I DID NOT win a random jackpot at Inetbet

[chuchu59]

What was the date of the win...or did I miss it in the thread? But you are absolutely 110% right Chuchu..that money needs to be reinstated ASAP. Inetbet has posted on this exact issue many times, that if a JP is ever won on a free chip...they return the jackpot to the game.

Has anyone PM'd the rep? I will if no one else has.

Even if, for tech reasons, they cannot reinstate the JP within a short time (not that I believe it), they should fork out the $2690+ current RJ amount - $1K in seed money to whoever hits it in the interim.

 

[4 of a kind]

Still waiting for any proof that someone here can show where a RJ was hit with a max cash out and the balance reinstated to jackpot.

A rep saying it is being done of course is not considered proof.

These randoms are hit often. You can't tell me that every person that hits them is not on a restricted bonus or free chip. Someone here by now has to have been an eye witness to an odd large increase at least once.

I have no proof that they don't put them back, but would be certain this tactic of retaining the leftovers after max cash out is paid is old school.

If RTG were proud of their honesty they would have a window that pops up on the screen while re-entering the non cash-able balance for everyone to see (at least for the first day they reinstate it) saying something like, "Random Jackpot has been increased by $8,350.21 due to previous winners restrictions"

I realize there are alleged many honest operators of RTG software. But no one here could possibly consider RTG software providers being to concerned about how or what an RTG operator wants to do. Especially when you consider all the confirmed endless list of rogues they let continue operating. I wouldn't be surprised if they (software provider) chop up the excess from randoms not payable in full with the casino. There is no doubt when it comes to the RTG software provider, it's all about the money and nothing else.

So someone please prove me wrong???

 

[rockycatt]

no reply = sign of the times im thinking m g =the future

after all there the big gun on the block the others well recent history speaks volumes

 

[Nifty29]

I dont have time to search thru years of posts, but I know for a fact that several times Inet have replaced the RJ minus the players' cashout - I know because I verified it myself by going to the game.

Why they arent doing it this time is beyond explanation.

 

[all4greed]

I've often wondered how many people have won the RJ's on a free chip. INetBet is quick to post a RJ win on the rolling banner. Plenty of times I've seen no mention of the hit with the person's user name but the RJ was set back to 1k.

Once there was a 13 or 14k RJ hit while I was playing it. No mention of it on their banner even a day or two afterwards.

 

[missmichelle]

Still waiting for any proof that someone here can show where a RJ was hit with a max cash out and the balance reinstated to jackpot.

A rep saying it is being done of course is not considered proof.

These randoms are hit often. You can't tell me that every person that hits them is not on a restricted bonus or free chip. Someone here by now has to have been an eye witness to an odd large increase at least once.

I have no proof that they don't put them back, but would be certain this tactic of retaining the leftovers after max cash out is paid is old school.

If RTG were proud of their honesty they would have a window that pops up on the screen while re-entering the non cash-able balance for everyone to see (at least for the first day they reinstate it) saying something like, "Random Jackpot has been increased by $8,350.21 due to previous winners restrictions"

I realize there are alleged many honest operators of RTG software. But no one here could possibly consider RTG software providers being to concerned about how or what an RTG operator wants to do. Especially when you consider all the confirmed endless list of rogues they let continue operating. I wouldn't be surprised if they (software provider) chop up the excess from randoms not payable in full with the casino. There is no doubt when it comes to the RTG software provider, it's all about the money and nothing else.

So someone please prove me wrong???

At a forum where I am a member there was someone who hit the random on paradise dreams on a free chip at inet. I had been playing the game when it happened. A few days later I was surprised the see it back over 6000.00 and then I saw their post stating that inet said it was going to be put back. That was about a year ago. So I have seen it happen in the past. Not sure what is going on now though.

Michelle

 

[gerilege]

A few years ago I also thought that this is unfair, however I learned that there are a few other factors to consider which I was not aware of, and now I tend to believe that it is not that straightforward that the RJ amount won on a cashout restriction bonus should be fully put back into the jackpot pool.
Note that whenever you place a wager on a RJ slot which does not consist of 100% cash (i.e you took no bonus) your contribution to the jackpot feed will not be 100% real money as well. Imagine that you deposit 50$ and get a 50$ bonus. On the long run your jackpot contribution per spin would be only 50% real money, with other words if you bet 10$/spin, and your contribution is 5c/spins, only 2.5c would be your real money in the jackpot pool, the other 2.5c would be bonus put in by the casino. Note that if a player without bonus wins the RJ, he will be paid out in full, although the RJ pool might contain a lot of non-existing, bonus money.
The cashout restrictions are integral part of the whole bonus offer's financial structure from the casino's point of view. It is not that easy to come out with a plan which makes both the bonus rules and the RJ re-seed procedure fair and consistent.
My idea would be the following, and it might sound strange for the first sight, please read it until the end, and you will understand that this would be mathematically fair also for the players on the long run:
- Individual players can decide whether to take a bonus/free chip offer or not, considering all the promotion details.
- If a RJ is won on a deposit without bonus, it is a clear case, it is paid in full to the player.
- If a RJ is won on a free chip, the casino SHOULD NOT put the remaining money back into the JP pool as there was absolutely 0% real money contribution to the jackpot pool from that particular player nor from any other player. Consider that it was the casino who actually seeded the jackpot, so the casino should get the winnings as well.
- If a RJ is won on a bonus which has a max cashout restriction, well this is the most tricky case as the max cashout amount and the bonus percentages and the jackpot amounts are not correlated that much. The proposal is the following: Let's assume that the player takes a 100% bonus which has a max cashout. Whatever amount is remaining from the jackpot win after paying out the player up to her/his maximum cashout, a part of the remaining amount should be put back into the jackpot feed proportional to the player's deposit/(deposit+bonus) ratio considering the last deposit. That means that in the example 50% of the remaining amount should be put back, as 50% of the feed contribution where made from deposit.

By making the above procedure clear, individual cases would even out on the long run, and players would not feel that the casino took away the JP funds.

As for the original post, only those winnings should be listed which are paid out fully in any marketing material.

 

[maphesto]

If a RJ is won on a free chip, the casino SHOULD NOT put the remaining money back into the JP pool as there was absolutely 0% real money contribution to the jackpot pool from that particular player nor from any other player. Consider that it was the casino who actually seeded the jackpot, so the casino should get the winnings as well.

I dont agree at all! What you are saying is basically that when a RJ is beginning really big the casino can use its own money to trigger it and save the RJ money? Or did I get it wrong?

Even if it is the casinos money they use when its free chips they just dont give them away for fun. They have it for propotional, to either get more customers or to let customers test new games(to get them deposit).

And iNetBet have said this:

Hi,
As we do with any Jackpot where a player is not eligible for payout the funds were added back to the game.
Best Regards
iNetBet Promos

EDIT TO ADD: I think that this "mess" is just mistakes from iNetBet. I dont think they on purpose will use a players name in a commercial newsletter and say that he has won over 2000$ when he only had the opportynity to withdraw 100$.
The strange thing is that there have been several "mistakes" there lately. The thing about the guy who didnt receive bonuses was also bad.

Has anyone told them about this thread?

 

[Cant_Get_Right]

Inetbet and its email only support is just a load of crap. After all these years I cannot understand it. I know that recently the accredited casino list was updated so that casinos had to have their own in house support. How about at least TWO methods of contact? And not counting forum reps.....as customers SHOULDN'T have to rely on this method.

We can safely assume that Inet likes to hide behind their email only support until they can fumble for a reply.

This is the exact reason why I closed my account there! This is unacceptable. I have emailed them a number of times and get a reply days later. And sometimes no reply at all. One time I made a withdrawal after losing 6 deposits in a row. I requested it to the same QT account that I used to deposit. 24hrs later my withdrawal was sitting back into my account. I wrote and asked why wasn't it processed. NO ANSWER at ALL! After 3 days I get a reply stated the needed my ID and phone bill. They had my doc from a few yrs back. But because I didnt play there in a couple of years. They was requesting that I do it again. That's when I sent it got paid. But closed my account while my withdrawal was being processed. I will never go back to INETBET! There are just too many other casinos that has much better support and just as fast payouts.

 

[emily_hanson]

Hi Everyone

Firstly I have to apologise this was an oversight on our part, as this player never requested a withdrawal but played it down to the max $50 withdrawal to build their comp points up it slipped through the net.

No excuses it was our fault, not trying to justify this slip up however the last 4 weeks have been, to say the least, very hectic, everyone is working extended hours due to the recent developments with Mastercard and with possibly Visa following suit.
We have been working to implement other alternatives and to maintain what we currently offer.

RTG have been notified and the funds will be returned shortly.

Also I have checked my PM box and can find no PM from mick114.

Once again my apologies for this.

Best regards to all.
Emily

 

[Cant_Get_Right]

And this is why I have taken a hiatus from online gambling. First, winning a RJ on a free chip with a max withdrawal of $50...I would have to shoot myself, second...the new games at Rival really suck (IMHO) and even playtime for entertainment value isn't there anymore. Trying to figure out if I will get paid, when I will get paid and how I'm going to get paid isn't worth it. I went to a landbased casino this afternoon, played what I wanted to, hit some good features and walked out $100 ahead. I didn't have to give DNA and get the third degree and worry about the FBI knocking on my door.

Other than not being able to play in my pajamas, I can go there or alomsot any B & M 24/7 and be entertained (and if I win actually walk out with the money)

Yep free drinks and free food. I drive to mississippi once a month. Get the VIP treatment. This is what it's all about.

 

[gerilege]

I dont agree at all! What you are saying is basically that when a RJ is beginning really big the casino can use its own money to trigger it and save the RJ money? Or did I get it wrong?

Even if it is the casinos money they use when its free chips they just dont give them away for fun. They have it for propotional, to either get more customers or to let customers test new games(to get them deposit).

Not directly, but indirectly yes. They could theoretically give away more free chips with low maximum cashout in such cases. You can not really technically exclude rouge behaviour. But think about it the other way as well, all the RJ contribution from free chips and bonuses make the RJ bigger, so when you win a RJ without bonus or with a bonus that has no max. cashout, you win more than you would win if there were no free chips/bonus contribution to the RJ. In some casinos it might very well happen that the casino bonus contributes well over 50% to the JP, so JPs would be the half of what they are now, and your contribution is the same, your chance is the same, but your winnings are higher. On the long run it evens out for all players.

You are right with the intent behind free chips, still, the funds are put in by the casino, and the contribution to the JP is made from casino funds. I still think that players can not expect that those funds - in the free chip case - should be put back.

Let me give you an example, think about your JP contribution as a lottery ticket, when you win the JP, your lottery ticket is a winner. Now imagine that there are 200 tickets sold, each for 1$, and there is only one winner, and therefore the jackpot is $200. You buy a ticket, your chance to win is 1/200, your expected value is 1$ (1/200*200 + 199/200*0). Now the casino issues 50 $1 free tickets with a max cashout of $50. The jackpot becomes 250, your winning chance changes to 1/250, but your expected value remains 1$ (1/250*250+249/250*0)!!! You will win less times, but more, and in the remaining 249 cases, where you do not win, it does not matter for you as an individual player, what happens with the money. If you expect that the casino puts back $250 each time when a winner from the free tickets win (50/250 = 1/5 of all cases), then it would look like the following: when you win, you get a fair game, when the 199 other players win, it is also OK, however when the 50 free players win, and the funds are put back, the price, you paid for the 1$ ticket would be available for those as well who just buy a new ticket for the new draw. If 200 more players would buy a new $1 ticket, and the original 200 players would also be required to buy new $1 tickets (as they can not win a new draw without entering to it), then it would be $250 from the last draw, $200 from the new players, $200 from the old players. So you, and all original players would finally pay $2 to win 650$, while new players would pay $1 to win 650$. I do not think this would be fair.

 

[Mick114]

Hi Everyone

Firstly I have to apologise this was an oversight on our part, as this player never requested a withdrawal but played it through to zero to build their comp points up it slipped through the net.

No excuses it was our fault, not trying to justify this slip up however the last 4 weeks have been, to say the least, very hectic, everyone is working extended hours due to the recent developments with Mastercard and with possibly Visa following suit.
We have been working to implement other alternatives and to maintain what we currently offer.

RTG have been notified and the funds will be returned shortly.

Also I have checked my PM box and can find no PM from mick114.

Once again my apologies for this.

Best regards to all.
Emily

Thanks for the reply and answering some questions. I just doubled checked my sent folder and the PM is there. I could forward if need be. As stated in my other posts I did also email Inetbet twice about this matter. Frankly I was shocked to see my name in the newsletter and then noticed the RJP not being replaced so was wondering what was up. I also DID cashout 48 dollars as the max withdraw was 50 playing 5 free chip.

 

[rockycatt]

Hi Everyone

Firstly I have to apologise this was an oversight on our part, as this player never requested a withdrawal but played it down to the max $50 withdrawal to build their comp points up it slipped through the net.

No excuses it was our fault, not trying to justify this slip up however the last 4 weeks have been, to say the least, very hectic, everyone is working extended hours due to the recent developments with Mastercard and with possibly Visa following suit.
We have been working to implement other alternatives and to maintain what we currently offer.

RTG have been notified and the funds will be returned shortly.

Also I have checked my PM box and can find no PM from mick114.

Once again my apologies for this.

Best regards to all.
Emily

is it not with in the terms to get comp points from this chip

ill wait for thst answer first before going further
thank you

 

[Mick114]

As far as comps. If 400 + comps points were removed.......wouldn't someone realize this was a free chip right then and there? ...just curious.

 

[chuchu59]

Hi Everyone

Firstly I have to apologise this was an oversight on our part, as this player never requested a withdrawal but played it down to the max $50 withdrawal to build their comp points up it slipped through the net.

No excuses it was our fault, not trying to justify this slip up however the last 4 weeks have been, to say the least, very hectic, everyone is working extended hours due to the recent developments with Mastercard and with possibly Visa following suit.
We have been working to implement other alternatives and to maintain what we currently offer.

RTG have been notified and the funds will be returned shortly.

Also I have checked my PM box and can find no PM from mick114.

Once again my apologies for this.

Best regards to all.
Emily

It seems you slipped twice, first by stating in the newsletter that Mick had won the RJ and then not reinstating the RJ to the original level. However, you did not slip up in deducting the comps from Mick's account. Hopefully, these were not all done on purpose.

BTW, though you stated there were no pms received why were the emails unanswered?

 

[Cant_Get_Right]

As far as comps. If 400 + comps points were removed.......wouldn't someone realize this was a free chip right then and there? ...just curious.

So you mean to tell me. If players played with $5 free chip. And while playing and gained maybe 1 comp or even 10 comp. Whether they bust out or not. INETBET went into each and every account and removed the 1+ comp point? If not, then why should they remove the 400? You can't be lazy and have a double standard. If they removed the 400 because it was done with a free chip. Then they must go and remove the 1+ comp from everyone else account. RIGHT is RIGHT. WRONG is WRONG! I withhold judgment, because I don't know if INETBET goes through everyone account and remove comps from free chip or not.

 

[binshakindown]

Is the thread dead?

What about the important questions that were asked, like why the 400 comp points were confiscated, or jp returned?

 

[chuchu59]

Thread might still have been active if not for DDos attack on this site. I hope Emily can answer the questions posed to Inetbet above.

 

[bernynhel]

...EDIT TO ADD: I think that this "mess" is just mistakes from iNetBet. I don�t think they on purpose will use a players name in a commercial newsletter and say that he has won over 2000$ when he only had the opportynity to withdraw 100$.
The strange thing is that there have been several "mistakes" there lately. The thing about the guy who didn�t receive bonuses was also bad.

Has anyone told them about this thread?

It is common practice for RTG sites to use player names advertising Random Jackpots won when the player was ineligible due to max cashout limitations from freechip and/or bonus terms and the player was only really allowed to WD $50. It's no mistake, it is deliberate.

Keep in mind: the casino software has accepted a bonus code and is in the process of constantly computing and displaying a running WR/cashable balance tally based on the ineligible player's wagering when it awards the "random" jackpot!

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hi Everyone

Firstly I have to apologise this was an oversight on our part, as this player never requested a withdrawal but played it down to the max $50 withdrawal to build their comp points up it slipped through the net.

No excuses it was our fault, not trying to justify this slip up however the last 4 weeks have been, to say the least, very hectic, everyone is working extended hours due to the recent developments with Mastercard and with possibly Visa following suit.
We have been working to implement other alternatives and to maintain what we currently offer.

RTG have been notified and the funds will be returned shortly.

Also I have checked my PM box and can find no PM from mick114.

Once again my apologies for this.

Best regards to all.
Emily

This problem is ENTIRELY down to the max cashout idea. It alters player behaviour, and in some cases can cause this kind of problem. The RJ win was considered valid because it was NOT confiscated when processing a withdrawal, it was lost back during play. If it wasn't for the max cashout, the player would most likely have withdrawn near the peak of $13K, and there would never have been any question about him having truly won the RJ.

The best way forward would be to STOP giving out these tiny free chips with max cashout, because it IS possible to trigger a RJ on one of these, even though it's highly unlikely. When an RJ IS triggered, and confiscated, due to a max cashout, the result is inevitably BAD PR for the casino. Free chips can be replaced by depost bonuses, for which there would be NO restrictions, and thus none of these arguments. If iNetBet doesn't want to go to this extreme, make the free chips GENUINE gifts, with NO max cashout restrictions, and base them on a player's past history, and NOT just because they got the code off the newsletter. They could be based on player's deposits, losses, or wagering, and awarded weekly or monthly.

Players can just as easily try new games on a deposit bonus, and players will often try new games out of curiosity once they have been tempted into making a deposit.

As for the different worry about too much bonus money inflating the RJs, itself a consequence of RTG casinos offering large bonuses (not so much iNetBet, but the others), the software could be set so that only bets made from CASH contribute to the pool. Whilst play from bonus funds could win the RJ, it could not add to the pool, and if the software was further altered to offer non-RJ versions of the game, the RJ versions could be blocked when bonus funds are in play, meaning that players could not even WIN a RJ whilst playing bonus funds.

 

[incrediblestuff]

This problem is ENTIRELY down to the max cashout idea. It alters player behaviour, and in some cases can cause this kind of problem. The RJ win was considered valid because it was NOT confiscated when processing a withdrawal, it was lost back during play. If it wasn't for the max cashout, the player would most likely have withdrawn near the peak of $13K, and there would never have been any question about him having truly won the RJ.

The best way forward would be to STOP giving out these tiny free chips with max cashout, because it IS possible to trigger a RJ on one of these, even though it's highly unlikely. When an RJ IS triggered, and confiscated, due to a max cashout, the result is inevitably BAD PR for the casino. Free chips can be replaced by depost bonuses, for which there would be NO restrictions, and thus none of these arguments. If iNetBet doesn't want to go to this extreme, make the free chips GENUINE gifts, with NO max cashout restrictions, and base them on a player's past history, and NOT just because they got the code off the newsletter. They could be based on player's deposits, losses, or wagering, and awarded weekly or monthly.

Players can just as easily try new games on a deposit bonus, and players will often try new games out of curiosity once they have been tempted into making a deposit.

As for the different worry about too much bonus money inflating the RJs, itself a consequence of RTG casinos offering large bonuses (not so much iNetBet, but the others), the software could be set so that only bets made from CASH contribute to the pool. Whilst play from bonus funds could win the RJ, it could not add to the pool, and if the software was further altered to offer non-RJ versions of the game, the RJ versions could be blocked when bonus funds are in play, meaning that players could not even WIN a RJ whilst playing bonus funds.

this is an excellent idea!
are you reading along RTG?

 

[reda]

i also know for a fact that inet put 18,000 back into aztec treasure a few years ago. i was playin that game and it hit. ( I dint hit the R J) and then a couple days later i went to play it and it was 18.000 again. must have been reset. thats the only way it could have gotten to 18.000 that quick .
now im wondering if mick did not know about this forum and had not posted here, then who would have known that the rj had triggered and the winner acutallly did not collect the funds??? then the rj would not have to be reset at all if no one knew, i believe inet will do the right thing.

 

[iNetBet Promos]

Hi Reda,
Just to confim the Bunko Jackpot has been added back to the game.
We have to request this directly with RTG so sometimes it take a little while for them to complete the request.
As you say if a Random Jackpot is hit and the player not eligible then we add the monies back to the game.
Best Regards
iNetBet Promos

 

[chuchu59]

It will probably never be known whether Inet would have requested for reinstatement of the RJ if Mick had not posted. From different sources posting in this thread, it seems that they would probably have done it. However, Emily states that this slipped thru the net because the player actually played the RJ balance down to $50. This is possible but how the heck does the casino explain the removal of the comps if they didnt realise he had played with a huge balance. 400+ comps indicates a playthru of at least $40K.

Mick must have rolled his $5 chip over 8000 times.