More BS from Inetbet!!

[jod5413]

Rusty and Silc,

You two have turned this thread into a major league excellent debate! Congrats to you guys and keep it up! I love seeing true "this vs that" threads.

Thanks.

 

[Rusty]

Sorry Silc, I misread your post and see where this quote came from now so I will answer your question.

Why are my bets void on some Tennis matches where a player retires and not on others?
The Betfair policy is to void matches where at least one set isn’t completed.

It is perfectly legitimate for a betting company to have different rules on postponements etc but the important distinction here is that where bets are not voided they stand, that is the player gets paid if the result is in their favour at time of abandonment/postponement whatever according to that companies particular policy.
If the bet is voided according to those same rules then the players bet is returned.
In no instance do the rules state that they will retain bets that are void which is essentially what I am arguing Inetbet are doing.

Inetbet can come here and argue that they have the right to retain these bets if they like and I will listen to their case.
If they charged an administration fee for returning deposits outside of the limitations of the bonus rules and made it clear this fee would be charged in the T&C's and how much it would be that would be transparent at least even though I personally would disagree with such a policy.

I will try to simplify things by sticking to this particular case which I am sure is not unique.

The player deposits $15......BRB just checking T&C's on bonus... can't be bothered digging them up but let's assume a 30x D/+B WR on a 100% match bonus.

The player now has a $900 playthrough requirement attached to their deposit(30x30)
Now with Inetbets policy as it stands if that player is fortunate enough to "win" and make playthrough the best they can hope for is to have their winnings void and removed and their $15 returned.
All other players now have a playthrough of $900 just to have the chance their deposit gets returned!

Again Inetbet, if they intend to keep these void bets, could put in their T&C's;
"Any deposit made that breaches the T&C's of the bonus will still have the wagering T&C's of the bonus attached but any wins will be deducted if and when a cashout request is made"

Now that is exactly what is happening but when written in black and white it looks not only like a draconian measure but it also appears to contradict itself.
(All winning bets are void but all losing bets are not)
If you can find that in the T&C's of any sportsbook or Casino out there I suggest you give them a very wide berth.

I hope that makes it a little clearer where I am coming from even you still disagree with me on principle.

 

[silcnlayc]

Rusty: In no instance do the rules state that they will retain bets that are void which is essentially what I am arguing Inetbet are doing.

Ok, I am seeing it a little better ...but here is where your argument fails IMO...the player deposits, collects the bonus plays for an hour then loses (but breaks the T&C's by accident or on purpose , whichever). No one is the wiser because nothing has happened to culminate in the end except for a clear account (no more money). Finished, ended etc etc..and the player has enjoyed a few hours of play with both their monies and the casinos.

Now, lets look at it on the other hand...same scenerio..the player deposits, collects bonus, breaks the T&C's (on pupose or not, which really doesn't mastter) plays for hours and then they end up with a balance to withdraw...here is where it comes down to..the player enjoyed the casino, the games and had hours of entertainment on the casinos money just as the previous one did but this one wants to withdraw..you cannot void the play time they have enjoyed for hours because it has been completed, used whatever, just as player one did but this player was fortunate enough to reach the culmation point of the withdraw..it is like going out to dinner and eating 99.9% of it and then point out , hey look, a hair! and then demand the dinner to be free...even if there was no hair...and the dinner was enjoyed right to the end..should they get their money back too?

Why should player 2 benefit in all ways that player one did and then get an additional reward in the end by getting their deposit back when they knowingly broke the T&C's?? This is where I am floundering in understanding your perception ....this is not a void play because it has already happened and has already been COMPLETED. You can only void something that has not been intitiated or started.

This is where I see rewarding the player for not following the rules and if by some chance they scream loud enough or make a fuss ...some will get paid their winnings by a casino "bending" the rules as some want, some do not...which is wrong all the way around. The player played wrong, won, and should forfeit their deposit because it has already been earned by the casino for the time of play the players has had. IMO.

.

 

[Rusty]

OK Silc, obviously you are seeing things from a very different perspective to me.
I think your perspective is unfair and unprincipled and I have explained why but you disagree.
I will give it one more go using your own examples and if you still disagree fair enough, you are perfectly entitled to.

From the moment the T&C is breached all bets are void. (the result of the bet/s is totally irrelevant in this instance, as is enjoyment or frustration suffered by the player because there are no results. The bet is not resolved as win,lose or draw - it is void)
You are somehow trying to say that real money wagers that are not resolved are somehow not void because the player may or may not of been entertained.

In this instance the T&C apply from the moment the deposit is made.
Players deposits don't magically turn into play money just because you have some notion they may or may not enjoy the experience.
They are void bets plain and simple and the player can hardly be blamed that the Casino accepts deposits and bets without informing the player they are void.
What should happen is that the bonus should not be applied, the player informed and the deposit treated as normal.
Again, it is not the players fault that RTG and Inetbet have such an inadequate and shitty system for dealing with such circumstances and much less should they be penalised for it by the Casino retaining what amounts to void bets.

This idea you have of the player getting value for money makes absolutely no sense to me.
Take your tennis example,
The game is abandoned after 1 set or whatever and all bets deemed void.
You think the Sportsbook should keep all those bets and tell the players, "Hey you watched a full set of tennis and at that time thought your bet stood so you still had the pleasure of a wager even though you could not win so we are keeping your money"
Seriously?

I will leave at that because I am just covering the same ground but taking different routes in an attempt to explain why it is wrong the Casino retains bets that were void and therefore the player could not win.
A bet/wager requires the prospect that the bet can be won or it surely is not a wager, a tax or fine or theft or whatever but not a wager.
It really is that simple.

 

[Nate]

By the way Inet, I hope you are busy refunding all losing deposits that have broken these rules as well - just to show what an outstanding and fair Casino you really are - after all you are sticklers for the rules.

Hi Rusty,

I am 100% with you on this. I am yet to see a reply from Inetbet (As usual) addressing the above.

Scenario A: Player deposits $10, $10, $11... loses the bonus plus deposits - Does the Casino bring this to their attention and say - You have voided this promotion by breaching the T&C's on the last deposit - all deposits are returned. Uhhmmm... Inet to confirm but i am in serious doubt about that.

Sceario B: Player deposits $10, $10, $11 Wins on the Bonus and deposit.. Casino cites T&C's and voids the winnings returning the deposits.

In any given scenario, the Casino is in a Win/Win situation... the player ALWAYS loses... Now to be fair, if the T&C's are so STRICTLY enforced (even for a measly $4) .. are they enfoced ONLY when the player wins?

Silc... No disrespect intended here, but if you feel that you gamble for Entertainment then you could play in Practice Mode all day. We gamble because we want to win / make money ... thats why the thrill sticks... The Entertainemtn bit comes in where you can actually say, you had a good try and were not successful... Nobody pays to see reels spinning with no thought of winning.

 

[silcnlayc]

Rusty: I will leave at that because I am just covering the same ground but taking different routes in an attempt to explain why it is wrong the Casino retains bets that were void and therefore the player could not win.
A bet/wager requires the prospect that the bet can be won or it surely is not a wager, a tax or fine or theft or whatever but not a wager.
It really is that simple.

About time you said something I can wrap my teeth around and grasp...thank you! I do see what you are saying now in a way..It brought back a memories from my (horse) racing days when a horse was in the gate and did not break through the gate and run..and the race still ran and finished but the horse was declared a non starter and all bets were returned for that one horse in any combination bet. I am getting it...OMG...how interesting!

Hmm..I am going to to ponder the thought of this and just when does the responsibility of the player comes in to play on this kind of betting with bonuses..and who carries the cost of this when a player does break the T&C's...etc..this is knowingly...and then demand their funds back? Just wondering when the player needs to step up and take some of the responsibility of this kind of play (with bonuses and T&C'c).....

Nate: Silc... No disrespect intended here, but if you feel that you gamble for Entertainment then you could play in Practice Mode all day. We gamble because we want to win / make money ... thats why the thrill sticks... The Entertainment bit comes in where you can actually say, you had a good try and were not successful... Nobody pays to see reels spinning with no thought of winning.

None taken at all...I bring in the terminology of entertainment only for the players that keep quoting that and claiming it is for "entertinment" purposes...I am all for winning and profiting.. sorry you misunderstood that.

.

 

[Jasminebed]

While I do find gambling entertaining, part of that entertainment comes from the hope that I will win real money. If I just want to watch reels spin, there is fun mode.

For this particular promotion, we are not talking about breaking T&C through game play, we are talking about a coupon being redeemed that should not have been redeemed, and without any play the player had no chance of winning.

This coupon series is not a one off, or the first time Inetbet has run something like this. A little bit of programming that reads something like

IF Coupon 2, Check if Coupon 1 redeemed. If no, reject coupon, send player message "You must claim this promotion in order"
IF Coupon 2 is greater than Coupon 1, reject coupon
Call player message "You can not redeem this coupon for greater than Coupon 1"

IF Coupon 3, check if Coupon 1 and 2 redeemed. IF no, call player message "You must claim the coupons in order" If yes, check IF Coupon 3 is greater than Coupon 1, if it is, reject coupon, send player message "You may not redeem this coupon for greater than Coupon 1"​

would disable players from claiming incorrectly. Another alternative would be to only credit a bonus for x percent of the initial deposit. That way the bonus sum remains the same, but the player would stand a chance of winning. They would have funds of their own tied up with a WR attached that they did not have to claim that bonus. If the player was expecting a larger bonus, they would be contacting support to find out why they did not receive the bonus sum they expected, and it could be explained to them then.

It is probably unrealistic for us to expect Inetbet to comb back through all their previous promotions to see if anyone claimed it and lost and return funds, but I would hope they improve their system so that bets that cannot possibly be won are not accepted.

I would trust that if any players that think they may have lost by an incorrect claiming of such a series of coupons and contact Inetbet, that Inetbet would return the invalid deposit. Inetbet usually seems to do the fair thing.

Oh, and Nate:

Scenario A: Player deposits $10, $10, $11... loses the bonus plus deposits - Does the Casino bring this to their attention and say - You have voided this promotion by breaching the T&C's on the last deposit - all deposits are returned. Uhhmmm... Inet to confirm but i am in serious doubt about that.

Sceario B: Player deposits $10, $10, $11 Wins on the Bonus and deposit.. Casino cites T&C's and voids the winnings returning the deposits.

Only the third deposit broke the terms, it is only the third one that should have been denied in the first place, and should be refunded.

 

[dominique]

Only the third deposit broke the terms, it is only the third one that should have been denied in the first place, and should be refunded.

Thats the way I see it. Why was the bonus even given when the deposit didn't match the rules?

If I deposit $50 when the minimum deposit to claim a bonus is $100, do I get the bonus too? I shouldn't. Giving it out in the first place when terms are clearly not fulfilled from the start just ends up causing hurt feelings when someone wins and then is told they can't have the money.

 

[Rusty]

Hmm..I am going to to ponder the thought of this and just when does the responsibility of the player comes in to play on this kind of betting with bonuses..and who carries the cost of this when a player does break the T&C's...etc..this is knowingly...and then demand their funds back? Just wondering when the player needs to step up and take some of the responsibility of this kind of play (with bonuses and T&C'c).....

There is no cost Silc.
All the casino need do is set up a system where the bonus is denied and the player is left with their deposit to play.
That is the Casinos responsibility not the players.

Now you are asking what happens in a hypothetical situation where the Casino suspects the player broke the T&C's in full knowledge in order to gain an advantage.
(That would be very hard to prove)
In that instance the Casino should return the players deposit and close their account.
Alternatively they could have a T&C where an administration fee is charged as I have explained previously.

What they shouldn't do is be judge and jury and
give the player forty lashes/ send them a virus/ give their email address to the virtual group/ arbitrarily confiscate their deposits or retain void bets just because they don't like the look of them.

Since Inetbet obviously go through every withdrawal request with a very fine tooth comb they are at little risk if any.
If they want to reduce that risk to zero then they should implement a system that disallows incorrect deposit amounts, you know like the minimum deposit requirement in the cashier that works perfectly fine -
or the one they use on cashout requests which also seems to work perfectly fine.

So why haven't they done this?
Because they are the ones in the win/win situation and not the player.

 

[silcnlayc]

Rusty: There is no cost Silc.
All the casino need do is set up a system where the bonus is denied and the player is left with their deposit to play.
That is the Casinos responsibility not the players.

Now you are asking what happens in a hypothetical situation where the Casino suspects the player broke the T&C's in full knowledge in order to gain an advantage.
(That would be very hard to prove)
In that instance the Casino should return the players deposit and close their account.
Alternatively they could have a T&C where an administration fee is charged as I have explained previously.

What they shouldn't do is be judge and jury and
give the player forty lashes/ send them a virus/ give their email address to the virtual group/ arbitrarily confiscate their deposits or retain void bets just because they don't like the look of them.

Since Inetbet obviously go through every withdrawal request with a very fine tooth comb they are at little risk if any.
If they want to reduce that risk to zero then they should implement a system that disallows incorrect deposit amounts, you know like the minimum deposit requirement in the cashier that works perfectly fine -
or the one they use on cashout requests which also seems to work perfectly fine.

So why haven't they done this?
Because they are the ones in the win/win situation and not the player.

Ok, now you are scarring me a little Rusty because I am seeing something here and you almost got me over to your side of this thought process...I am still stuck on the players role in all this...they carry some responsibility in this I truly believe...( I guess I better say "so far" to cover my butt) ...

.

 

[dominique]

Maybe my view is just too simplisitic, but IMO the casino should not give out bonuses on deposits that do not qualify. Period.

If you claim a bonus and you get credited for it, it is the casino's decision and the casino's fault.

If I want to buy something from a vending machine that costs a one dollar bill, and I only have 90 cents in change, and I ask you to please give me the dollar for my change, and you know it's 90 cents I have, and you agree, it's your decision to give me the extra 10 cents. You are not going to wait until I get my can of soda and then take it away from me. That just makes no common sense, and it's going to cause friction.

The situation becomes a lot more convoluted if a bonus was claimed with the proper prerequisites but there is some kind of fraud involved.

But that was clearly not the case here, the player deposited TOO MUCH money, and was given the bonus.

IMO this is the casinos fault for giving out a bonus that did not fit the prerequisites.

That said, it's always "player beware". You need to watch your axx, here and in any transaction anywhere.

Personally, I stay away from bonuses. The way I see it, I am gambling, taking a risk that may leave me with hardly anything because I am on a bad roll, or it may leave me with some entertainment value if I can play for a decent amount of time, or it just may pay off with a win. When I take that bonus, I add additional jeopardy to the gamble, because the elusive win may not turn out to be a win for me since I am stuck paying the piper with wagering requirements that could swallow my win.

So I see bonuses as double jeopardy. But it's all in the eyes of the beholder.

However all that may be, there is clearly no fraudulent intent by the player, and the casino clearly made the decision to give the bonus despite an improper deposit. Punishing this player (and it does feel like punishment when someone takes away your can of Soda) is simply bad business.

 

[whitespade]

More BS from iNetBet

Be careful people. Seems like iNetBet is up to their old trickery again (changing bonus terms).

Finally had a decent session with the third coupon of the "tasty trio" promo.

Deposited 60, 40, then 50.

Now they're saying that deposit #3 cannot be more than deposit #2.

Its no longer that the deposits can't be more than deposit #1.


Dear nygirl30,

I really fail to see your problem here. You did not adhere to the rules of a promotion you decided to take part in. I am sorry if you did not read the rules but they are very clear.

When claiming coupons #2 & #3 the deposit used to claim these coupons must not be larger than that used to claim coupon #1. If this is the case play will be void.


I should have known that something was up since I was actually getting some decent hits on their slots- FOR ONCE.


Won $700 yesterday. Today I have $50.

Check that- after 55 $1 spins, I have nada.

F***kin scammers.

 

[coxwel]

sorry to say but it seems you missed to read the terms carefully.

some days ago as inet send out the newsletter along with this promo i went through the terms and still remember this rule.

some weeks ago another player here had the same problem.

its clearly stated in the rules that 2nd, 3rd deposit must not be larger than 1st otherwise winnings get voided.

the reason is pretty simple, as the 3rd coupon is the largest they want to avoid people making min deposits on coupon 1 and 2 and then deposit big for the 3rd as it has the highest match percentage.


considering the rules were always there and never changed its unfair to talk of rogue or scam.





cheers

coxwel

 

[vinylweatherman]

The problem is the lack of software support from RTG for these more creative promotions. iNetBet should go back to RTG and ask them to include better coupon management tools.

RTG have made improvements, operators can now make coupons account specific in order to "bonus ban" certain players before they even manage to claim a coupon, rather than worrying about coupon codes being "leaked" on the various bonus hunting websites.

RTG need to add a tool that can CONDITIONALLY allow subesequent coupons in a sequence based on correct completion of the previous coupon in the order. This tool should also be able to reject the loading of deposits onto the latter coupons offering higher bonuses.

This offer has progressively higher and higher WR the higher the percentage bonus is, so the situation is NOT quite what the rep has us believe. The higher bonuses are NOT "more vulnerable to abuse" by loading the deposits, since the WR increases from 15x on the first coupon, to 25x on the last. Increasing WR negates the advantage of having a higher percentage bonus.
MGS casinos do NOT increase the WR on larger percentage bonuses, and this has NOT lead to vast numbers of MGS casinos going bust. The MGS system (when used properly) does NOT lead to all these problems. Players merely need to be familiar with ONE set of bonus account terms, and provided they are followed, should not suffer confiscation of winnings after the fact.

iNetBet claim their email support system is "fit for purpose", yet there are continual failures down to the "selective" nature of which emails they will reply to. This leads to situations like the following..

I have never played at inetbet cause they never reply to my emails. Been trying to send emails for 2 years now and nothing I wanted to deposit long ago, but if they can't answer emails then they lost my business

TWO YEARS

Hardly what I would call a "prompt reply"

How exactly does a player in this situation get in touch with iNetBet to COMPLAIN that all their emails are getting ignored. This player simply sent another email, and another, but these too were ignored like the first.

Sometimes this happens to a player with money at stake, and they ONLY find an alternative way to communicate with iNetBet when they have reached the stage of venting on a forum, where they might be told that there ARE "reps" available on SOME forums (such as this one), where they could try the forum messaging functions, rather than email, to get through.

We can also expect iNetBet to PAY a player who rigidly STICKS to the rules as written, even though they have played right to the edge of what is allowed, and with the clear intention of beating a coupon for maximum profit.

 

[Nifty29]

Here is the terms from the email - they are very clear.

Valid as per dates above

Enter coupon code: WGT8C
Deposit between $10 - $100
Receive 50% Match Bonus.
Play through deposit & Bonus 15x on given games.
Please see terms and conditions.

(This coupon must be redeemed first)

Valid as per dates above

Enter coupon code:Y6NT4
Deposit between $10 - $100
Receive 75% Match Bonus.
Play through deposit & Bonus 20x on given games.
Please see terms and conditions.

(Coupon #2 can only be redeemed if coupon#1 has been used . Deposit must not be larger than that used for coupon #1 )


Valid as per dates above

Enter coupon code: QXD6A
Deposit between $10 - $100
Receive 100% Match Bonus.
Play through deposit & Bonus 25x on given games. Please see terms and conditions.

(Coupon #3 can only be redeemed if prior two coupons have been used in order. Deposit must not be larger than that used for coupon #2)

Sorry Whitespade but the casino is right this time - you did not read and understand the terms of the bonuses.

I have used this promo before and it made perfect sense to me, and obviously does to the vast majority of players as you are only the second person to indicate otherwise.

You have been around long enough to know about reading terms etc so I am surprised you even posted about it.

Fair enough if you are annoyed with yourself for not doing your homework, but dont drag Inetbet through the mud when they have done absolutely nothing wrong.

Be careful people. Seems like iNetBet is up to their old trickery again (changing bonus terms).

Even if they did change them (and Im pretty sure they didnt), it is up to you to check the terms before you claim the promotion. Don't blame others for your own mistake.

F***kin scammers.

Wow. Unwarranted and unacceptable IMO.

 

[Casinomeister]

Be careful people. Seems like iNetBet is up to their old trickery again (changing bonus terms).

Finally had a decent session with the third coupon of the "tasty trio" promo.

Deposited 60, 40, then 50.

Now they're saying that deposit #3 cannot be more than deposit #2.

Its no longer that the deposits can't be more than deposit #1.


Dear nygirl30,

...

Are you Tammy?

 

[whitespade]

you did not read and understand the terms of the bonuses.

True, I did not read the terms THIS weekend, but I'm almost positive that these terms were changed. Check out the Reps posts in this thread (she only states that 2nd and 3rd deposits cannot more than the 1st).

Kind of slick how they change their their t&cs (like the wagering limit on free chip nonsense). Its like they want us to screw up.

And yes I screwed up. But as a VERY loyal player who almost always loses here and always follows the tcs- I would think that it would be obvious to them that this was a petty mistake and I was not trying to abuse this promo. Oh well- they definitely cured my iNetBet addiction. Good riddance.

[/QUOTE]Wow. Unwarranted and unacceptable IMO.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, posted this right after they confiscated my winnings. I apoligize.

 

[Casinomeister]

True, I did not read the terms THIS weekend, but I'm almost positive that these terms were changed. Check out the Reps posts in this thread (she only states that 2nd and 3rd deposits cannot more than the 1st).

Kind of slick how they change their their t&cs (like the wagering limit on free chip nonsense). Its like they want us to screw up.

And yes I screwed up. But as a VERY loyal player who almost always loses here and always follows the tcs- I would think that it would be obvious to them that this was a petty mistake and I was not trying to abuse this promo. Oh well- they definitely cured my iNetBet addiction. Good riddance.



Sorry, posted this right after they confiscated my winnings. I apoligize.

you didn't answer my question.

 

[whitespade]

Are you Tammy?

No, sorry.

Copied that from the thread.

peace

 

[RedAndi]

Deposited 60, 40, then 50.



When claiming coupons #2 & #3 the deposit used to claim these coupons must not be larger than that used to claim coupon #1. If this is the case play will be void.

Don't know about this promo but if I am reading this right isn't the OP RIGHT?!?
It says you can not deposit more than your 1st deposit on the second 2.
S/he didn't deposit more on the second 2.
Why do I always feel like such a dillweed when these posts/terms confuse me!
OK now someone explain what I am not seeing, and TY! LOL

 

[RedAndi]

OK I just saw Niftys post with the different terms.
So did the casino change them, was OP going by old terms, wrong terms....or what?

 

[Rusty]

If this is correct and the bonus promotion still has the same name then Inetbet are obviously guilty of just setting up a player trap.
There is nothing more rogue than subtle changes to the T&C's of a promotion already running and denying winnings for breach of those T&C's.

Whitespade you might consider a PAB.

Can any other players confirm or deny the T&C's have changed without notification since the promo started?

 

[whitespade]

Dear xxxxxxx,

Yes they may have been posted a few weeks back however to reduce any more confusion the terms were updated and made very specific indeed.
They are the ones listed below which show where the new coupon is listed so that there cannot possible be ay confusion

Valid as per dates above

Enter coupon code: QXD6A
Deposit between $10 - $100
Receive 100% Match Bonus.
Play through deposit & Bonus 25x on given games. Please see terms and conditions.

(Coupon #3 can only be redeemed if prior two coupons have been used in order. Deposit must not be larger than that used for coupon #2)


This was not in any way an attempt to deceive anyone quite the opposite in fact the terms were changed to make it very clear.

You could not possibly have seent he coupon code without these terms being visible and on the same screen.

If you did not read the terms I am sorry but that is not our fault.
You cannot then look at old terms in a previous thread on a forum.

Like I say I am sorry that this has occurred but the terms a VERY clear however you simply chose not to read them.
However you cannot really blame that on us.

Regards
iNetBet Support


This shows that the terms were in fact changed. Like I said, I'm almost positive that it used to be that only the 2nd and 3rd deposits could not exceed the 1st. Never said anything about the 2nd and 3rd or whatever.

Not going to PAB because as far as I'm concerned it's a dead issue (although it is more BS). And I guess they are right, in theory.

Anyways, after the intial anger/dissapointment wore off, I now see this as a blessing since I will never consider spending another dime at iNet.

IMO it all boils down to what AudiManinBoro said in the 4th post of this thread.

Why would they want to lose a player who puts money into their casino every time they get paid, hardly ever wins, always redeposits their wininings when they do win (and then some), probably would have eventually redeposited all of these winnings (and then some), and probably would have kept losing as usual? All because of something so petty and an obvious mistake.

So hey, its their loss. Not mine.


Another positve thing is that other players who read this will be aware that they need make sure that they read the t&c's before EVERY deposit at iNetBet. Pretty ridiculous IMO. Sure as heck don't have to do that at any other casino that I play at.


Thanks for letting me vent CM

 

[all4greed]

Why can't INetBet include something like "Note There Is A T&C Change" in their emails promoting on going bonuses? No player wants to double and triple check T&C's to see if there was a change that happened a week ago, a day ago, or an hour ago.

Either these casino managers don't think in a proactive manner or they just don't think...

 

[jod5413]

Why can't INetBet include something like "Note There Is A T&C Change" in their emails promoting on going bonuses? No player wants to double and triple check T&C's to see if there was a change that happened a week ago, a day ago, or an hour ago.

Either these casino managers don't think in a proactive manner or they just don't think...

I would rather think that it is the players that don't think. This is not that hard of a promotion to understand. It is, after all, the players that deposit money that should take the time to read and understand the promotions.

It isn't brain surgery, after all.