads and did not see
any players not getting paid by this casino.
Could a seasoned CM vet please school me on
why not to trust this casino? It would be highly appreciated.
If they would steal from affiliates do you think they would still from you?
they got your info as you put it in fictitious
so if you ever play there or a sister casino under their umbrella you prolly won get paid because your a multi acounter now
What's the deal with Grand Prive Casino?
I read through the Rogue Casinos section and I did not
see any reason (besides kicking affiliates to the curb and
not being loyal when they departed from the U.S.) to
not play there. I haven't opened up an account there yet,
but I skimmed through past threads and did not see
any players not getting paid by this casino.
Could a seasoned CM vet please school me on
why not to trust this casino? It would be highly appreciated.
I received their player magazine a few weeks back and have to say it was very polished. Far nicer than I would have thought.
Never deposited and never cashed out, just play those free bonuses.
Have yet to see any proof that they would have actually breached the contracts. They terminated them and thats totally legal AFAIK. Its irrelevant what they "promised" their affiliates.
Affiliate programs have done the same multiple times, this just was the first time a major gambling company did it.
So talking about stealing isnt really accurate.
Many contracts have such clauses, but they are meant to be used for unforseen circumstances, and NOT as Grand Prive used them, to get out of meeting promises made to affiliates. It goes back to trust, because we KNOW that it is easy for contracts to be worth little in this industry, and we expect promises to be kept.
Grand prive went to great lengths to BREAK these promises, AND to make themselves come out of it "smelling of roses". They did not care that they USED eCogra & it's reputation to attempt this. They were prepared to DAMAGE the integrity of eCogra by tricking them into taking on this investigation, where Grand Prive had already decided what the outcome would be, and would NOT tolerate a significantly different result.
They had NO regard to the licensing conditions of their Kahnawake gaming license, nor their contratural obligations with MGS.
This is the definition of a "rogue company". They will do whatever they can get away with, and WILL "tread on others" to get what they want with no regard for common moral standards.
I suspect this new software gives them far more freedom than MGS did, and maybe they can mess around with slot RTP when they feel like it, and to whom they want. RTG and Rival have similar features built in, but have had to introduce restrictions BECAUSE of the number of operators that were misusing such features to screw players.
Until the new Grand Prive software has been PROPERLY tested for fairness and randomness, the past actions of Grand Prive makes it likely they have required certain "features" be designed into the software so that they can continue to do what they feel they can get away with.
This is why they are in the pit. From KNOWN rogue business practice, we can judge what they are PREPARED to do, and thus this qualifies them for the pit, even though there is no current PROOF of them operating another rogue scheme.
They stay in the pit until they can PROVE through their actions that they have changed their ways, and have put the player first, from which business success & profit will flow, HONESTLY.
It's not promises. You sign up for a program and there is a contract that says what each party is allowed/not allowed or supposed/not supposed to do.
It is a legal contract. Grand Prive did NOT close shop, they are very much in business as you see from the article, and they just broke the contract and made off with a lot of money owed to a lot of people.
If they had gone broke or something, that would have been different. But they didn't.
And they stiffed Microgaming too, although you're not going to hear Microgaming complaining about this publicly.
Like I always say, players and affiliates need to pay close attention to which casinos screw the other group. If they do it to one group, they'll do it to the other. It's a matter of character. Likely they screw the cleaning lady out of her wages too.
If you walk by a pond full of crocodiles, and you see them eating a person of opposite sex from the other end of the world, do you jump in for a swim because they haven't eaten anyone like you?
Every affiliate program I have seen has a cancellation/termination clause in the contract. They can enforce it when they see fit. And its totally legal AFAIK. Much bigger companies than a relatively small gambling company like GP have closed their affiliate programs and terminated the contracts.
And they would have gone broke if they would have continued as normal. I think thats quite obvious.
And you promote Lock casino for example so the whole player affiliate stuff you talked about seems only to be a one way street.
Edit: and in no way do I think GP acted professionaly. They could have informed a few months in advance.
In many cases, payment is STILL DUE for work done BEFORE the agreement is terminated. Since affiliates were paid for the work done in installments based on players' losses the previous month, they STILL had existing liabilities to affiliates so long as these players remained active.
I am a player there, and they DID try a dirty trick. I was sent an email informing me that the 5 casinos WERE actually closing for good, and telling me to follow a link to download a new casino, and only play there. This was a deliberate ploy to get referred players off the system, so it would look like they had stopped playing, and earning money for the affiliate that referred them.
When someone posted this email, Grand Prive tried to get Bryan to REMOVE the post because of what it revealed. Rather than removing the post, the fact of the request was also posted, making it even clearer that Grand Prive were up to something. Affiliates found out what they were up to later that year, when they were told many of their players were "no longer active", and making it easier to buy them off with a payment. The case only went on because they didn't pay off ALL the affiliates, including some of the bigger ones, who then wanted their share.
No. That is wrong, the only obligation they have is to pay for the last month the contracts were effective.
Word on the street is these casinos have been down for over a full day for maintenance. What casinos goes down for a full day for maintenance? People are gonna get hosed on bonuses that expire and I suspect if the casinos don't make it right there is going to be wide spread anger out there.
A contract is binding, and it can only be dissolved when both parties reach an agreement.
If I agree to sell you my TV, and you pay me the first few installements, and then I decide to keep it afterall and won't refund your money, I am at fault and you can sue me.
If we however discuss the situation and reach an agreement where I keep the TV and I pay you back what you have prepaid, then the contract is not breached.
In the past, aff programs have closed doors for various reasons, such as the sale of casinos. And there was usually a settlement.
That is the way this sort of thing is legally handled.
"Escape clauses" were instituted online for software contracts where you use an application that is designed and owned by a company and the company reserves the right to deny further usage at any time.
These clauses do not apply to contracts that regulate payments for services rendered. It's a whole different thing, and courts have set precedent in throwing these clauses out.
I'm not going to go search for these precedents now, no time. But, they were actually researched and presented here at Maister in a much earlier thread about this.