Microgaming implement max bet limit when playing with a bonus(!!)

[Balthazar]

Edit: Removed as requested

Hmm...

 

[Nifty29]

The system awards $2 for every $60 wagered however i can set you up with bonuses that awards $10 for every $300 or $20 for every $600 etc etc
Actually, we can do any combination, the player can choose how they want to receive the cashback whether it be in $2 increments or even in $100 increments. We have this working with a number of players and we guarantee it with some players i.e. if a player has a run of bad luck and does not earn the cashback, we will simply add it manually. They can continue to play with it or they can cash it out.

Unfortunately we cannot let it all accumulate in the account for later use, because we carry over unearned cashback for every deposit, there are some tech issues with this we still have not been able to solve. The above solution almost solves this by changing when the cashback is released and how much is released in each increment.

If ANY players want a custom cashback bonus at Wintingo, please PM me your account details and i will set it up for you



I re-read the post, sorry for that, was not my intention, i was generalizing.

Out of interest, what's the tech difference between crediting the $2 into a seperate "account" rather than the normal playing account? Doesn't appear to be that hard, but then I'm not a programmer.

I'm just not a fan of the "drip feed". It just doesn't really help me to win, which is kinda what you suggest other casinos do. If your system DOES help me win, them I'm happy for you to explain it to me.

 

[Nifty29]

Hmm...

Double hmmm.

Requested by whom? Sounds like censorship to me, which is very anti-CM.

What's the go Matt?

 

[Tirilej]

Double hmmm.

Requested by whom? Sounds like censorship to me, which is very anti-CM.

What's the go Matt?

I'm the one to blame. I didn't think it was appropriate to tell us all how high Igor was betting and told him that.
He could only change his own post but had to ask Matt to remove the quote.

We are all humans and even the reps need a chance to correct their mistakes. At least that's how I see it

 

[wintingo]

Out of interest, what's the tech difference between crediting the $2 into a seperate "account" rather than the normal playing account? Doesn't appear to be that hard, but then I'm not a programmer.

I'm just not a fan of the "drip feed". It just doesn't really help me to win, which is kinda what you suggest other casinos do. If your system DOES help me win, them I'm happy for you to explain it to me.

We have a one wallet solution and therefore there is no separation between real money and bonus money, its all just real money. To develop separate wallets now is a very complicated and time consuming process. We also need our regulator to approve the development work as it deals mainly with customer balances. It's not really justified in our opinion however we know players are requesting this functionality. We thought rather allow players to control "when" they receive the cashback instead by changing the wagering increments that trigger cashback release. It's "almost" the same thing and a temporary solution until we get to figuring out how best to implement a true automated batch solution.

I'm just not a fan of the "drip feed". It just doesn't really help me to win, which is kinda what you suggest other casinos do. If your system DOES help me win, them I'm happy for you to explain it to me.

I never said that our system helps you to win, our system simply removes the restrictive conditions that stop players from withdrawing their own funds and the funds they win without meeting wagering requirements of bonuses. As i mentioned in previous post, we can avoid the "drip feed" by changing how you receive the cashback i.e. from $2 in $60, to $10 in $300, $20 in $600 etc etc... depending on the type of player you are, we can accommodate pretty much all requests relating to cashpay release (apart from the batch processing of course which i explained above)

 

[wintingo]

Double hmmm.

Requested by whom? Sounds like censorship to me, which is very anti-CM.

What's the go Matt?

I was told that we are not allowed to mention a players bet amounts so i requested that the post be edited.

 

[Igor82]

I was told that we are not allowed to mention a players bet amounts so i requested that the post be edited.

I'll say it -it's no problem. The way you did things ties in with a long ago post about which bonuses players prefer - direct cash back was coined by a player on that forum and a conversation ensued about volatility risks.

I played loaded on massive hands to see how would real cash drip correlate to huge bankroll bets for myself. It didn't - as you said yourself it only cashed back at 16% instead of the advertised 100% (i think) and that's directly correlated to generated volume so there is no bankroll guarantee.

if you look up the thread you'll see that's exactly the discussion good people of this forum had at the time.

so as a result i was seeing how far my cashback goes in proportion to the advertised 100% on playing high volatility at large bet size - as you said 16%. it's self protective and that's great. If i happened to hit lucky in the first few hands then id have hit lucky with my initial balance anyway on any casino.

On the other hand, please understand that "we the sneaky ones" guarantee the double bankrolls as an amount upfront and do not have the AMOUNT awarded as a variable - it is NOT volume controlled - and as such need to protect ourselves from players playing at our casinos exactly how i played on yours. Your protection dropped my bonus amount from 100% as advertised to 16% - our system gives 100% upfront, but as such needs the WR and the max bet as deterrent.

Also please note that real money balances are not locked in on MGS casinos so your statement a few posts up that deposited funds winnings are likewise locked is also untrue. If you are to state such a thing, please clarify that that is a system mostly employed by playtech bonus system's and even that is not 100% true for every operator they have.

I don't call your system evil or sneky for giving me less bonus that my promised 100% as such you shouldn't berate ours(32Reds or anyone's) without understanding it either.

Igor

 

[Igor82]

Again, i'm not attacking 32red in this instance. This was not my intention at all. I'm generalizing about why casinos want players to play with bonus money.

Again, as a representative of the industry you arent allowed to generalise as to why we do what we do if you dont actually know why we do what we do. It's dangerous and mis-informative and i would imagine by now you would offer an apology for stating the reason "why we give bonuses" which isn't truthful, rather than justify your statement by saying you were generalising.

It's just as wrong to be generic about your statement (seeing as the generalisation itself is bogus) as it is to make it directly related to 32Red.

Just don't judge what you don't know and frankly, it should be your job to know based on your occupation.

 

[vinylweatherman]

We have a one wallet solution and therefore there is no separation between real money and bonus money, its all just real money. To develop separate wallets now is a very complicated and time consuming process. We also need our regulator to approve the development work as it deals mainly with customer balances. It's not really justified in our opinion however we know players are requesting this functionality. We thought rather allow players to control "when" they receive the cashback instead by changing the wagering increments that trigger cashback release. It's "almost" the same thing and a temporary solution until we get to figuring out how best to implement a true automated batch solution.


I never said that our system helps you to win, our system simply removes the restrictive conditions that stop players from withdrawing their own funds and the funds they win without meeting wagering requirements of bonuses. As i mentioned in previous post, we can avoid the "drip feed" by changing how you receive the cashback i.e. from $2 in $60, to $10 in $300, $20 in $600 etc etc... depending on the type of player you are, we can accommodate pretty much all requests relating to cashpay release (apart from the batch processing of course which i explained above)

Rather than have to arrange this with the casino, why not have a "preferences" page for players to tailor aspects of their account, and this could include adding the value of the increments for the awarding of cashback. If players set a high enough value, then it IS pretty much "the same thing", even though players would have to keep on top of their profile settings in order to control the triggering.

What players need is an amount that they notice going in to their balance, and $2 is hardly going to get noticed at all, so even though they are getting it, players are not "experiencing" the benefit, so it is effectively like playing without any kind of incentive.

The benefits of a "batch" solution are that players would have something they are familiar with, the cashing in of loyalty points at most other casinos, but coupled with a far better rate of accrual than the standard 0.1% seen elsewhere.

 

[mattsgame]

Double hmmm.

Requested by whom? Sounds like censorship to me, which is very anti-CM.

What's the go Matt?

As Trill said, I seen some comments by the Wintigo rep in which I thought were not appropriate and commented on them, the rep since removed those comments and so I removed the quote with what I said at the request of Wintingo and to respect Igor's privacy.

Cheers
Matt

 

[Igor82]

i dug up the thread out of curiosity:

https://www.casinomeister.com/forum...-system-around-is-clearplay-the-answer.49992/

In fact it was VWM that coined the concept of direct cashback at the time - page 3

 

[wintingo]

I played loaded on massive hands to see how would real cash drip correlate to huge bankroll bets for myself. It didn't - as you said yourself it only cashed back at 16% instead of the advertised 100% (i think) and that's directly correlated to generated volume so there is no bankroll guarantee.

I dont believe i mentioned anywhere about "bank roll guarantee"?? All i mentioned was allowing players to withdraw their own funds and any funds they have won at any time.

so as a result i was seeing how far my cashback goes in proportion to the advertised 100% on playing high volatility at large bet size - as you said 16%. it's self protective and that's great. If i happened to hit lucky in the first few hands then id have hit lucky with my initial balance anyway on any casino.

Yes but if you hit lucky in the beginning and you played with a bonus then you would need to complete wagering before you can cash out. This is a restrictive term, this is my main argument.

Please also note, with Cashpay if a player does not manage to earn his full cashback (like in your case), should the player want to deposit again (even after he has a withdrawal pending) he will still be eligible to earn any un-realised cashback from previous deposits and any cashback that is connected to the new deposit. We carry over any un-earned cashback from one deposit to the next.

On the other hand, please understand that "we the sneaky ones" guarantee the double bankrolls as an amount upfront and do not have it volume controlled and as such need to protect ourselves from players playing at our casinos exatly how i played on yours. Your protection dropped my bonus amount from 100% as advertised to 16% - our system give 100% upfront, but as such needs the WR and the max bet as deterrent.

Your 100% upfront bonus sounds great, its standard industry practice as far as i can see. Our protection (as you say) did no such thing, the way you played (High volatility/large bets) could happen at any casino.

I'm not being arrogant here but we are fortunate enough that we don't need to protect ourselves from players that play in your style. All types of players are free to play how they like, when they like and any game they like (games do however have different weighting in order to earn the stated cashback). This is my whole point Igor, as you say you came onto Wintingo, you placed massive bets and still earned 16% of your bonus (volume controlled), if you won big you could have cashed out straight away because you already completed the required wagering in order to earn the 16% and therefore you did nothing untoward or you did not break any complicated bonus rule. In this case you were lucky, its gambling, you won and because there is no wagering requirement to withdraw, you are owed the money.

I don't call your system evil or sneky for giving me less bonus that my promised 100% as such you shouldn't berate ours(32Reds or anyone's) without understanding it either.

As stated above, you will earn the 100% and any unrealised cashback amounts by simply continuing to play with us.

 

[wintingo]

Rather than have to arrange this with the casino, why not have a "preferences" page for players to tailor aspects of their account, and this could include adding the value of the increments for the awarding of cashback. If players set a high enough value, then it IS pretty much "the same thing", even though players would have to keep on top of their profile settings in order to control the triggering.

What players need is an amount that they notice going in to their balance, and $2 is hardly going to get noticed at all, so even though they are getting it, players are not "experiencing" the benefit, so it is effectively like playing without any kind of incentive.

The benefits of a "batch" solution are that players would have something they are familiar with, the cashing in of loyalty points at most other casinos, but coupled with a far better rate of accrual than the standard 0.1% seen elsewhere.

Its something we are working on, i have said it before, i think you are right here, a batch solution would be GREAT!. Unfortunately at the moment its manual but its very straightforward. You simply need to PM me with your details, it takes 5 minutes to implement it.

 

[Igor82]

I dont believe i mentioned anywhere about "bank roll guarantee"?? All i mentioned was allowing players to withdraw their own funds and any funds they have won at any time.

That is also true for us (and 32red and any other netnet, mgs, amaya, etcetecetc operator) ..... a HOST of operators out there don't lock in real money. You will find it more often that winnings from real balance can be withdrawn at any time at which point the BONUS balance is lost without having any influence on the real balance.

The ONLY difference between your system and the system you are berrating is that players have a guarantee bankroll upfront by which if they happen to deplete their real money balance they still have a decent amount of spins left in their bonus funds. They know exactly how much and what the conditions of turning that BONUS balance real are from before they deposit.

That is not the case with your system. If my RTP happens to be particularly bad for that session my awarded cashback will be far lower than advertised at the point of my deposit and i will get nowhere near my 100% cashback on my losses.

Yes but if you hit lucky in the beginning and you played with a bonus then you would need to complete wagering before you can cash out. This is a restrictive term, this is my main argument.

Hey, that again is just not true.

Again, please do your research. If you deposit a 100 now, get 100 bonus, put 100 on bacarrat and make the real balance in to 200 - now you will have 200 real and 100 bonus. You can withdraw the real balance of 200 and anul the bonus balance of 100. In your case you would have 206 real balance and no bonus to keep you going if you hit a bad run - as you don't actually do bonuses. You are a "cash back on volume" casino.

So please correct your statement.

Please also note, with Cashpay if a player does not manage to earn his full cashback (like in your case), should the player want to deposit again (even after he has a withdrawal pending) he will still be eligible to earn any un-realised cashback from previous deposits and any cashback that is connected to the new deposit. We carry over any un-earned cashback from one deposit to the next.

agreed - i never denied that or wanted to go into the discussion on how YOU do things. It has its perks - so much so it's not the first time it was looked into.

That said it's just DIFFERENT and no body came onto your thread and started complaining how you advertise 100% cashback while you should advertise UP TO 100% cashback on your first deposit: (conditions apply: in case of bad rtp you need to re-deposit to maximise your cash back amount) in small letters.

I don't have an issue with your system and i don't understand the need for you to advertise it on a thread that related to a max bet value on another casino using another system. Your statement to "come play at wintigo" quoted verbatim, is outright poaching, and your justification as to WHY is outright dis-information and THAT is what i have a problem with - not your system.

Your 100% upfront bonus sounds great, its standard industry practice as far as i can see. Our protection (as you say) did no such thing, the way you played (High volatility/large bets) could happen at any casino.

yes but on another casino i would have another 500 to play with, instead of receiving 65 from you. again, i don't know why you think this thread is about how wintingo does things and its making me believe your comments are not merely accidental as they appeared initially. I suggest opening a thread called "how we do things at wintingo and why" for a healthy on topic discussion.

I'm not being arrogant here but we are fortunate enough that we don't need to protect ourselves from players that play in your style. All types of players are free to play how they like, when they like and any game they like (games do however have different weighting in order to earn the stated cashback). This is my whole point Igor, as you say you came onto Wintingo, you placed massive bets and still earned 16% of your bonus (volume controlled), if you won big you could have cashed out straight away because you already completed the required wagering in order to earn the 16% and therefore you did nothing untoward or you did not break any complicated bonus rule. In this case you were lucky, its gambling, you won and because there is no wagering requirement to withdraw, you are owed the money.

You arent being arrogant - you are being different and catering to a player market that can understand it - and hey, GREAT for you congrats. That doesn't mean we are sneaky or have ulterior motives in tying players up with bonuses. Again - not about you, its about max bet on a casino.

i thnk we can really put a fork in this now, dont you agree?

Let's just agree that bonus based casinos are not ALL sneaky or evil - the systems and ways to do things are vehemently vast in the way they operate - some more fair or beneficial to players than others. And likewise, lets say your system is very ingenious, safe, less complicated and i am the first one to give you kudos for that :notworthy

 

[incrediblestuff]

Much of what you argue is true Igor, but this:

Again, please do your research. If you deposit a 100 now, get 100 bonus, put 100 on bacarrat and make the real balance in to 200 - now you will have 200 real and 100 bonus. You can withdraw the real balance of 200 and anul the bonus balance of 100.

is generally not the case: most Casinos never even will let you play table games on 100% match ups, or make bets consisting of more then half of your bankroll, which i think WT was referring to, but to me it is understandable to ensure some basic level of AP-protection

So maybe it is the case in Bet-At-Eu, but "normal" MG operators, and heaps of other provider-powered Casinos do have restrictions on bonuses, and force you to bust or make playthrough under set terms.

Nothing new really but for the sake of argument, i think i should point that out

 

[Igor82]

Much of what you argue is true Igor, but this:



is generally not the case: most Casinos never even will let you play table games on 100% match ups, or make bets consisting of more then half of your bankroll, which i think WT was referring to, but to me it is understandable to ensure some basic level of AP-protection

So maybe it is the case in Bet-At-Eu, but "normal" MG operators, and heaps of other provider-powered Casinos do have restrictions on bonuses, and force you to bust or make playthrough under set terms.

Nothing new really but for the sake of argument, i think i should point that out

My case is a case where you win on your FIRST bet - using your real deposited money though - its super important.

Yeah if you place a bet of 100 and lose and then place a bet of another 100 using bonus funds, now you have game weights, wagering etc.

Here is the main differentiator - you can place the second bet because you actually have it upfront - that is the main and only the difference.

winning with real money bet wont invalidate your win. I'm pretty confident 32red doesn't do that but I'll be trolling their t&c's now to see if they do. I'd be gob smacked if i had to learn that they withhold real money bets based non their bet size and game played because there is a potential bonus in play.

look giving cashback on volume with a cap is nothing else but a post-wager loyalty bonus, or higher conversion of loyalty points, or pick yours. It's a reward that is given POST wagering, while others choose to give a reward PRE wagering for their acquisition and leave the post wagering rewards for long term retention. I'm not arguing wintingo systems here - i'm arguing that to say real monies get locked in on other casinos in such a general way is simply misinformative - and really - poaching is not cool. I've said that before - i'll stick to it

I'm personally forking this now I have my own baptism thread i'm neglecting

 

[vinylweatherman]

If my RTP happens to be particularly bad for that session my awarded cashback will be far lower than advertised at the point of my deposit and i will get nowhere near my 100% cashback on my losses.

For a single session, this is true, and in such cases a traditional bonus would at least offer a chance to climb back out and get a better overall RTP, but the disadvantage is the WR. Wintingo, however, allow the unearned cashback to carry over, so a player that continues to deposit will get closer to the long term expected RTP, and thus would end up having a balancing good session that earned all the carried cashbacks from previous offers.

The original Clearplay DID allow the withdrawal of real money and winnings at any time, with the bonus then removed, it was simple in concept, but it didn't take long for Advantage Players to spot the main flaw, and it was to bet 200 on Baccarat (100 real, 100 bonus), and withdraw 200 on a winning bet, but lose only 100 if unlucky.

Clearplay did nothing to protect casinos against advantage players, so operators modified it, most only keeping the concept of game weightings, but going back to the traditional locking in of all money till WR was completed.

Most casinos still like traditional bonuses, and many players like the idea. What they DON'T like are all the complicated terms, and the fact that some casinos use them as "traps" to punish even the minor mistakes like a misclick, which is using them to maximise profit, rather than to protect the casino from determined Advantage Players.

This is an argument between two different attempts to address the issue, we have the bonus free cashback model vs the redesigned bonus model that should mean most players CANNOT ever reach a point where a casino confiscates their winnings, yet Advantage Players find that their usual strategies are blocked at source, such as overlimit bets being declined, or outstanding WR being increased in proportion to any breach of bet limits.

The thing that needs to be addressed now is ID for players. This is getting so complicated that some players just cannot comply, even though they are fine, honest, upstanding citizens, not devious scammers.

Just as some clubs and theme parks do, the industry should operate it's own system for giving players a universal ID that can be used at any casino. It would mean players getting thoroughly vetted and verified once, and with whatever ID and documents they get from their government, along with various database checks, and issued with a "Casino photo ID" card in the post, that they then use to prove their ID to each casino they play at.

If I buy an annual pass for the big theme park company in the UK, they don't ask me to show my passport each time I enter (relying then on an internal database to check my pass status), they issue me a photo pass valid for that year, and this is checked upon entry. This means that even without a passport or driving license, I would still be able to purchase an annual pass, something that would not be possible if they relied on government photo ID and a database check.

Like online casinos, a theme park is part of the "entertainment industry".

 

[catapultaudio]

Its something we are working on, i have said it before, i think you are right here, a batch solution would be GREAT!. Unfortunately at the moment its manual but its very straightforward. You simply need to PM me with your details, it takes 5 minutes to implement it.

How do you mean ? You already have code written to do batch payments and just want a PM of specific requests? Or that you think it could be coded quickly if somebody sends you details of HOW it should be plugged in?

I totally agree that the option to let all the cashback build and collect in one go would be fantastic, as it stands I can definitely agree since signing up last night and collecting £12 of cashback I didn't notice receiving the payment even once and infact by the 5th time was watching my balance when it clocked over to see if it was actually happening or not, wondering if perhaps i needed to go find a button to redeem what I had collected...

It's definitely a great idea though and the fact it rolls over between deposits is again, really really nice.

Side note: Whilst I have been experiencing some ROTTEN runs of luck at Wintingo since last night, somehow I am also sitting pretty at nearly 6x my deposit .. the first time I've not busted out before doubling my money in weeks! Please lord say I have reached the other side of my money sucking chasm ??? ...

 

[Nifty29]

For a single session, this is true, and in such cases a traditional bonus would at least offer a chance to climb back out and get a better overall RTP, but the disadvantage is the WR. Wintingo, however, allow the unearned cashback to carry over, so a player that continues to deposit will get closer to the long term expected RTP, and thus would end up having a balancing good session that earned all the carried cashbacks from previous offers.

The original Clearplay DID allow the withdrawal of real money and winnings at any time, with the bonus then removed, it was simple in concept, but it didn't take long for Advantage Players to spot the main flaw, and it was to bet 200 on Baccarat (100 real, 100 bonus), and withdraw 200 on a winning bet, but lose only 100 if unlucky.

Clearplay did nothing to protect casinos against advantage players, so operators modified it, most only keeping the concept of game weightings, but going back to the traditional locking in of all money till WR was completed.

Most casinos still like traditional bonuses, and many players like the idea. What they DON'T like are all the complicated terms, and the fact that some casinos use them as "traps" to punish even the minor mistakes like a misclick, which is using them to maximise profit, rather than to protect the casino from determined Advantage Players.

This is an argument between two different attempts to address the issue, we have the bonus free cashback model vs the redesigned bonus model that should mean most players CANNOT ever reach a point where a casino confiscates their winnings, yet Advantage Players find that their usual strategies are blocked at source, such as overlimit bets being declined, or outstanding WR being increased in proportion to any breach of bet limits.

The thing that needs to be addressed now is ID for players. This is getting so complicated that some players just cannot comply, even though they are fine, honest, upstanding citizens, not devious scammers.

Just as some clubs and theme parks do, the industry should operate it's own system for giving players a universal ID that can be used at any casino. It would mean players getting thoroughly vetted and verified once, and with whatever ID and documents they get from their government, along with various database checks, and issued with a "Casino photo ID" card in the post, that they then use to prove their ID to each casino they play at.

If I buy an annual pass for the big theme park company in the UK, they don't ask me to show my passport each time I enter (relying then on an internal database to check my pass status), they issue me a photo pass valid for that year, and this is checked upon entry. This means that even without a passport or driving license, I would still be able to purchase an annual pass, something that would not be possible if they relied on government photo ID and a database check.

Like online casinos, a theme park is part of the "entertainment industry".

ID is totally irrelevant to this discussion.

Why would you even bring that up, besides the fact it is your "bugbear of the decade"?

 

[wintingo]

How do you mean ? You already have code written to do batch payments and just want a PM of specific requests? Or that you think it could be coded quickly if somebody sends you details of HOW it should be plugged in?

I totally agree that the option to let all the cashback build and collect in one go would be fantastic, as it stands I can definitely agree since signing up last night and collecting £12 of cashback I didn't notice receiving the payment even once and infact by the 5th time was watching my balance when it clocked over to see if it was actually happening or not, wondering if perhaps i needed to go find a button to redeem what I had collected...

It's definitely a great idea though and the fact it rolls over between deposits is again, really really nice.

Side note: Whilst I have been experiencing some ROTTEN runs of luck at Wintingo since last night, somehow I am also sitting pretty at nearly 6x my deposit .. the first time I've not busted out before doubling my money in weeks! Please lord say I have reached the other side of my money sucking chasm ??? ...

No we dont have the code for this and no unfortunately it cant be coded quickly. I was saying that if individual players want us to change the increments in how the cashpay is released then they can PM me. For example, currently its $2 in $60, we can customise per a player and make it $10 in $300 for example.

 

[chuchu59]

Hmm, I realized this a couple of years ago. BJ, Paigow Poker and Baccarat to name a few. If the implementation of a max bet ensures that the % of a bonus is not exceeded as in some cases its a good thing actually. Sorry I hadn't read the whole thread so maybe someone may already have brought this up.

 

[mrmark21]

I'm going to mosey on over to betatau later on tonight. Is that the clearplay system?

 

[Igor82]

I'm going to mosey on over to betatau later on tonight. Is that the clearplay system?

hey mark,

I've PM'd you the details

If anyone else wants a public explanation of how our bonus system works on this thread - please let me know, otherwise i explained it on our baptism thread.

Igor

 

[vinylweatherman]

ID is totally irrelevant to this discussion.

Why would you even bring that up, besides the fact it is your "bugbear of the decade"?

It's a relevant issue that requires more exposure, as at present it is being swept under the carpet, and attempts to produce a system better suited to the needs of players are continually stonewalled without any real explanation of just how and why the suggestions are "impossible to implement".

This thread has already brought about a wider debate over two alternative systems trying to overcome the problems with bonuses in the industry.

For many in the UK, such debate is largely irrelevant because they don't drive. It is a ridiculous state of affairs that one's ability or not to drive has such a significant bearing on one's eligibility to gamble online. It's NOT a problem in other countries because different systems are used where photo ID is issued independently of any qualifications, such as a driving test pass. If the UK is such an important market, the industry needs to take the issue more seriously, or suffer the consequences of bad PR.

The current shambles over ID is deterring potential players who bother to do their research before signing up, as they will realise that they can never be eligible to receive their withdrawals. The current problems are down to too FEW UK players realising this till it's too late, so the damage to the bottom line is far less than it would be if every UK player realised the potential problems that often only arise when they win.

If more players checked up the ID issue beforehand, there would be far fewer complaints, but this would be due to those players affected deciding not to play to start with, and this will only hurt the industry as this will be a class of customer unavailable to them.

With the industry now fully mainstream, with TV ads and program sponsorship, the negative issues will also start receiving more publicity. This deters even more customers, the same way that seeing a company featured on BBC Watchdog deters me from placing an order with them that I was otherwise going to place with them.

Online gambling has already been featured on Panorama and Dispatches, but it has focused mostly on Poker and sports betting, rather than casinos. The coverage has also tended to be negative towards the operators.

 

[petr1]

Yes, this is my whole point - these players should never join a site unless they do, they are a danger to themselves. If some sites idiot-proof then players will become even more complacent when playing at those who don't and will surely be stung eventually, then will appear here bleating after the event.

Far from idiot-proofing. This also prevents honest mistakes. Why would you be against something like this? This protects players, and that's a bad thing?