mary
Dormant account
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2000
Some casinos have a policy of locking out and closing the accounts of players who:
*Deposit and play only when there is a bonus offered
*and win more then they lose, or, after losing for several sessions, finally make a big win and withdrawal.
They may add insult upon this by labeling the player a "bonus abuser".
Ultimately, what this can mean to a player is that every session may be his/her last and the last session's winnings are in jeopardy.
The casino's position is that they lose money overall to players using bonuses; that a player who only plays during bonus periods is not "a real player"; and they need to protect their business. Some casinos do have this stated in their terms and conditions; some do not.
While I see the business need for this, I also see potential for abuse on the casino side. The problem I see is that many players unaware of this restriction wind up playing only during bonus periods because, heck, that's just smart shopping. Because of the games they choose, their betting style, how long they play etc. they are still what any land casino would consider to be an excellent customer and still provide profit potential to the business.
However, by doing discretionary lockouts and seizing the "last large cashout" a casino could make money out of winners as well as from player losses at the cost of losing the player as a customer.
Because of the intense competition between casinos for customers, I can see an attitude developing of viewing *any* winning customer as a disposable customer, even if that win is atypical for the customer overall.
It is the OPA's position that casinos have the right to control who has access to their services. However, we have also seen players "backed off" who are not cheaters in any sense, but lucky.
How should we as an organization handle this?
*Deposit and play only when there is a bonus offered
*and win more then they lose, or, after losing for several sessions, finally make a big win and withdrawal.
They may add insult upon this by labeling the player a "bonus abuser".
Ultimately, what this can mean to a player is that every session may be his/her last and the last session's winnings are in jeopardy.
The casino's position is that they lose money overall to players using bonuses; that a player who only plays during bonus periods is not "a real player"; and they need to protect their business. Some casinos do have this stated in their terms and conditions; some do not.
While I see the business need for this, I also see potential for abuse on the casino side. The problem I see is that many players unaware of this restriction wind up playing only during bonus periods because, heck, that's just smart shopping. Because of the games they choose, their betting style, how long they play etc. they are still what any land casino would consider to be an excellent customer and still provide profit potential to the business.
However, by doing discretionary lockouts and seizing the "last large cashout" a casino could make money out of winners as well as from player losses at the cost of losing the player as a customer.
Because of the intense competition between casinos for customers, I can see an attitude developing of viewing *any* winning customer as a disposable customer, even if that win is atypical for the customer overall.
It is the OPA's position that casinos have the right to control who has access to their services. However, we have also seen players "backed off" who are not cheaters in any sense, but lucky.
How should we as an organization handle this?