jetset said:
Gunslinger's alternative ideas for a fairer settlement posted above make for far more interesting reading imo.
Can you clearify what you mean by that? I hope I don't sound abrasive, I just am really interested in your thoughts.
I figure, if I had just had $1000 pulled (this is all theory) out of my account that I had made in some type of really generous promotion, comp points, free give away etc. (somthing comparable to the Joyland situation) due to whatever reason they decided to state, I'd be irate.
So I look at it like this. Seeing that $1000 in cashable 0WR form in my balance is unlikely. As is having it processed through the Neteller. The casino can dodge and weave and all that other crap long enough to erode the popular preassure on them (probably) to the point where it's profitable not to pay. Offering to strike deals with some players, paying off others, waiting for some to just move on and call it a loss etc. etc. could erode support substantially. This is hard in Joyland's case because of the large sums of money that are owed and the fact that it has become so widely publicicized and they are part of a large group.
This leads me to believe that after the initial attempt by Joyland to begin erroding support amongst the player and watchdog base by picking off the players one by one with substandard deals and contracts that say there will be no additional payments made will be a general failure. Though they may end up getting rid of a couple players, I think it will do very little to limit the public outcry. This move is probably to see how many dollars they can shave off of their debts before the next phase.
I'd anticipate the next move of Joyland to either be stonewall or somthing that I mentioned in an earlier post. If Joyland does indeed attempt to stonewall, you will undoubtedly see the entire casino flatten. You'll see other Crown Solutions Casinos doing whatever it is they have to do (lie, cheat, steal) to distance themselves from Joyland. Joyland will fall and the shockwave will reverberate for however long. It will go down as one of the single biggest examples of casino fraud in the recent history of online gaming.
The other scenario I see happening is for Joyland to work out some sort of middle ground. My origional hopes that all the players would be paid in full after sufficient preassure was applied has since dissipated as Joyland remains by and large unresponsive. Due to what would be extreme damage to the Playtech nameplate as well as the Crown Solutions Group in the even of non-payment, I'd assume the preasure from affiliates and from Playtech (I believe that THERE IS preasure from Playtech on Joyland from internal channels. They'd be completely retarded if they didn't, and I don't know that any company as sucessfull as Playtech could make that mistake) to force some type of compromise.
***NOTE: I want to stress. When I explain what I think of these suggestions, I am presupposing that players will not want to play recreationally at Joyland Casino, that players will want to withdrawl as quick as possible, and that they would not feel in any way morally obligated not to take full advantage of Joyland casino. These are not presuppositions dirrived from any type of assumption that the players owed money have promotional tendencies, only that these players could not be expected to follow what casinos love to refer to as "The intended spirit of the promotion" after what has happened at the casino. ***
Of the three mentioned idea I believe that the comps being redeposited in
cashable form makes the most sense (even if there is a WR attatched to them.) The reason for this is clear in the assumption of what would happen if the comp points were deposited in any other fashion.
I mean lets face it, no one who's owed 1k, 3k, 5k in comps (as I'd imagine these are probably the numbers. The winnings vary greatly, but I'd imagine the comps are somewhere around here) is going to want to play that Blanace in Joyland Casino recreationally. That's the problem with depositing them in Sticky or Non-cashable form. If you do that, in order for players to ever see any of that money (which lets face it, is probably all they'd want to do at that point) they'd have to (in the case of non-cashable credits) double the balance to get their money. So if there's like a 50/50 chance of that happening, it's still and extremely crazy situation. If someone's got a 3000 chip non-cashable balance they'd have to take it all the way to at least 6000 (so as to withdrawal the 3000 bucks they're probably shooting for, as that is what they're rightfully owed in the first place.) because if they withdrew at anything less then the bonus credits would *poof* vanish. No one's gunna take a 3000 non-cashable bonus, work it up to 3500 and cash out. You're going to see probably even bigger withdrawals then the comp point fiasco created ...
who's gunna trust Joyland to make good on a ... for instance $10,000 withdrawal if they wouldn't cash out the $3000 one in the beginning. But that's just my take on that.
Which begs the question? Why not make the comps sticky? Well, if you made the comps sticky then you'd be faced with a situation where Joyland would almost have to pay out the same amount anyway, just broken into whatever the maxbet in Blackjack is sized withdrawls. If you stick the bonus in the account, all you're going to do is drive the players nuts, plus it's just the same as doing a cashable. AND if it's sticky, there's no way for the player not to look like a bonus abuser.
Bottom line is cashable with a modified standard 40xB WR would be best. WR at New York for example is 20xDB, but in this case there is no deposit so you could apply a 40xBR, maybe allow Blackjack. Or you could make it a 4x Sticky. Or a no WR Non-cashable.
All of these are solutions, I think they should be explored. The idea of Joyland making customed tailored plans for each person that fits them just fine (i.e. Player A 21,055 in winnings/ 659 in Comps may settle for comps gone and that be just fine with him, however Player B who has 1450 in winnings/5500 in Comps may wish to convert those comps over to a non-cashable bonus, and again Player C who has maybe 1500 in Winnings/1500 in Comps who may wish to continue gambling at Joyland anyway could convert that into a 40xB WR cashable bonus) is not nessisarily a bad thing. I just hope the process, if infact plans are worked out on a case by case basis, are transparent to the public to insure fairness.
The Gunslinger
Hopefully we can just warn authentic players. Let the bonus hunters go slam the casino, they're not doing the casino any good, especially if few real players are playing there. Let the real players go to reputable casinos. 
