Feedback No-Can-Do Rivals

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
Location
Bexhill on sea, England
Re: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/all-non-accred-rivals-are-on-the-no-can-do-list.53301/
and: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/rival-canada.52675/

No-one can answer in those two threads, since one is accessible by Mods only, and the other is closed - so I had to start a new one.

CasinoMeister said:
If anyone has any issues with Rival casinos, they can contact either a casino rep in the forum or their licensing agency which is primarily Curacao. All non-accredited Rivals are on the "No Can Do" list - Slots Capital is the only Rival Casino that is listed here. The PAB service is off limits to all but Slots Capital.
What about Desert Nights?
This Rival casino has the same owners as Slots Capital - why is one No-Can-Do and one OK?

Although I sort of understand the reasoning, I am still very disappointed to see all Rivals get tarred with the same brush... again. :(
Yes Rival do seem to have their heads in a place which should be physically impossible to reach, and yes many Rival casinos need a good swift hard kick up the ass, but many more have not done anything wrong. It's such a shame to see the good ones getting punished for things which are out of their control.

KK
 

Balthazar

The Governor
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Location
Woodbury
Re: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/all-non-accred-rivals-are-on-the-no-can-do-list.53301/
and: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/rival-canada.52675/

No-one can answer in those two threads, since one is accessible by Mods only, and the other is closed - so I had to start a new one.


What about Desert Nights?
This Rival casino has the same owners as Slots Capital - why is one No-Can-Do and one OK?

Although I sort of understand the reasoning, I am still very disappointed to see all Rivals get tarred with the same brush... again. :(
Yes Rival do seem to have their heads in a place which should be physically impossible to reach, and yes many Rival casinos need a good swift hard kick up the ass, but many more have not done anything wrong. It's such a shame to see the good ones getting punished for things which are out of their control.

It's likely related to the accusations on the other thread that all Rival casinos are owned by the same people anyway. That's probably why they were "all tarred with the same brush".
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
I have Desert Nights listed as an RTG casino - not Rival.

It's a business decision; we are not going to use our resources to entertain player complaints via the PAB service. That's all - no big deal. Hopefully the PAB service won't be needed by anyone. And there is still the forum - there are several casino reps at hand as well.

It's not like I rogued the whole lot.
 

maxd

PAB (Complaints) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
It's likely related to ....

No need for speculation or confusion here guys, Bryan has already posted the reasons (here):
[I received] an ill-thought out letter sent from Rival's legal reps to both me and Network solutions (Casinomeister.com's registrar host) instructing me to remove this thread and to make an apology. It wasn't even signed by an individual - the closing was only a scribbled name of the legal firm.

I explained to Rival's administration - and to their legal reps - that I know my rights as a webmaster and that threatening me with this sort of bully tactic to remove legitimate comments left me "highly disappointed and downright astonished." I even offered to discuss this in person in Barcelona - but they did not take me up on this. I presume that they weren't there.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Re: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/all-non-accred-rivals-are-on-the-no-can-do-list.53301/
and: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/rival-canada.52675/

No-one can answer in those two threads, since one is accessible by Mods only, and the other is closed - so I had to start a new one.


What about Desert Nights?
This Rival casino has the same owners as Slots Capital - why is one No-Can-Do and one OK?

Although I sort of understand the reasoning, I am still very disappointed to see all Rivals get tarred with the same brush... again. :(
Yes Rival do seem to have their heads in a place which should be physically impossible to reach, and yes many Rival casinos need a good swift hard kick up the ass, but many more have not done anything wrong. It's such a shame to see the good ones getting punished for things which are out of their control.

KK


Rival should not have tried to bully CM then. The individual Rival operators could have chimed in to separate themselves from the rest, but they chose to remain silent along with Rival central. If this was because all Rivals are owned by the same people, then tough, the allegations were obviously true.

If individual Rival casinos want to engage, then surely the door is still open. They can offer up their own forum reps to deal with problems players face. How well they engage will enable players to decide whether any of the "no-can-do" Rivals are worth the risk.

I can't see what the evasive four need to worry about now, as they have already pulled out of Canada. It is accidentally straying onto US soil they should be worried about, not speculation in some forum.
 

labeled

The eagle got Kevin!
Joined
Mar 22, 2011
Location
Land of the "free"
I have Desert Nights listed as an RTG casino - not Rival.

It's a business decision; we are not going to use our resources to entertain player complaints via the PAB service. That's all - no big deal. Hopefully the PAB service won't be needed by anyone. And there is still the forum - there are several casino reps at hand as well.

It's not like I rogued the whole lot.

Out of curiosity (I play there all the time) what does that mean, exactly? Is the Desert Nights Rival on the no-can-do list, or not?
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
Out of curiosity (I play there all the time) what does that mean, exactly? Is the Desert Nights Rival on the no-can-do list, or not?
Desert Nights is run by the operators of Slot o' Cash - they are both accredited casinos and listed on this site. It means nothing to you really. If you ever find yourself needing assistance via PAB (which I seriously doubt), you may still use the PAB service. We are just not going to accept PABs for non-accredited Rival casinos. We may make exceptions depending on the circumstances. That's our prerogative.
 

maxd

PAB (Complaints) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia

jetset

RIP Brian
Joined
Feb 22, 2001
Location
Earth
Trying to intimidate Casinomeister with a questionable 'legal' threat was a singularly silly move imo, and one that will only raise more questions about why Rival's management are apparently so sensitive about the disclosures in the now settled T2 case.

In my view they would have been better advised to let sleeping dogs lie, and clearly did not realise that trying to 'persuade' an experienced webmaster like Bryan, who has legal resources as well as personal knowledge, to take down legitimate exchanges of opinion on a message board was never going to fly.

Some of the daft decisions made by executives in this industry continue to boggle my mind.
 

Balthazar

The Governor
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Location
Woodbury
Trying to intimidate Casinomeister with a questionable 'legal' threat was a singularly silly move imo, and one that will only raise more questions about why Rival's management are apparently so sensitive about the disclosures in the now settled T2 case.

In my view they would have been better advised to let sleeping dogs lie, and clearly did not realise that trying to 'persuade' an experienced webmaster like Bryan, who has legal resources as well as personal knowledge, to take down legitimate exchanges of opinion on a message board was never going to fly.

Some of the daft decisions made by executives in this industry continue to boggle my mind.

They promised their side of the story but never actually delivered. Notice that a bunch of Rival reps visited the threads and not a single one has decided to intervene. Not one. Some people are clearly walking on eggshels.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
They promised their side of the story but never actually delivered. Notice that a bunch of Rival reps visited the threads and not a single one has decided to intervene. Not one. Some people are clearly walking on eggshels.

Quite, a whole bunch of Rival reps would rather risk their business going down the pan than stick up for their own individual casinos in order that they be spared the tar brush.

The announcement that it is Bryan, not the casinos, that has made the move to the "no-can-do list" can only single out Rival as being the only set of casinos who are quite willing to participate in PAB, but have had the door shut on them by Bryan. Other casinos on the list have put themselves there, and are thus in control of the situation.

Surely court records are already in the public domain, and no amount of legal threats will make the courts rewrite history. Rather than the mutterings of what might be seen as a group of anti-casino players on some forum, we now have attention drawn to court records which would be perceived as "hard evidence" with which to back up any allegations made elsewhere.

It all started with a very simple question, one that could easily have been answered with a fair bit of "spin", yet satisfy Canadian players. We don't get conspiracy therories as to why Neteller chucked out Canadians, it is down to them having offices in Canada which exposes them to potential legal risks if they assist Canadians to perform gambling transactions. I am sure there has been some "spin" added by Neteller, but the position has been accepted by Canadians who at least still have Moneybookers.
 

maxd

PAB (Complaints) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
The announcement that it is Bryan, not the casinos, that has made the move to the "no-can-do list" can only single out Rival as being the only set of casinos who are quite willing to participate in PAB, but have had the door shut on them by Bryan. Other casinos on the list have put themselves there, and are thus in control of the situation.

No sure I follow you VWM but I can report from experience that many of the Rival properties do not cooperate with the PAB process at all. It's rather much like the Cassava situation: they say they will but when it comes to actual issues nothing happens. In other words they don't cooperate, regardless of what they may claim in public.
 

chuchu59

gambling addict
PABnonaccred
CAG
PABinit
Joined
Sep 26, 2004
Location
SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
While I understand KK's concern, unless one has absolute love for Rival games, Rival casinos should be avoided in general. Just look at the warning on Vegas Regal which was once considered among the better-managed Rivals. Like Rushmore I believe they are seriously underfunded and if you are lucky to hit big chances are you wont get any of your dough and Max wont be able to help you either.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
No sure I follow you VWM but I can report from experience that many of the Rival properties do not cooperate with the PAB process at all. It's rather much like the Cassava situation: they say they will but when it comes to actual issues nothing happens. In other words they don't cooperate, regardless of what they may claim in public.

Now that I have seen the Vegas Regal warning, it seems this is no great loss to Rival. It merely formalises the position that "most" Rival casinos will not cooperate in any case. It seems a number of Rival reps have come on here to make us think otherwise, as an active rep gives players a degree of confidence.

I have also noticed that a recently active Rival rep seems to have suddenly gone AWOL, yet was claiming that their casino really was "independent", and could be relied upon even though it was on the "white label" list. Maybe Rival central have acted to silence all Rival reps after their legal spat with the Meister, even the "independent" ones:rolleyes:

It seems Kasino King is the only one that might be able to help players, but even he has expressed frustration at some Rivals when trying to do so.
 

Refilliates Casinos

Dormant account
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Location
Rival Powered
Hi there members,

Kindly note that we are active on the forums every day and have been following this thread (and all other Rival threads) very closely since joining.

We did not respond here as we tried to resolve this behind the scenes with Bryan and Rival, however answers were requested and as they were not provided, the decision was made to add Rivals to the No-Can-Do list. We respect Bryan's decision, however it is regrettable that it has come to this as a lot of effort went into getting Rivals off the old "Not Recommended" list. We apologise to everyone that has supported Rival (with special mention to Kasino King) - it is frustrating when so much effort goes into something and then it seems it was all in vain.

We will assist all members who have issues and if Max needs help when a PAB is filed, we will provide all the information needed to resolve it. We will continue to operate as best we can, in the markets we can and maintain a level of service that keeps our customers happy.

Thank you,
Tropica Casino
 

Balthazar

The Governor
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Location
Woodbury
Hi there members,

Kindly note that we are active on the forums every day and have been following this thread (and all other Rival threads) very closely since joining.

We did not respond here as we tried to resolve this behind the scenes with Bryan and Rival, however answers were requested and as they were not provided, the decision was made to add Rivals to the No-Can-Do list. We respect Bryan's decision, however it is regrettable that it has come to this as a lot of effort went into getting Rivals off the old "Not Recommended" list. We apologise to everyone that has supported Rival (with special mention to Kasino King) - it is frustrating when so much effort goes into something and then it seems it was all in vain.

We will assist all members who have issues and if Max needs help when a PAB is filed, we will provide all the information needed to resolve it. We will continue to operate as best we can, in the markets we can and maintain a level of service that keeps our customers happy.

Thank you,
Tropica Casino

Tropica you're the "good people" I was talking about and your presence on this forum is appreciated. You should really try take the accredited route, if it worked for the other Rival group, it can work for you as well.

As for the other stuff, I believe that it should come from Rival themselves but if you're willing to give some answers, we're all listening.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Hi there members,

Kindly note that we are active on the forums every day and have been following this thread (and all other Rival threads) very closely since joining.

We did not respond here as we tried to resolve this behind the scenes with Bryan and Rival, however answers were requested and as they were not provided, the decision was made to add Rivals to the No-Can-Do list. We respect Bryan's decision, however it is regrettable that it has come to this as a lot of effort went into getting Rivals off the old "Not Recommended" list. We apologise to everyone that has supported Rival (with special mention to Kasino King) - it is frustrating when so much effort goes into something and then it seems it was all in vain.

We will assist all members who have issues and if Max needs help when a PAB is filed, we will provide all the information needed to resolve it. We will continue to operate as best we can, in the markets we can and maintain a level of service that keeps our customers happy.

Thank you,
Tropica Casino


Your software supplier has caused this, why not ditch them?

It has turned out that Rival casinos in general did not cooperate with PAB in any case, so are not really affected by this move. The move was made after Rival not only ignored the issue, but tried to bury it, and any discussion of it, through the use of legal threats. This is worse that merely saying "no comment" or remaining silent.

Whilst there are many RTG casinos around, there are relatively few on the latest "nu works" product from RTG. Switching to this would give you a degree of uniqueness, and also enable you to take players from any country you want, including Canada. In addition, by not being a Rival casino, you will not be lumped in with the negative reputations of the rest.

The other route would be to become 100% independent like Sloto, and work towards accreditation. This could be done, like Sloto, whilst still using Rival software. It would just involve bringing everything in-house and ditching your "white label" relationship with Rival.
 

Balthazar

The Governor
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Location
Woodbury
Your software supplier has caused this, why not ditch them?

It has turned out that Rival casinos in general did not cooperate with PAB in any case, so are not really affected by this move. The move was made after Rival not only ignored the issue, but tried to bury it, and any discussion of it, through the use of legal threats. This is worse that merely saying "no comment" or remaining silent.

Whilst there are many RTG casinos around, there are relatively few on the latest "nu works" product from RTG. Switching to this would give you a degree of uniqueness, and also enable you to take players from any country you want, including Canada. In addition, by not being a Rival casino, you will not be lumped in with the negative reputations of the rest.

The other route would be to become 100% independent like Sloto, and work towards accreditation. This could be done, like Sloto, whilst still using Rival software. It would just involve bringing everything in-house and ditching your "white label" relationship with Rival.

I wish Tropica would have replied to this.
 

Refilliates Casinos

Dormant account
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Location
Rival Powered
I wish Tropica would have replied to this.

Hi there,

First, please accept our apologies for the delay in replying and a big thank you to those who offered kind words and advice.

We gave this some thought and consideration and our sentiment is that both parties have a right to their opinion and decisions. Several operators choose which markets to avoid and those software vendor's management team do not publicly explain their decisions. From our side (i.e. our opinion) - the decision to pull out of Canada was partially because of a court case, but also because of operations been based there at a time when the US were arresting folk and fining everyone. Honestly, we would have done the same if we were based in Canada.

We will continue to work with Rival as our customers love the games and the play-time they get compared to other software. This equates to better retention which is good for affiliates. We feel Rival still has the potential to be a top software provider and with time and effort, we hope they get there.

As for been accredited, we don't qualify as we do not do our own processing (which is a good thing for a number of reasons). We do have a few pokers in the fire and are looking to add to our existing product offering in the coming months (and hopefully Bryan will give us another chance then).

I hope we have answered some of your questions or thoughts? If not, please write to us or PM me and we will do our best to assist. For now, we really just want to get on with the business at hand and hopefully you guys will see that in the future :thumbsup:

Kind regards,
Tropica
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Hi there,

First, please accept our apologies for the delay in replying and a big thank you to those who offered kind words and advice.

We gave this some thought and consideration and our sentiment is that both parties have a right to their opinion and decisions. Several operators choose which markets to avoid and those software vendor's management team do not publicly explain their decisions. From our side (i.e. our opinion) - the decision to pull out of Canada was partially because of a court case, but also because of operations been based there at a time when the US were arresting folk and fining everyone. Honestly, we would have done the same if we were based in Canada.

We will continue to work with Rival as our customers love the games and the play-time they get compared to other software. This equates to better retention which is good for affiliates. We feel Rival still has the potential to be a top software provider and with time and effort, we hope they get there.

As for been accredited, we don't qualify as we do not do our own processing (which is a good thing for a number of reasons). We do have a few pokers in the fire and are looking to add to our existing product offering in the coming months (and hopefully Bryan will give us another chance then).

I hope we have answered some of your questions or thoughts? If not, please write to us or PM me and we will do our best to assist. For now, we really just want to get on with the business at hand and hopefully you guys will see that in the future :thumbsup:

Kind regards,
Tropica

Not according to Rival. They did not expect any rights but their own to express opinions, and went as far as to make a ham fisted attempt to silence the opinions of forum members by serving notice to Bryan to remove the thread that discussed this issue on pain of a vaguely defined legal consequence. You have more or less confirmed that in your opinion, the main thrust of the discussions was true, yet Rival claimed this misrepresented the facts. They may now come after YOU for adding weight to the facts that were allegedly misrepresented.

The question was a legitimate one because the risks of being arrested for accepting Canadian players is fairly low, yet at the time Rival did this risk assessment, they ditched Canadian players at a time when they were still accepting US players, even actively marketing to them. Only later did Rival largely pull out of the US market. As for the risk of arrest, it is too late. US authorities arrested people who's operations had long since pulled out of the US, and even people that had not worked for the companies for a number of years. Rival staff are going to be at the same risk of arrest now as they were when Rival casinos actively marketed to US players. It makes more sense to believe that the court case was pretty much the main reason for dropping Canadian players like hot potatoes, with US players being dropped some time later because of the number of arrests being arranged by the US authorities.

This incident has set back Rival's attempt to become a top notch software supplier by some years, and it seems Rival repeatedly do something "idiotic" to damage their chances in this respect even though it is clear that players rate the software highly, and WANT Rival to become as iconic as the big suppliers such as Microgaming.
 
Top