New Rival casinos - lost the bonus plot?

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
At least 3 new Rival casinos will go live in September (two already have), but I my fear that they will follow the other recent new ones with totally unrealistic sign-up bonuses is being realised...

In my opinion the "industry standard" should be what Microgaing have;
30 times the bonus amount, and fully cashable.
This still makes the bonus +EV for the casino, but at least it gives the players a realistic chance of completing the WR without losing their whole deposit.
If Microgaming casino can do this, why can't Rival casinos???? :confused:

A good example was new Ruby Royal who launched last month with a ridiculous WR of Bonus x 50 and to make it 10 x worse it was Phantom! :eek2:
They did reduce this to Bonus x 30 when I pointed out how ludicrous it was, but it still remains phantom.

The first new Rival this month has gone with Bonus x 60 - only TWICE what MG casinos offer...

The second new Rival this month has gone with this:-

View attachment 19023
(Note: The word "reversal" is the worst spelling of the word "deposit" that I have ever seen!)

I am almost speechless about this one. Surely this is the WORST sign-up bonus anywhere on the internet!
For slots you have to wager Bonus x 160...
For the allowed card games it's Bonus x 320... :eek2:
If that's not ludicrous enough - it's PHANTOM!!!

It you took the maximum bonus & played slots you would have to wager $64,000 and get a return of 100% or more on games with an average RTP of 96% in order to be able to cash out anything...
Do you feel lucky, punk? ... Well, do you?


As an affiliate and as a player these bonuses are totally useless to me - I certainly wouldn't take a bonus with such a crazy WR, and I wouldn't expect many other players would either.
I'm still listing ALL the Rivals on my site because despite their insane welcome bonuses I still trust them to treat their players fairly, and some people are happy to try new places without taking bonuses. Not for me, but that's their prerogative! :rolleyes:


So what do YOU think - have most new Rival casinos lost the plot over bonuses?
Or do you think they are just trying to encourage people to play without bonuses?

KK
 

zebedy

No!!!! Im Spartacus
webmeister
MM
The bonuses have deffinately been creeping up over the last 5/6/7/8/9 rivals that have been brought out,
Hence ive never deposited a dime with them,and probably never will,
there has to be a reason why there W/R is so high ?
i think some people/opperators have seen how popular rival have become and are trying to jump on the badwagon,maybe without a decent startup bankroll and are putting incredibly ludicrous restrictions on W/Rs as not to get hit big,
as we all know a $1 bet can win you $1000 on some of there slots and if the W/R are only 15x you would expect to cash out something,but with a W/R of 60x plus the chance is probably zero,

I blame the smart bonus hunters like yourself :p casino's are catching on to it
 

3Dice

I-Gaming Industry Representative
In my opinion the "industry standard" should be what Microgaing have;
30 times the bonus amount, and fully cashable.
This still makes the bonus +EV for the casino, but at least it gives the players a realistic chance of completing the WR without losing their whole deposit.

Hi KK,

30 times bonus, fully casheable is very much -EV for the casino.

I know the formula you and others here at CM use all the time that
arrives you at that conclusion - but that formula is fundamentally
flawed. (in short - those that lose don't generate enough playthrough,
but the bonus money went in the machine - and will come out.)

Instead of trying to understand it starting from that flawed formula,
lets do it the other way around. I'll simplify the game setup in this
sample so its easier to follow.

As game we will use a simplified slot machine. A high variance one
since that's easier to think about. Our simple slot machine has three
reels with 10 symbols each. There's 9 loser and 1 win symbol on each
reel. There's only one center winline so we can immeadiately see that
the winning combination occurs 1 in 1000 times on average. It's a 95%
machine so the win combination pays out 950 times betsize.

Now, a thousand people signup to play this slot at KK's casino. (good
name btw). They all take advantage of the bonus offer where the WR
is 30 times the bonus amount, and they all deposit 5 to do a single spin.
Lets look at the maths ..

1000 people deposit $5 = $5.000
100% bonus from KK casino = $5.000

999 people lose their spin : $9990 in total stake, house edge on this stake : 499.5

1 person hits and wins $9500 - stake there is $10, house edge on that is .5

This person now has $140 left in wagering ($5*30-$10) .. assuming those 14 spins are
all losers (he could hit again - chance of that is ~1.4%) he generates another
$140 in stake with an extra house edge of 7.

So KK casino spends $5000 in bonuses and makes back 507 - a net loss for the
casino of 4493. Now as the machines become less variant that number goes down,
but for the bonus to become a no-loss deal for the casino, the total stake
must be $100.000 which would represent a machine so low variant its highest
win would be more in the range of 2 times betsize..

In short, 30 times B and fully casheable is very much player EV+. If you
only play under those conditions and you play high variance slots, then
you are sure to end up ahead.

Cheers,

Enzo
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
So KK casino spends $5000 in bonuses and makes back 507 - a net loss for the casino of 4493...
Riiiiiiiight....
Well I don't know mate, but I reckon one of us is barking mad! :p

I'm not going to pretend I understand your example at all, but this is the maths I use:-

Player deposits $100 and get $100 bonus.
WR Bx30 = $3,000
Player wagers $3,000 on a 95% slot; return = $3,000 x 95% = $2,850
$3,000 - $2,850 = player loss of $150.
He started with $200 but $100 was bonus chips, therefore he has lost $50 of his deposit.
The casino has made +$50.

I'm sorry, but I can't see any way you can argue against that... :confused:

KK

PS: If what you're saying is true, how come all the 80+ MG casinos who offer Bx30 bonus haven't gone bust yet?

PPS: I don't know what you're smoking today... but Robwin wants some of it! :D
 

Nifty29

Dormant account
Well I received a ND welcome chip of $50 a Vegas Days Casino.

The terms were:

100xB WR
Max cashout = $50
Bonus non-withdrawable

Tough to beat that one!

Oh, and some of the emails I received with follow-up offers said "Get 200% bonus at Rockbet!". Well lets hope they didnt want the connection kept secret.

I may be adding something VERY interesting to this discussion in the next 7 days which will make your hair curl, but I am doing the right thing for the moment and letting some processes take their course.
 

3Dice

I-Gaming Industry Representative
Riiiiiiiight....
Well I don't know mate, but I reckon one of us is barking mad! :p

I'm not going to pretend I understand your example at all, but this is the maths I use:-

Player deposits $100 and get $100 bonus.
WR Bx30 = $3,000
Player wagers $3,000 on a 95% slot; return = $3,000 x 95% = $2,850
$3,000 - $2,850 = player loss of $150.
He started with $200 but $100 was bonus chips, therefore he has lost $50 of his deposit.
The casino has made +$50.

I'm sorry, but I can't see any way you can argue against that... :confused:
To see the error in your thinking just repeat it 100 times at high risk bets.

so you loose 99 times in one big 200 bet .. after 99 times there's how much in the machine ? 99*$200 = 19800. When you win, on average it will be 95% of that so 95% of 20k = 19k. And then you got 3000 WR to clear ..


KK

PS: If what you're saying is true, how come all the 80+ MG casinos who offer Bx30 bonus haven't gone bust yet?
Because they dont offer it on each deposit.

PPS: I don't know what you're smoking today... but Robwin wants some of it! :D
Cheers,

Enzo
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Oh, and some of the emails I received with follow-up offers said "Get 200% bonus at Rockbet!". Well lets hope they didnt want the connection kept secret.
I don't think that's ever been a secret - Vegas Days is a sister casino to Rockbet.
What I'm slightly confused about is "Rockbet John" who was supposed to have left This is Vegas to manage Rockbet - but there are still so many similarities & ties between these two (now three) casinos that I can't believe he no longer has any involvement with TiV...


I may be adding something VERY interesting to this discussion in the next 7 days which will make your hair curl...
Sorry, that's impossible.
All my hair fell out when I read the terms of that new Rival casino today... :p

KK
 

silcnlayc

Just one more spin pleez!
PABaccred
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Bonuses are gifts with attachments, not a players right. If you do not like the attachment to the gift, refuse the gift. Simple. JMO...

.
 

anniemac

Ueber Meister
PABnoaccred
MM
While you are correct about bonuses being a gift with attachments, I think the point of this thread is why give a "gift" and then make it impossible to enjoy.

If I get a bonus offer, either ND or deposit, the very first thing I look at is the wagering requirements. Why in the world would I take a 100% deposit bonus with 80x wagering requirements non cashable when I can get a 100% deposit bonus with a 30x wagering requirement that is fully cashable.

Bonuses like the ones with the huge wagering requirements remind me of Cirrus etal.

I'm not a bonus wh**re either. I play as much with as without but I won't spend my money on a bonus that I believe I will never be able to meet.
 

silcnlayc

Just one more spin pleez!
PABaccred
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Why in the world would I take a 100% deposit bonus with 80x wagering requirements non cashable when I can get a 100% deposit bonus with a 30x wagering requirement that is fully cashable.
Exactly my point...a lousy gift is still just a lousy gift...JMO

.
 

WonderingSpirit

Casino critic
Hi KK,


1000 people deposit $5 = $5.000
100% bonus from KK casino = $5.000

999 people lose their spin : $9990 in total stake, house edge on this stake : 499.5

1 person hits and wins $9500 - stake there is $10, house edge on that is .5



Enzo
And the player that deposits 5$, makes a spin and wins will get his account closed because to the casino thats irregular betting pattern :p
 

chuchu59

gambling addict
PABnonaccred
CAG
Stop arguing guys:D I am playing at Vanguard casino, a new Rival right now. There is a freebie of $20 with 25 WRs. The SUB is a 100% match bonus which is cashable and carries a 25x WR. Seems reasonable to me.
 

bb28

Meister Member
I may be adding something VERY interesting to this discussion in the next 7 days which will make your hair curl, but I am doing the right thing for the moment and letting some processes take their course.
My hair is already curly but I can't wait to have more curls. ;)
Should I pop some popcorn?
 

casinojack

Dormant account
Keep in mind when doing this calculations, at least wit RTG, is really based on 1,000,000 spins = 95% edge,( in this example you chose 95% Im staying with it)

One other note, most WR is 30 times bonus plus deposit. So wouldn't you see a $6,000 WR in the example?
 

oldtrvlagt

Dormant account
Just to add to the drama....the Vegas Days transcript of my chat I had with them said it came from "this is vegas"......IMHO they are ALL kissing cousins. And, of course, they still DO NOT like me (except for Mayan Fortune and Sloto)
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
One other note, most WR is 30 times bonus plus deposit. So wouldn't you see a $6,000 WR in the example?
No. I was referring to the most popular casino software on the internet, Microgaming.
The vast majority of their casinos have cashable bonuses with WR of Bonus Only x 30.

Despite Enzo's rather strange explanation, I assure you this is still very much in favor of the casino winning and the player losing.
No MG casinos I know (except one) give players the edge with their bonuses.

KK
 

casinojack

Dormant account
No. I was referring to the most popular casino software on the internet, Microgaming.
The vast majority of their casinos have cashable bonuses with WR of Bonus Only x 30.

Despite Enzo's rather strange explanation, I assure you this is still very much in favor of the casino winning and the player losing.
No MG casinos I know (except one) give players the edge with their bonuses.

KK
Ahh ok, I was looking at the example that you had pasted in the first post...Sorry!!
 

thelawnet

Dormant account
Riiiiiiiight....
Well I don't know mate, but I reckon one of us is barking mad! :p

I'm not going to pretend I understand your example at all, but this is the maths I use:-

Player deposits $100 and get $100 bonus.
WR Bx30 = $3,000
Player wagers $3,000 on a 95% slot; return = $3,000 x 95% = $2,850
$3,000 - $2,850 = player loss of $150.
He started with $200 but $100 was bonus chips, therefore he has lost $50 of his deposit.
The casino has made +$50.

I'm sorry, but I can't see any way you can argue against that... :confused:

KK
Unusually, it seems the casino rep knows what he is talking about.

The only player who plays $3000 is the one that cashes out.

If you go in and play $100 spins (for example), most of the time you would lose both spins.

So let's say 60% of the time you lose both your $100 spins, this means you bet $200, and 40% you win and complete the WR (this is grossly simplified of course).

The amount wagered is not $3000, but

60% of $200
+ 40% of $3000

which is
$120 + $1200 = $1320.

The casino doesn't get, on average, 5% of $3000 = $150. It actually gets 5% of $1320 = $66.

Which is less than the bonus amount, so the casino makes a loss.

The determining factor of whether the casino makes a profit is whether the average player wager is more than $100 /5% = $2000.

My guess would be that it is not, the average player does not bet that much, because they will bust before they have bet $2000.

Basically there are a number of stages of evolution of casino bonuses:

Stage 1: Casinos offers bonuses that has a playthrough that will cost, on average, less than the bonus amount, played on the right game. The casino can still make a profit if the player bets on games with higher house edge, but a player playing correct strategy can expect to win, on average, even playing 1 cent bets.

Stage 2: Casino changes bonus so that the playthrough will cost more than the bonus amount. The player gets around this by reducing the amount of playthrough he does. How? By increasing bet size, or by playing higher risk bets. An example of this is players playing single numbers on roulette with their bonus. 36 times out of 37 the player will lose (of course the player could play 2 numbers, 3 numbers, whatever, but the theory is the same). If he does lose the roulette bet, the casino has only effectively seen 1* playthrough, and no bonus is profitable at that level.

Stage 3: Casino tries to ensure player completes all or most of the playthrough, thereby guaranteeing a profit from the playthrough that exceeds the bonus amount. This is done by:

* banning high variance games like roulette which allow the player to bypass the wagering
* implementing low bet sizes (I believe 3dice does this). If you got a $1000 bonus and can only bet $1 max on roulette, you're not going to be able to follow the strategy above
* banning large bets with complicated clauses designed to ensure that the casino wins - if the player loses he loses, and if he wins he loses because he bet too high a % of his balance (popular with Microgaming casinos)
* requiring the player to do the wagering BEFORE he gets the bonus. This is done by Wagerworks and Chartwell and is the only way to guarantee that the player completes the WR, thereby giving the house its expected gain as determined by the stated WR.

PS: If what you're saying is true, how come all the 80+ MG casinos who offer Bx30 bonus haven't gone bust yet?
In some cases they have complicated terms designed to ensure they make a profit, see above. In others, they view customer acquisition as an expense, and they lose money on the signup. In fact all casinos operate this way - that's why they're paying you affiliate commissions. The only issue with paying some of that customer acquisition money to the player is that it encourages bonus hunting.

Different casinos will have different ways of doing business - some will get more follow-up revenue from customer than others, and what works for one casino might not work for another.

A casino that offers bonuses like the ones described in your OP will not lose money from that bonus, but they could still end up losing money because:

* they don't attract enough customers because the market is highly competitive and players can be tempted away to another casino with better bonuses, so they do not cover overheads (even though every single player has a positive gross profit expectation)
* because they have to pay affiliate commissions and the like

Casinos need to get new players, and they need to get them playing again, otherwise they will go bust. For the time being there are so many casinos offering player incentives that the online market is IMO a difficult one to enter unless you have the megabucks to attract a mass of players.

There are lots of ways to handle player retention: for players generating high playthrough or making big deposits, the casino should look at their play and aim to offer a proportion of it back in bonuses or free gifts. This should be player-specific, because some players will play in a way that is much more profitable for the casino than others (and this shouldn't determined by how much they cash out (which is heavily luck-dependent), but rather the casino's theoretical win)

Lower level players can be tempted with wagering contests, prize draws and tournaments (which are generally less attractive to players simply looking for a bonus, and more appealing to players who want to 'try their luck'), as well as by offering good customer service.
 

3Dice

I-Gaming Industry Representative
KasinoKing,

Please take a few mins to figure this out. You have 5 years of records to prove I'm right and the formula you use isn't. (you don't really believe you had 5 years of good luck ?). You formula is essentially only valid for a machine with 0 variance. (every $1 bet pays back $0.95). For every other machine its completely useless - and wrong.

I know its been an accepted thing on this forum for years - and I had to bite my lip so many times waiting for a good context to explain it :rolleyes:

Cheers,

Enzo
 

chuchu59

gambling addict
PABnonaccred
CAG
However, hundreds of thousands of players have proved that KK could be right. He is only one of a handful of those who have proved otherwise.
Shame on you KK by winning and contradicting your theory.:D
 
Top