greasemonkey VS Club Worlds Alladin's Gold

[greasemonkey]

I am new to the casino at Alladin's gold but I won't be going back the way they are acting. It is very hard for me to trust them. The reason is that they have a bonus for all deposits that you make for the first 7 days of membership. It sounds great! The problem is that they were treating me great at first and very nice. They even sent me an email for an additional 100% bonus on top of the 7 days! However, I won once then they cancelled all the bonuses. They wouldnt allow me to do the rest of the 7 days and on top of that they voided the emailed bonus.

So it is classic bait and switch. They lured me in with all promises of bonuses and great support then they took it all away after I had one win. They claim it is their right to stop giving bonuses. I agree that they have no commitment to give me bonuses going forward but they agreed to give me a bonus on every deposit for the first 7 days of my membership and to void that is just being dishonest. It is bait and switch. They want me to play so they offer a bonus then they take it away half way into it.

I will not trust them after this. Also, they keep changing my betting limits. They lower my minimum/maximum bets then they raise them then they lower them again. It is as if they are trying to figure out how to make it worse for me. It is just unethical and gives me the creeps to be playing there. I wouldnt suggest it to anyone after my experience.
They DID pay me so that is one good thing for them. still, very unethical practices other than that.

 

[slotjunkie]

That is horrible! I would never go back if it was me! I also had an experience there that was creepy! Uninstalled!

 

[takethemoney]

Accedited casino!

They should not be so arbitrary and if this is the MO, they shouldn't be accredited. No casinos that switch things around on a customer just for winning should be accredited.

 

[Lucky Loser]

I don't know how CWC casinos got accredited here. Their conduct is certainly no shining light for other casinos to follow.

They have a $3k cashout limit, they charge for ewallet withdrawals and they bait with bonuses and then put up the barriers if you win. It seems they want your money but not the overheads or risk that go with running a decent casino operation.

 

[clubworld]

We got our accreditation here by running an excellent casino for many years.

We do not charge for eWallet withdrawals and all we ask if you win is that you verify your account.

When the OP in this thread requested his withdrawal my cashier team reviewed the account and saw that he was participating in a playing strategy that we deemed abusive. As such they processed the withdrawal and restricted any further bonuses.

Regards
Tom

 

[maxd]

Since there appears to be more to this story than originally stated I've changed the thread title to indicate that there is some disagreement over the facts here between the respective parties.

 

[Nate]

We got our accreditation here by running an excellent casino for many years.

We do not charge for eWallet withdrawals and all we ask if you win is that you verify your account.

When the OP in this thread requested his withdrawal my cashier team reviewed the account and saw that he was participating in a playing strategy that we deemed abusive. As such they processed the withdrawal and restricted any further bonuses.

Regards
Tom

Hello Tom,

Care to explain what the Casino deems 'Abusive' and what is regarded as a 'Playing Strategy'...

Thank You

 

[winbig]

Hello Tom,

Care to explain what the Casino deems 'Abusive' and what is regarded as a 'Playing Strategy'...

Thank You

Yes, please. Aren't these SUB's for slots only? How could a playing strategy be at all effective on a set of games that the house is always going to win on? With one of the highest HA's there is to offer, you should be happy to have players that only play the slots.

If they played other games, then please disregard my above statements.

 

[takethemoney]

It sounds like the point being missed is that the bonus ban occurred before he got to use the 7 days of bonuses that were used to lure players to join. After he had used them, then it should be their perogative to remove future bonuses, but the fact that they let this player join thinking he had the bonuses, then yanked them away as such has caused this player to play under false pretenses and this is a breach on the casino's part, IMO.

 

[winbig]

Ah, the nice FU clause that's listed in the T&C for that particular bonus offer:

"We reserve the right to withdraw these offers at our sole discretion."

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[takethemoney]

Ah, the nice FU clause that's listed in the T&C for that particular bonus offer:

"We reserve the right to withdraw these offers at our sole discretion."

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

It's fair as long as they put this term in too: "the players shall be allowed the right to withdraw their deposit at any time, at they're sole discretion". Fair is fair.
I think CW is a good casino, but I disagree with them on this one.

 

[vinylweatherman]

We got our accreditation here by running an excellent casino for many years.

We do not charge for eWallet withdrawals and all we ask if you win is that you verify your account.

When the OP in this thread requested his withdrawal my cashier team reviewed the account and saw that he was participating in a playing strategy that we deemed abusive. As such they processed the withdrawal and restricted any further bonuses.

Regards
Tom

Sadly, the OP didn't enlighten us as to his strategy, just the fact that he was OK to play this strategy WHEN HE WAS LOSING, but it was deemed "abusive" WHEN HE WON, and the offer was thus terminated.

This offer is not all that well thought out though, since it theoretically offers UNLIMITED 100% bonuses for 7 days, and it is hard NOT to come out ahead provided you have a big enough bankroll.

There is also the question of his betting limits constantly changing from one session to the next, WTF is all that about I have NEVER experienced this with RTG software before, and RTG themselves say that it is NOT possible to make "account specific" changes, but only changes that apply to all players at a particular casino.

Not charging for ewallet withdrawals has also been contradicted in another thread, and was shown to be in your "smallprint".

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/manhattan-slots-104-withdrawal-fee-to-neteller.38865/

In here, a player simply made more than one withdrawal in a 28 day period. According to T & C therefore, he was charged 2%. BUT, this fee was applied RETROSPECTIVELY to earlier withdrawals that were initially free, but BECAME retrospectively chargeable because of the last withdrawal.

In his exchanges with CWC, at no point was this player told his pattern was deemed "abusive", but rather that it was "normal practice" to levy these charges if more than one withdrawal was made within a 28 day period.

From his account of his last session, he completed WR on a bonus, so therefore it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for this deposit to have been used (as I suspected) to "churn" money for the current Neteller promo.

What is bad in this incident was that the player was simply hit with the charges, and WITHOUT prior warning that his depositing patterns had been deemed as "churning", rather than for playing. He further mentioned that he had LOST significantly overall at the casino, and this does NOT happen if you are "churning" money through the casino, playing it a token 1x through, and withdrawing, in order to manipulate the Neteller promo.

In short, it looks like you DO indeed charge for ewallet withdrawals beyond one "free" one per month, but when there is another, not only is that charged, but the earlier free one is charged retrospectively. This is in the terms and conditions, so is "normal practice", rather than an exception (unless you regularly ignore your own T & C).

That thread still awaits the benefit of your reply as to WHY this player got charged $104 for that ewallet withdrawal.

 

[jod5413]

I only have one thing to say.......Inetbet.

Though they do not offer live chat support, they let you know where you stand, they do not change the bonuses or terms midstream, they pay without hassle.

The End.

 

[clubworld]

Hello,

I have posted in the other thread VWM refers to, but to reiterate we don’t charge for eWallet withdrawals and this is not in our terms and conditions. The player referred to has been less than completely transparent, and is in fact many thousands of dollars in profit.

The table limits for the OP in this thread were not changed from one session to the next. They were increased from the new player limits of $50 per hand to the regular player limits of $250 per hand. No other changes at all.

But back to the main issue in this thread, should we have revoked this promotion for this player?

If we only offered promotions that were impossible for bonus advantage players to profit from they would be so stingy and overladen with terms and conditions that no-one would want them at all.

As such our policy is to offer generous promotions with reasonable terms, and if someone is participating in a playing style that is clearly abusive we cash out the winnings and reduce the bonuses offered to them. We would never revoke bonuses for players simply because they have won - it is all down to the system they use to play.

Greasemonkey’s experiences with our casino has been to make a few deposits, claim a few bonuses, make a few thousand profit, get paid out within 48 hours and be told that this promotions is no longer available to him. I genuinely fail to see how this is either Rogue behaviour or an FU.

Regards
Tom

 

[winbig]

So other than being in the black, how did the player abuse the system?

 

[anniemac]

I'm going to play devil's advocate here.

Let's say the OP made a deposit, took bonus, made playthru and immediately cashed out. Got paid within a day or so. Again, made deposit, took bonus, made playthru and immediately cashed out. Repeat process, etc. I can see where a casino would have a problem with this type of play. CW is not the only casino to remove or change bonuses because of this play. And as Bryan has stated in other threads, bonuses are given at the casinos discretion.

While I have bitched about CW on occasion, I have never had one problem with them as far as my bonus structure. I have been ahead by alot some months but my bonuses never change.

So possibly before we hang them by their thumbs, we might need to know the whole story.

And nope, not shilling for CW. Just stating another possible side to this story.

 

[Casinomeister]

I just want to make a few general comments - these are not directed at anyone in particular, it's just a general commentary that can be applied to a number of situations; perhaps including this one.

If you want to solve any issue - you're going to have to see both sides of the fence. What I'm gathering is that most people don't like the term "abusive" correct? Perhaps another term needs to be coined in order to get beyond certain definitions or semantics. How about "inventive play"

Let's not forget:
Bonuses are not obligatory - no casino is obliged to give you one/you are not obliged to take one either.

When you accept the bonus, you accept the terms and conditions - if you see something that alarms you, e.g. the term "abusive play", ask the casino to define what that is. Or bring this up in the forum.

If something bothers you, and you want something to change, then by all means drop rhetoric that puts people on the defensive. Pushing people into a corner won't get you very far. Sure, it's great to vent, but if you want to persuade someone to make a change, drilling them with accusations won't help.

 

[Nate]

When you accept the bonus, you accept the terms and conditions - if you see something that alarms you, e.g. the term "abusive play", ask the casino to define what that is. Or bring this up in the forum.
help.

Ty Meister... I have asked this exact same question in a previous post on this thread...

What does the Casino deem 'Abusive' and what is 'Playing Strategy' .... The question was not answered although specifically directed at Tom...

 

[darkpixie]

I was of the understanding that CM frowned upon casinos that played the Advantage player card per the notation in the Accreditation Section:

Must not confiscate winnings for vague & unclear reasons, such as "irregular playing patterns" or "bonus abuse", without specific T&C violations.

Not saying that this is specifically the case here, BUT the player DID join and agree to the 7 days of deposit bonuses offered by the casino at the time he joined, likewise the casino made the agreement to uphold this deal by accepting his first deposit.

Now if the player is playing the bonuses within their T&C, I believe that the Casino should keep its end of the bargain here and after the 7 days may offer bonuses to this player or not at their own discretion.

If the player is NOT playing within the defined T&C then the casino has every right to confiscate his winnings and return his deposit, but should still stand by the 7 days of deposit bonuses. By processing his first withdrawal the Casino has made it pretty clear that this is NOT the case here.

As long as the player plays within the T&C then all bets are off. The Casino made an offer and a player accepted it. If CWC continues to not honor the 7 days of deposit bonuses then that's a dark spot on their record for sure.

And a question to the casino, how many losing players did you contact and inform that they are no longer eligible for the 7 days of bonuses??

Just throwing out a guess here and that would be zero!

 

[winbig]

And a question to the casino, how many losing players did you contact and inform that they are no longer eligible for the 7 days of bonuses??

And in addition, how many other (non CM, apparently) players have won and have had these bonuses taken away for the same reason?

 

[Nate]

And a question to the casino, how many losing players did you contact and inform that they are no longer eligible for the 7 days of bonuses??

Excellent Q

 

[brianzz]

From what I'm seeing here is the only "advantage play" or "abusive" behavior is the player made a deposit, got a bonus, made wagering requirements and won.

Oh yeah, silly me, I forgot we're just supposed to give online casinos our money. I'm so glad I washed my hands of online casinos a few weeks ago, I've been in such a better mood.

 

[takethemoney]

From what I'm seeing here is the only "advantage play" or "abusive" behavior is the player made a deposit, got a bonus, made wagering requirements and won.

Oh yeah, silly me, I forgot we're just supposed to give online casinos our money. I'm so glad I washed my hands of online casinos a few weeks ago, I've been in such a better mood.

The new modus operandi is that any kind of play that does not allow the casino to take your deposit before you make the playthrough and bust out must be considered advantage or abusive play by the customer. Check! Online gaming continues to go down the crapper. Why won't these places just let the RTP do it's job without creating extra obstacles? The vendor of the software has already built in the house edge but apparently that's not good enough for these greedy casinos that insist on using tactics like giving bonuses then taking them away, aka bait and switch. Yes it pisses me off. Not having bonuses is one thing and an acceptable perogative for the casino. It's their business and as long as they do business in an ethical manner, we players have no right to tell them how to run things. When they start pulling the rug out from under people like this, I think we have the right to say something about the ethics involved. This does not just apply to this casino, but any casino that does business like this. People can always express their approval or disapproval with their wallets.....that is our perogative as well. This incident would keep me from ever depositing at such a casino again and I wonder how many other folks here who read this kind of stuff avoid them as well? Their business practices must certainly be driving customers away.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hello,

I have posted in the other thread VWM refers to, but to reiterate we don’t charge for eWallet withdrawals and this is not in our terms and conditions. The player referred to has been less than completely transparent, and is in fact many thousands of dollars in profit.

The table limits for the OP in this thread were not changed from one session to the next. They were increased from the new player limits of $50 per hand to the regular player limits of $250 per hand. No other changes at all.

But back to the main issue in this thread, should we have revoked this promotion for this player?

If we only offered promotions that were impossible for bonus advantage players to profit from they would be so stingy and overladen with terms and conditions that no-one would want them at all.

As such our policy is to offer generous promotions with reasonable terms, and if someone is participating in a playing style that is clearly abusive we cash out the winnings and reduce the bonuses offered to them. We would never revoke bonuses for players simply because they have won - it is all down to the system they use to play.

Greasemonkey’s experiences with our casino has been to make a few deposits, claim a few bonuses, make a few thousand profit, get paid out within 48 hours and be told that this promotions is no longer available to him. I genuinely fail to see how this is either Rogue behaviour or an FU.

Regards
Tom

OK, the player ended up ahead overall, and you then stopped all FURTHER bonuses. However, what was the $104 "fine" for? IF you don't normally charge for withdrawals, this $104 must have been a fine, so what did he do wrong other than having the brass nerve to WIN.

You said :-

Greasemonkey’s experiences with our casino has been to make a few deposits, claim a few bonuses, make a few thousand profit, get paid out within 48 hours and be told that this promotions is no longer available to him. I genuinely fail to see how this is either Rogue behaviour or an FU.

So, he did nothing wrong, but you DID "confiscate" $104 from his winnings, and this IS what could be considered as "rogue behaviour", because it goes beyond merely banning a player from future bonuses after having paid current winnings.

The advantage element from the 7 day bonus could be removed by adding a term that ends the promotion upon a withdrawal that takes the player into profit, for whatever reason. This would prevent players cashing out a profit, and then depositing again for further 100% bonuses.

 

[greasemonkey]

Sorry that I had not responded. I was away for a week. I made 8 deposits at Alladins Gold. Only on the 8th deposit did I win. What I did that was abusive is.... win? I don't know other than that. I played table games. They have 2 bonuses. 200% for slots and 100% for table. I played table games. I deposited $500usd in total and they loved me. Like I said, I even got sent an individual (for me only) Email bonus during this time. When I tried to redeem it they had taken that back also. Classic bait and switch.
Also, the person posting from CWC is not accurate. They DID change my betting limits often. I started at $100 max bet, it then went to $250 after one point when I checked the cashier for my comps and playthrough, then down to $50. When I next logged in it was back to $250 then I went to the cashier for live chat and came back and it was $50 again. so there were multiple movements of the number and there were 3 different numbers for max bet that they were moving to and from.
Like I have maintained, I agree that they do NOT have to give me a bonus going forward if they don't like my table game play but to Email me a personalized bonus when I am down 8 deposits then say they wont honor that bonus ANNNNND take away the signup bonus WHILE I AM PLAYING IT is nothing more than bait and switch and no matter how the poster from cwc tries to spin it, it is roguish in nature. It is offering one thing and doing another. I would even understand it if I had broken a term or something. I simply played table games, had a great run and cashed out well after meeting wagering on my 8th deposit. As I read these posts the more that action was "defended" the more roguish it seemed to me even more than when it was happening. How could anyone think that this is an acceptible practice? The casino really has a ton of audacity in this matter.