Total ESoft says that without white labels there would be fewer casinos on the net, and says this as though this was a bad thing
Most player complaints are related to bonuses, and, more specifically, when they play at more than one individual casino that is backed by a group, be this a white label scheme of a group with many casinos.
Players are faced with confiscated winnings, bans etc because they played at what was marketed to them as a different casino, but turned out to be just another "skin" related to a big gaming group. Rogue casinos deliberately engage in this in order to lead players into breaching rules about sister sites, and then use this as an excuse to deny payment.
The other white-label scheme from playshare has also been discussed, and the first issue that arose was with regard to players having accounts at more than one of the white label sites and/or the main casino. This necessitated the introduction of some complex rules that differ between the main Grand Mondial casino and "those operated by Naden". Playshare have refused to enlighten us to who, or what, "Naden" is. It could be a company, a trading name, or just a person who has gone one better than affiliate.
Total ESoft defends their use of the white label scheme with the old line of "well, everyone else is doing it". Well, you could also argue that robbery is something that it seems "everybody else is doing", as is spamming as a marketing tool. The fact that "everybody else is doing it" does not make it right, and these critisisms are not just directed at Total ESoft, other casinos indulging in this practice have been critisized, and one, Fortune Lounge, was dropped from the accredited list for failing to get a grip on the problem.
With the white label "skin" model, it is even easier for rogue "affiliates" to bend the rules because steps have been taken by Total ESoft to hide their identity.
Well, we haven't seen any real marketing for Total ESoft, and mayne this is a good thing, but with this white label scheme running, the obvious question is WHY has there been no real effort made by these white label owners to market their skins to the playing public. This makes the scheme look like a failure, it has failed to generate a flow of new players.
The "reciprical link" statement is an explanation of how these links exist, however, why are they from a page of completely meaningless and uninformative drivel, how on earth would that encourage a player to go have a look or even try Casino Lobby.
The "sleaze" I mentioned is demonstrated by the stream of half-truths, unwillingness to directly answer questions, allowing marketing by entities who are not prepared to publically be identified so that they can be held to account IF they overstep the marketing mark.
If players WERE to receive spam for Casino Lobby, to whom would they complain? The marketer could be one of these confidential clients, and will complaints directly to Total ESoft be dealt with in the same way that the other casinos have dealt with issues related to spam (usually, WE didn't send it, it must be from an affiliate or marketing company, and you have to take it up with them to get unsubscribed).
It is not so much white labels that irritate players, it is the nest of unnecessary confusions that result with who owns what, and what constitutes "an account at one or more of our sister sites" when it comes to the rationing of bonuses to players.
If I see some genuine attempt to market Casino Lobby through these white label sites, I will be prepared to believe that they are indeed being used to get players from niche markets, but so far I have seen dozens of "Casino Lobby" skins, none of which appear anywhere other than in the nests of "reciprical links" that festoon many casino sites.
Perhaps some of the owners of the white label skins could be encouraged to come here and tell us why they joined the scheme, and why it is going to get players into viewing and trying Casino Lobby that would not otherwise have been tempted had only the original Casino Lobby website been there.
We would be particularly interested in hearing how this improves things for PLAYERS, so far, much of the white label schemes only benefit the casino operators, while at best being neutral for players, and in many cases detrimental as it restricts their ability to decide NOT to play at a specific casino group, and be certain that any "new" casino they find is genuinely a "different casino".
If casinos want to convince us that white labels will work, they must first get some law and order into the CURRENT system of using affiliates to market their brands, some of whom resort to spam and misdirection. I simply do not believe it when a rep says they cannot do anything about the rogues, it's BS, these affiliates are PAID by the casinos, and non-payment and confiscation of THEIR affiliate "winnings" (naturally, on the grounds of "marketing abuse")will soon make spam a good deal less attractive an option for them.