One Million Reels BC $204,167.54 + was hit today

[BingoT]

I just like to say Thank You to Wael at Slotocash.
I knew from day one Slotocash is thee best and up front with anything that comes up.
Ok now I want a free chip I have not seen one in awhile.
Thanks Wael
B-T

 

[NASHVEGAS]

The power of the forum(s)

If Sloto is going to begin paying progressives in full then there is good reason to assume all Rivals' and skins will.

Yet, it also possible Sloto values it reputation such that if necessary they will do what is right even if they must fund/insure via their own pockets, Kudos regardless.

 

[chuchu59]

That's more like it. The statement from slotocash was reassuring and would put many players minds at ease. What I would like to see now is a stream of other Rivals coming out and confirm that the progressives are to be paid in a lump sum preferably within a week of them being hit.

I doubt whether we can get to the bottom of IL's true intentions. Meanwhile, I do not fully agree that the progressives must not be won with ND bonuses. B-D chips, for example, are there to show loyalty to customers and if they are lucky on the day they might just win it. The offer from IL was a freakish one and must not override all others.

 

[jetset]

This just posted at the GPWA:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Kudos to SlotoCash for making a public statement.

And I have to add that it was the one Rival I wasn't sure about in re: Rival ownership. I do believe they are a stand alone operation, given the numerous postings on this forum regarding payouts, bonuses, the processor they use, etc. None of their day to day operations seem to be in line with ALL the other Rivals.

I am extremely happy to see the public statement re: progressive jackpot payouts. That is the way it should be done.

That was professional and addressed the most critical points that have been brought up in this thread and others. Given that statement, and nothing but positive feedback from players, this is one Rival that I would even consider promoting if I were in that end of the business.

I, nor anyone else, will ever convince affiliates to stop promoting these places, nor players to stop playing there. But I can't stress enough, that Slotocash's statement is the way that business SHOULD be done. And I would urge all of you to start pressuring all the other Rivals (via email, phone, livechat, message board postings, thru the affiliate program) to address the issue of lump sum payments as regards their progressives. 5K a month or whatever it is, is NOT acceptable. If someone wins a progressive, they need to be paid out in one payment. No wiggle room. So do your part, and let them know that it's not acceptable any other way.

EDIT: I wanted to add that in my previous posts where I offered an opinion/speculated on Rival ownership, I wish I had included a disclaimer re: SlotoCash. I never was sure about them...they never fit the mold. For that, I apologize to Sloto. As to the rest of the Rivals, pffffttt.

A little transparency and communication goes a long way, something that Rival might like to note!

 

[jetset]

@ Nash - the GPWA folks have seen the Quebec court papers, right?

 

[NASHVEGAS]

@ Nash - the GPWA folks have seen the Quebec court papers, right?

I do not know but I will attempt to find out. I will be more than happy to send the PDF file which is all I have on my boxes.....a few others were sent via snail mail but not complete (as I expected).I still need to scan and upload.......I think I was redirected so much that I dialed every combination of 514-393-_____.

 

[Rusty]

If Sloto cash are run independently of all other Rivals then there must be a real shit storm behind the scenes right now.

The progressive is run right across all Rival Casinos regardless of ownership and no doubt Sloto are furious that Irish Luck (Rival) have pulled this stunt without putting them in the loop. Or did they?

I welcome Sloto cash's statement that the bonus promotion run by Irish Luck was contrary to their own policies but would like further clarifcation that they were in no way aware that the promotion would be run.

This has a little more running time yet.

 

[jetset]

I agree. To paraphrase an old cliche....there's something smelly in the state of Ottawa!

 

[bb1webs]

The Q papers leave a bit to consider. Being in the states and having seen what a sloppy job they have done every time they try to group a bunch of casinos ... it has been done incompetently.

While I'm choosing to wait and see how this all works out it is pretty clear to me on one note which is that the list provided on that paper is either incorrect or incomplete and I offer the point already brought up about why wasn't Mayan Fortune on the list? They are clearly a sister to Pantasia so its either very odd or more likely a sign of incompetent research which then leaves the question of credibility to the whole charge.

 

[Rusty]

The Q papers leave a bit to consider. Being in the states and having seen what a sloppy job they have done every time they try to group a bunch of casinos ... it has been done incompetently.

While I'm choosing to wait and see how this all works out it is pretty clear to me on one note which is that the list provided on that paper is either incorrect or incomplete and I offer the point already brought up about why wasn't Mayan Fortune on the list? They are clearly a sister to Pantasia so its either very odd or more likely a sign of incompetent research which then leaves the question of credibility to the whole charge.

As you say this is really a wait and see situation but the paper does not state that the list is comprehensive so I am not sure what you are basing your incompetent statement on unless you have proof that the plaintiff is wrong in their claim that the defendants own any of the Casinos listed.
In the case of Mayan fortune it may be it was simply omitted or ownership was unknown or it simply did not exist when the papers were drawn but the point is its absense from the list proves nothing.

Are Sloto cash going to make a difinitive statement on whether they were aware the progressive bonus promotion was going to be run by Irish Luck?
If they were it makes their assurances of independent ownership a little less comforting.
I appreciate they are not the Ones on the stand here but it is an important question that relates to player trust.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

RESPONSE #1

The Q papers leave a bit to consider. Being in the states and having seen what a sloppy job they have done every time they try to group a bunch of casinos ... it has been done incompetently.

While I'm choosing to wait and see how this all works out it is pretty clear to me on one note which is that the list provided on that paper is either incorrect or incomplete and I offer the point already brought up about why wasn't Mayan Fortune on the list? They are clearly a sister to Pantasia so its either very odd or more likely a sign of incompetent research which then leaves the question of credibility to the whole charge.

Have seen numerous types of errors in many pleadings I have read over the years, so certainly errors are possible pursuant to the current allegations (and exhibits).

That said, certain courses of action among more by Rival Gaming have created reasonable speculation imo but may be inane speculation. Speculation as I'm sure you know is one of the many dynamics of message boards. It is your choice/opinion/right to speculate on whether the Plaintiff's counsel may be "incompetent" or if a "question of credibility" exists. I am only aware of the quoted existing with an entirely different party. Will post in regards later but buckle your seat belt.

A screenshot (obviously outdated) just fyi, fwiw!

 

[silcnlayc]

I just heard that they will be coming out with a press release soon to address this.

.

 

[Pinababy69]

For those who are questioning the accuracy of the court documents in re: exactly which casinos were/are owned by Rival....I think it's important to remember that the statements contained within those documents relate to the facts as they existed at THAT time (April of 2006). They relate to the facts that T2 Marketing and their solicitors were in possession of when the contract was entered into, not the present situation, or when the papers were filed in late 2008.

As KK (I think) mentioned, there were casinos/domains listed, that weren't even in operation as yet. It doesn't mean they weren't owned by Rival, just that they weren't actually open as yet.

T2 Marketing could only include those domains/casinos that they had first hand knowledge of, and the documentation to back it up.

Like I said before, people are going to believe what is in their best interests to believe. For myself, I don't care....Rival means nothing to me. They don't provide me with any type of income (nor does any other casino/casino group/agency, etc). The ONLY thing I care about is the truth.

 

[KasinoKing]

I just heard that they will be coming out with a press release soon to address this.

Where did you hear that?
And who is "they" - Rival or Irish Luck?

 

[silcnlayc]

Where did you hear that?

I have been talking with a rep from one of the Rival casinos (NOT Irish Luck) this past week and the rep emailed me today that there will be an announcement coming out soon to address this but the rep doesn't know exactly when except that it will be soon. This thread is being followed closely by all involved is my understanding by what was said in email.

.

 

[bb28]

Like I said before, people are going to believe what is in their best interests to believe. For myself, I don't care....Rival means nothing to me. They don't provide me with any type of income (nor does any other casino/casino group/agency, etc). The ONLY thing I care about is the truth.

The Truth, I can't help but be the pessimist concerning if we or anyone will ever know the truth about this particular issue, although the lawsuit settlement may make it clear as to who are the actual owners are of the different casino's.
The things that I most wonder about other than who the ownership really is are below.

• Who was responsible for this promotion, rival or Irish Luck?
• Did they think that it was probable that the JP would be hit during this promotion?
• If that was their line of thinking then that sure leads to the probability that the game is rigged/weighted or what ever you want to call it and if that is truth then how can anyone ever play there or promote them and feel good about it?
• Would they have put the JP back in the general fund had it not been for the outrage at this forum and others?

Sadly as so often happens I don't think we'll ever know the complete and whole truth.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Sadly as so often happens I don't think we'll ever know the complete and whole truth.

Agree BB.

There may be some stand up reps/AM's/etc. that are honest and intentions are good but I always sensed and posted of that "leash". A tight one!!

You will see some type of damage control P.R. statement I assume (as the litigation is a factor).

The progressive windfalls may be history, ya think?? Talk is cheap, actually free. (stolen ,oops npi, from CatrinaM, lol)

I think some affys have been very objective, kudos-but others, nevermind, no offense intended, truly. The intent of the progressive bonuses was obvious in January, not May. Is the January PM that I posted just coincidence???? IIRC, it is the only PM exchange I've had with CM in 2009 (until this past week which was about my email addy,lol.) The January PM never mentions IL but Rival. FTR, the subject posted PM was sent just prior to another coincidence, you know, moi becoming aware of that lawsuit. How strange

Rival Gaming cares as much about the truth as Madoff did his clients' based on my numerous experiences. That said, not all were negative by any means but ultimately I realized I could not continue as a patron when I had lost any and all trust. Not a reactionary or easy decision but the correct decision to close my accounts over the course of a few days.

 

[jetset]

The Q papers leave a bit to consider. Being in the states and having seen what a sloppy job they have done every time they try to group a bunch of casinos ... it has been done incompetently.

While I'm choosing to wait and see how this all works out it is pretty clear to me on one note which is that the list provided on that paper is either incorrect or incomplete and I offer the point already brought up about why wasn't Mayan Fortune on the list? They are clearly a sister to Pantasia so its either very odd or more likely a sign of incompetent research which then leaves the question of credibility to the whole charge.

If you are referring to the efforts of state officials to nominate 'illegal' online gambling websites (ie Minnesota, Kentucky....and outside America even the Australian bureaucrats) then I would have to agree.

However - this is not quite the same.

These court papers have been filed by a private company (T2 Marketing) that had intimate contractual dealings with the companies and individuals involved in matters Rival and in my opinion that make a major difference.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

If you are referring to the efforts of state officials to nominate 'illegal' online gambling websites (ie Minnesota, Kentucky....and outside America even the Australian bureaucrats) then I would have to agree.

However - this is not quite the same.

These court papers have been filed by a private company (T2 Marketing) that had intimate contractual dealings with the companies and individuals involved in matters Rival and in my opinion that make a major difference.

In addition, in a debt-breach of contract case, transposing a number, not dotting an i or crossing a t is a reach if one believes that in itself creates a question of credibilty on the merits of the case. Now if the Judge wakes up on the wrong side of the bed, Houston, we have a problem.

Ironically, BB1WEBS is a victim of incompetence. Whose??? Hold on, yep one of the Rival skin's.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

He should not have been as it has been over a year ago since the TIV thread where I mention the contradictory withdrawal terms. Even reminded my TIV Bud, he still needed to remedy the contradictory withdrawal terms 6 months later. He tried and failed.

Thus, if a well respected WM-AFFY is confused ~ a year later by the exact same contradictory withdrawal T and C terms at the skin known as DaVinci's (gotta love the truly incompetent known as Rival Gaming), Mr. BB1WEBS, with all due respect, these Rival skins are not innocent as you posted y-day+/- on another forum. They actually have been and remain incompetent at this very moment on both of the 2 sites (TIV et ROCKBET) I just checked.

Only posting the screenshots from ROCKBET for the second time in ~ 2 months of well (still not corrected,tight ship you say,humm), just look, followed by the contradictory withdrawal terms, which both also are still present. The one correct and other incorrect term unfairly misleads you in your thread link above. Wonder if your player's get confused like I was in early 2008 (not an incompetent typo).

Old / Expired Link

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[KasinoKing]

They actually have been and remain incompetent at this very moment on both of the 2 sites (TIV et ROCKBET) I just checked.

Only posting the screenshots from ROCKBET for the second time in ~ 2 months of well (still not corrected,tight ship you say,humm), just look, followed by the contradictory withdrawal terms, which both also are still present. The one correct and other incorrect term unfairly misleads you in your thread link above. Wonder if your player's get confused like I was in early 2008 (not an incompetent typo).

Old / Expired Link

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I hadn't spotted that one, but no surprises there given Rival's history of incompetence.
For those not aware of why this happened; John Wright left This is Vegas and started up Rockbet. I'm not aware of the financial/ownership arrangements, but obviously they just copied & pasted the T&C's across from one to the other without thinking to proof read them (Proof-read seems to be an illegal term in Rival-land...)
Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy!

Sorry for the derail.
KK

 

[RobWin]

In addition, in a debt-breach of contract case, transposing a number, not dotting an i or crossing a t is a reach if one believes that in itself creates a question of credibilty on the merits of the case. Now if the Judge wakes up on the wrong side of the bed, Houston, we have a problem.

Ironically, BB1WEBS is a victim of incompetence. Whose??? Hold on, yep one of the Rival skin's.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

He should not have been as it has been over a year ago since the TIV thread where I mention the contradictory withdrawal terms. Even reminded my TIV Bud, he still needed to remedy the contradictory withdrawal terms 6 months later. He tried and failed.

Thus, if a well respected WM-AFFY is confused ~ a year later by the exact same contradictory withdrawal T and C terms at the skin known as DaVinci's (gotta love the truly incompetent known as Rival Gaming), Mr. BB1WEBS, with all due respect, these Rival skins are not innocent as you posted y-day+/- on another forum. They actually have been and remain incompetent at this very moment on both of the 2 sites (TIV et ROCKBET) I just checked.

Only posting the screenshots from ROCKBET for the second time in ~ 2 months of well (still not corrected,tight ship you say,humm), just look, followed by the contradictory withdrawal terms, which both also are still present. The one correct and other incorrect term unfairly misleads you in your thread link above. Wonder if your player's get confused like I was in early 2008 (not an incompetent typo).

Old / Expired Link

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

So what is the "contradictory withdrawal terms" exactly? As far as I can remember it has always been $2,000 per day and $4,000 per week at all Rivals.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

I hadn't spotted that one, but no surprises there given Rival's history of incompetence.
For those not aware of why this happened; John Wright left This is Vegas and started up Rockbet. I'm not aware of the financial/ownership arrangements, but obviously they just copied & pasted the T&C's across from one to the other without thinking to proof read them (Proof-read seems to be an illegal term in Rival-land...)
Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy!

Sorry for the derail.
KK

Maybe, one day we can combine our lists, I have not mentioned most of my collection but I will give you one just in case the knuckleboys mess me up. No worries

 

[NASHVEGAS]

So what is the "contradictory withdrawal terms" exactly? As far as I can remember it has always been $2,000 per day and $4,000 per week at all Rivals.

Rob, you were all over the TIV thread or the 3 links above should be clear.

BB1WEBS, rightfully assumes exactly as the term reads on the about us page in his hypo. However, one can not withdrawal as it exactly states.

"PRIZES & WINNINGS

The casino reserves the right to request documentation for the purpose of identity verification prior to granting any deposits with or withdrawals from the player's casino account.

A fee may be charged to the player to cover payments made by bank wire or check.

A player is permitted to withdraw a maximum of $2000 USD of their winnings per 24 hour period.

Players winning a sizeable amount deemed to be worthy of publicity by the casino agree to make themselves available for any event arranged by BC in relation to that win. BC will at all times respect the player's privacy in this event.

The casino reserves the right to use your first name and first initial of your surname (e.g. John S.) in any casino announcement regarding winning results."

Hope this brings back memories,lol

 

[RobWin]

Rob, you were all over the TIV thread or the 3 links above should be clear.

BB1WEBS, rightfully assumes exactly as the term reads on the about us page in his hypo. However, one can not withdrawal as it exactly states.

"PRIZES & WINNINGS

The casino reserves the right to request documentation for the purpose of identity verification prior to granting any deposits with or withdrawals from the player's casino account.

A fee may be charged to the player to cover payments made by bank wire or check.

A player is permitted to withdraw a maximum of $2000 USD of their winnings per 24 hour period.

Players winning a sizeable amount deemed to be worthy of publicity by the casino agree to make themselves available for any event arranged by BC in relation to that win. BC will at all times respect the player's privacy in this event.

The casino reserves the right to use your first name and first initial of your surname (e.g. John S.) in any casino announcement regarding winning results."

Hope this brings back memories,lol

Yea, I remember that now...lol...thanks for the refresher

 

[chuchu59]

The Truth, I can't help but be the pessimist concerning if we or anyone will ever know the truth about this particular issue, although the lawsuit settlement may make it clear as to who are the actual owners are of the different casino's.
The things that I most wonder about other than who the ownership really is are below.

• Who was responsible for this promotion, rival or Irish Luck?
• Did they think that it was probable that the JP would be hit during this promotion?
• If that was their line of thinking then that sure leads to the probability that the game is rigged/weighted or what ever you want to call it and if that is truth then how can anyone ever play there or promote them and feel good about it?
• Would they have put the JP back in the general fund had it not been for the outrage at this forum and others?

Sadly as so often happens I don't think we'll ever know the complete and whole truth.

I dont mind making wild guesses so here goes.

I doubt whether Irish Luck was responsible for the promo and that many Rival casinos were involved. They probably drew lots to decide who held the promo first.

They might not have known whether the JP was about to be hit but the size of the JP was enough to entice them to do such an act. It's of little risk to them because unless you hit the JP or hit 2 wilds and a cavewoman you wont be getting their $375. Once Irish Luck ends the promo another Rival could take over with another similar promo.

With the above, I am always hopeful that the slot isnt rigged lol.

I am 100% certain that they would not have reinstated the JP. A lengthy time elapsed between the JP win and the time they contacted the winner to show their appreciation. Obviously they were intent on hoping the winner played out his balance to gain more comps since he was only restricted to wiinings of $375 and since the terms were crystal clear he couldnt argue much on that. However, with the uproar here and possibly elsewhere, there was a danger that no one would be playing Rival progressives in future and that would be far more damaging to them in the long term so they relented and placed back the JP after seemingly being very enthusiastic about the JP win (belatedly).

I know I am only guessing but unless they come with with something really believable I stick to my opinions.

 

[clj7221]

I'm surprised Irish Luck casino is still open. They are so fraudulent. I made deposits for bonuses it had on there and never got the money. When I went to customer service they put me on hold forever it felt like then came back and told me I do not have any bonuses in my account and I said yes look I applied for it then when I went back to my account the bonuses were all gone.I wrote this in the forum months ago and mailed them here as well they never got back to me.

I got this offer from Irish luck. After redeeming 37.5 for 10max spins, i did not found the game under progressive tab. Then after talking with live chat i was informed, that this offer is only for usa players. And they got some problems with this bonus, sending mails to non usa players..... and bonus manager is nedeed to sort things out. So now i got 37.5 on my acount, and i can not play any game until they sorted...
congrats to the winner

 

[Rusty]

ChuChu;

I am always hopeful the slot is not rigged

Not so much hope ChuChu as blind faith.

Not won for 4 Months.
Won Twice in quick succession.
They were both on a bonus chips.


Then again people still believe in creationism despite the incredible weight of evidence and logic that suggests it's nonsense, we believe what we are comfortable with and that is what people will do here.

 

[RockbetJohn]

Thanks for the corrections on Rockbet, they have been updated and someone was paid to do the write-ups and I'll have to get them to explain this to me.

As for the Irish Luck issue I can't really say much for many reasons. As a manager for Rockbet I can say that their actions seemed obvious and it doesn't sit well with other operators. I believe the proper course of action has been taken and I am confident this won't happen again and I am sure that in the future it will be impossible to create promotions like this.

John

 

[jas2587]

Rob, you were all over the TIV thread or the 3 links above should be clear.

BB1WEBS, rightfully assumes exactly as the term reads on the about us page in his hypo. However, one can not withdrawal as it exactly states.

"PRIZES & WINNINGS

The casino reserves the right to request documentation for the purpose of identity verification prior to granting any deposits with or withdrawals from the player's casino account.

A fee may be charged to the player to cover payments made by bank wire or check.

A player is permitted to withdraw a maximum of $2000 USD of their winnings per 24 hour period.

Players winning a sizeable amount deemed to be worthy of publicity by the casino agree to make themselves available for any event arranged by BC in relation to that win. BC will at all times respect the player's privacy in this event.

The casino reserves the right to use your first name and first initial of your surname (e.g. John S.) in any casino announcement regarding winning results."

Hope this brings back memories,lol

Nash IIRC back when you was doin all that winning at TIV didn't they up the amount that you could withdraw per week? or did I read that thread wrong back before you hit the Progressive?

Cindy

 

[RobWin]

Thanks for the corrections on Rockbet, they have been updated and someone was paid to do the write-ups and I'll have to get them to explain this to me.

As for the Irish Luck issue I can't really say much for many reasons. As a manager for Rockbet I can say that their actions seemed obvious and it doesn't sit well with other operators. I believe the proper course of action has been taken and I am confident this won't happen again and I am sure that in the future it will be impossible to create promotions like this.

John

John, thanks for coming in here and making a statement and at least stepping up to the plate here.

 

[The Dude]

Wow - another mega-thread...didn't I say that about ten pages ago?

I have some catching up to do....

Sloto'Cash is independently owned and operated by Deckmedia N.V and is in no way affiliated to any other Rival Casino....

Play on any progressive jackpot is excluded from no deposit promotions at Sloto'Cash, unless otherwise specified and in these cases there would be no max cash out on progressive jackpots.
...
The progressive jackpot is paid to players as one lump sum and is not subject to weekly withdrawal limits at Sloto'Cash Casino....

Well, this is some excellent news since I always thought Slot o'Cash was on a different level than some of the other rivals. In fact, it was only this "progressive" issue that was keeping them from coming on board. If any of you have noticed, casinos that have progressive payout stipulations are dropped from the accredited section. So far we only had to drop one casino (Playtech powered bettercasino.com). Bummer for them.

 

[KasinoKing]

If any of you have noticed, casinos that have progressive payout stipulations are dropped from the accredited section. So far we only had to drop one casino (Playtech powered bettercasino.com). Bummer for them.

What sort of stipulations?
Can you elaborate please?

KK

 

[The Dude]

What sort of stipulations?
Can you elaborate please?

KK

The stipulation I was referring to was that progressives are paid out in relatively small increments (say 9k a month). That's a no go in Casinomeisterland.

 

[Pinababy69]

Oh...post #83.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Posted by Rockbet John:

Just going to add in some comments even though 9 pages is a lot to go through and I haven't been on the forums in a week.

I don't think people should be attacking Rival as if this was their fault or that it's a reflection of Rival going down the tube. If anything Rival is growing and improving and as the # of operators grows it's going to be tougher to manage. I would love to say that you can trust all Rival operators but I think affiliates should be selective of who they choose to promote. I don't think Rival expected an operator to try to pull something like this but I think they are correcting the situation. As a software provider I think Rival do a good job of keeping their own reputation in check and trying to improve. I don't think you'll see any grand prive style events happening with Rival.

Not sure there isn't much I can say or do about this situation but I think it's being sorted out.

John

I'm gonna try and say this without being a smartass, I actually always liked John. But I think he should have spent the time necessary and gone through ALL 9 pages at the GPWA and the 18 or 19 pages here.

Never expected a Rival operator to pull something like this? As a software provider? Doing a good job of keeping their reputation in check?

All I can say is that John must have completely missed the part about almost all of the Rivals being white labels, becoming public knowledge. And the posts which highlighted this part of the legal documents:

12. In the Corporate Structure (Exhibit P-1A), Defendant McParland explains, inter alia, that although (i) customer support for the Casinos takes place in Ottawa, and (ii) the Individual Defendants (referred to as the "four owners") have full decision making authority, marketing materials to be prepared by Plaintiff should not mention these facts.

Exhibit P-1A happens to be a written explanation of the corporate structure, provided to the defendants T2 Marketing by defendant McParland.

Forget about Rival not knowing what Irish Luck were doing....that's almost laughable IMO. And I hope anyone having any doubts as to the true ownership of these places realizes the significance of a written explanation of the corporate structure of the company, provided by Rival/the four defendants. This lawsuit is backed up by evidence, not made up facts, IMO anyway.

I'm sorry, but John hasn't helped his case, not in my book anyway. I will look forward to some statement by Rival in re: paying out progressive jackpots in one lump sum payment.

 

[Pinababy69]

If any of you have noticed, casinos that have progressive payout stipulations are dropped from the accredited section. So far we only had to drop one casino (Playtech powered bettercasino.com). Bummer for them.

Not to derail, but I know that I definitely noticed, and I'm ecstatic you are taking that line. There is no excuse for ANY casino to pay out a progressive jackpot in installments. Well, no excuses that don't involve them making some extra money for themselves (one way or another), using the player's money.

This whole progressive thing is a HUGE issue, and I would hope that affiliates will take this into consideration when deciding which casinos to promote. If a casino won't pay a progressive winner/player in one payment.....don't promote them, period. It is not acceptable behaviour.

Thumbs up from me Bryan.

 

[KasinoKing]

I'm gonna try and say this without being a smartass, I actually always liked John. But I think he should have spent the time necessary and gone through ALL 9 pages at the GPWA and the 18 or 19 pages here.

Never expected a Rival operator to pull something like this? As a software provider? Doing a good job of keeping their reputation in check?

All I can say is that John must have completely missed the part about almost all of the Rivals being white labels, becoming public knowledge. And the posts which highlighted this part of the legal documents:

I don't know how to put this without causing unintentional offense, but I'll try.
I really like John too - I've met him in person several times and he's a great guy. But the bottom line is he is a 'Rival Man'; he has worked his way up to a high position & is obviously well remunerated for his efforts, so naturally it is understandable that he will defend Rival to the death.
I'm not saying he is lying or doing anything underhand, but I think it's fair to say he is 'more than slightly biased'...

2c.

 

[Pinababy69]

I don't know how to put this without causing unintentional offense, but I'll try.
I really like John too - I've met him in person several times and he's a great guy. But the bottom line is he is a 'Rival Man'; he has worked his way up to a high position & is obviously well remunerated for his efforts, so naturally it is understandable that he will defend Rival to the death.
I'm not saying he is lying or doing anything underhand, but I think it's fair to say he is 'more than slightly biased'...

2c.

Totally agree with that assessment KK. I also don't feel any need to "dwell" on his statement, but maybe in the future he should take the time to read everything, and understand what has already become public knowledge, prior to posting. IMO, he would have been better off saying nothing, than making some of the comments he did. That's the only point I was trying to make.

For me, unless there are some huge bombshells to be dropped, I don't see this thread going much further with the exception of a statement by Rival and/or one or any of the white label partners in re: progressive jackpot payments. That is the one thing I want to see addressed. As for everything else, my own mind is made up...as I'm sure is everyone else's (one way or another).

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Totally agree with that assessment KK. I also don't feel any need to "dwell" on his statement, but maybe in the future he should take the time to read everything, and understand what has already become public knowledge, prior to posting. IMO, he would have been better off saying nothing, than making some of the comments he did. That's the only point I was trying to make.

For me, unless there are some huge bombshells to be dropped, I don't see this thread going much further with the exception of a statement by Rival and/or one or any of the white label partners in re: progressive jackpot payments. That is the one thing I want to see addressed. As for everything else, my own mind is made up...as I'm sure is everyone else's (one way or another).

@ KK, somewhere, maybe the reply to Sdaddy, I dittoed what you just posted up to where you mention liar or simi(liar) but elsewhere I said cover ups, many other unethical practices, well disguised schemes, intent, den of whatever. If in the US, just sayin, there may be another civil case and some types of fraud are criminal.

Pina, no bombs but loaded with grenades, John just has to guess which grenades and fyi I have a legal opinion, then found almost similiar on the net that it may be possible to file suit (gaming related) from the States in Canada but highly unlikely one's arguement and/or basis of such would stand or be granted but interesting. The legal disclaimers and TandC's would be laughed at legally unless a judge woke up on the wrong side again, the risk of Court......There will be a James Grosjean but when...I'm done....If Pina was sick, then I'm dead........A effing joke!!

 

[NASHVEGAS]

If Bryan wants I can drop a bombshell but if a software malfunction justifies a house advantage of beyond what is supposed, then I won't waste my time.

Actually in context, the optimal malfunction for the house but have an expert confirm. All documented. John lies but his lie is just stupid and incomprehensible. 2 BJ experts have shots and paraphrasing one's comment, "very compelling", 6 month ordeal but I stopped playing for 2 to 3 months in that period.

Getting tired,lol!

 

[RobWin]

The stipulation I was referring to was that progressives are paid out in relatively small increments (say 9k a month). That's a no go in Casinomeisterland.

Since this thread has now turned out to be all about whether "Rival Progressive Jackpots" are going to pay out in full instead of increments can someone please point me to the rest of the "Written T's & C's" stating that the "Accredited RTG Casinos listed here also pay out the progressive jackpots in full in one lump sum too. I can't seem to find that listed anywhere in their T's & C's along with a few other Casinos listed here.

Anybody? I'm sure I have just missed reading :Read: that somewhere, so if you could find it and point it out for me I would sincerely appreciate it. I'm actually thinking about writing an article to publish regarding which Online Casinos actually do pay the "Progressive Jackpots" out in full in one lump sum. Could make for some interesting reading..

 

[bb28]

Since this thread has now turned out to be all about whether Rival Progressive Jackpots are going to pay out in full instead of increments.

I sincerly hope that the above is NOT going to be the only issue addressed or discussed from now on in this thread.

Even if Rival comes forward and changes that particular policy that doesn't make all the other stuff go away or make it OK to sweep the rest under the rug.
Players and Aff's will have to come to their own conclusions but right now do we have enough information to put it to bed? I don't think so! The responsibility of deciding whether to promote or not falls on the aff's shoulder and unless the other issues are cleared and addressed it doesn't make everything else or any of it all hunky dory.

 

[RobWin]

I sincerly hope that the above is NOT going to be the only issue addressed or discussed from now on in this thread.

Even if Rival comes forward and changes that particular policy that doesn't make all the other stuff go away or make it OK to sweep the rest under the rug.
Players and Aff's will have to come to their own conclusions but right now do we have enough information to put it to bed? I don't think so! The responsibility of deciding whether to promote or not falls on the aff's shoulder and unless the other issues are cleared and addressed it doesn't make everything else or any of it all hunky dory.

Well I agree, but all you need to do is just read the last five pages... But I also do hope that someone can answer my question for me too.

 

[BingoT]

The responsibility of deciding whether to promote or not falls on the aff's shoulder

I asked this also & got no reply (The only reply was from my Bugger and that's it.)if you will or not.
Promote or Play that's the question
Or are you waiting for this court thing to make your ruling on this?
Thank You

 

[Pinababy69]

Since this thread has now turned out to be all about whether "Rival Progressive Jackpots" are going to pay out in full instead of increments can someone please point me to the rest of the "Written T's & C's" stating that the "Accredited RTG Casinos listed here also pay out the progressive jackpots in full in one lump sum too. I can't seem to find that listed anywhere in their T's & C's along with a few other Casinos listed here.

Anybody? I'm sure I have just missed reading :Read: that somewhere, so if you could find it and point it out for me I would sincerely appreciate it. I'm actually thinking about writing an article to publish regarding which Online Casinos actually do pay the "Progressive Jackpots" out in full in one lump sum. Could make for some interesting reading..

Could be an interesting topic/read Rob. It is actually something I had been thinking of doing (checking the others I mean), at some point. You wouldn't have to check Microgaming, as I think it's already been determined that they DO pay out their progressives in one lump sum, no exceptions. The one time that one of their licensees tried to pull a fast one, it was taken care of pretty quickly. But I think the Playtech case highlights that not all software providers require their licensees to abide by this.

I don't think it's so much about written T&C's, I'm not sure you'll even find progressive jackpots addressed in the T&C's. It's more of whether the casinos who limit their cashouts with max withdrawal limits, actually apply this to progressives as well. We know that Rival does (with the exception of Slotocash). We know that some of the Playtechs do (one of which has been dropped here). So as far as the other Playtechs on the accredited list here, it seems they are good to go. So that leaves all the other casinos on the accredited list to check. IMO, I think it would have to be done manually ie. via email or live chat. Those are my thoughts anyway.

When I started questioning Rival a couple of months ago about their progressive wins, and maximum monthly payouts...I remember asking Enzo what his/their policy was. He stated unequivocally that any progressive wins would be paid in one lump sum. I don't have it in writing, but that is what he said.

I also thought about starting a thread re: How Progressives are Paid Out, and asking the reps from each and every accredited casino, to comment on their particular casino's policy re: progressive payouts. Might be easier that way, lol.

 

[RobWin]

Could be an interesting topic/read Rob. It is actually something I had been thinking of doing (checking the others I mean), at some point. You wouldn't have to check Microgaming, as I think it's already been determined that they DO pay out their progressives in one lump sum, no exceptions. The one time that one of their licensees tried to pull a fast one, it was taken care of pretty quickly. But I think the Playtech case highlights that not all software providers require their licensees to abide by this.

I don't think it's so much about written T&C's, I'm not sure you'll even find progressive jackpots addressed in the T&C's. It's more of whether the casinos who limit their cashouts with max withdrawal limits, actually apply this to progressives as well. We know that Rival does (with the exception of Slotocash). We know that some of the Playtechs do (one of which has been dropped here). So as far as the other Playtechs on the accredited list here, it seems they are good to go. So that leaves all the other casinos on the accredited list to check. IMO, I think it would have to be done manually ie. via email or live chat. Those are my thoughts anyway.

When I started questioning Rival a couple of months ago about their progressive wins, and maximum monthly payouts...I remember asking Enzo what his/their policy was. He stated unequivocally that any progressive wins would be paid in one lump sum. I don't have it in writing, but that is what he said.

I also thought about starting a thread re: How Progressives are Paid Out, and asking the reps from each and every accredited casino, to comment on their particular casino's policy re: progressive payouts. Might be easier that way, lol.

To me, I think it should be a term that is mentioned with clarity in All Casinos T's & C's, even MG's. This would leave absolutely no room whatsoever for speculation or questioning of this unknown and eluded to missing payout term. It would also give a little more respect to the casinos that did include this mention in their T's & C's and would show them in a new light of transparency IMO.

 

[Pinababy69]

To me, I think it should be a term that is mentioned with clarity in All Casinos T's & C's, even MG's. This would leave absolutely no room whatsoever for speculation or questioning of this unknown and eluded to missing payout term. It would also give a little more respect to the casinos that did include this mention in their T's & C's and would show them in a new light of transparency IMO.

I agree Rob, 100%. I was just commenting on the current situation. In my perfect world, there would be no ambiguous T&C's and all casinos would treat all players fairly. But again (here I go, lol)....that could only be accomplished if players refused to play at places that don't abide by this, if affiliates refused to promote these places, if sites such as this one would refuse to accredit them, if overseers such as eCOGRA insisted on such things prior to certification and if licensing jurisdictions actually policed their licensees. Joint effort....it just won't work any other way. And I know that is probably a pipe dream. Just to use one example.....you get a site such as Casinomeister who will rogue a certain casino (let's say Virtual, just for fun), yet you get those players who insist on playing there no matter what. If you can't stop players from doing stupid things, when they have all the info laid out in front of them.....how is there any hope for the rest of it?

 

[Rusty]

I am still waiting to hear which Rival Casinos knew about this promotion in advance.
It is a very important question.

If they knew then they can hardly distance themselves from this scandal and it smacks of conspiracy.

If they did not know then they were being ripped off by Rival and Irish Luck as well because their reputation and income suffers by association and their Casino had no chance of basking in the positive publicity a large Progressive winner brings-not to mention the chance of winning it back from the player.
There are all sorts of ramifications so what are they doing about it?

The lump sum issue is a big one but surely there are much larger issues here that need addressing.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

@ Nash - the GPWA folks have seen the Quebec court papers, right?

UPDATE: Michael has replied to my PM sent a few days ago. And strictly just addressing your inquiry, he had/has not.

He should have just received an email of the PDF file "MOTION......"

Cheers,G

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Nash IIRC back when you was doin all that winning at TIV didn't they up the amount that you could withdraw per week? or did I read that thread wrong back before you hit the Progressive?

Cindy

In the The TIV thread, John states they are going to remove the limits on flushes across his entire group, iirc, so unlimited flushes for VIP and maybe all players . Did they do that and could you also as John posts in the TIV thread where John also states as always sorry,miscommunication,blah,blah? And his great quote (as he did not read that thread either where I and few others question ethics and I add then just as now with intent) paraphrasing---no I will get the direct quote and add as an edit in a few.

Well, I was told so and agreed to return as a player 3 or 4 months later. So I have a nice run, I make sure everything is in order and per that skin they are waiting on me. Lianne (asst. affy manager) just needs the amount I desire to flush and a done deal. Wanna bet? To be continued T-ROW!!

 

[NASHVEGAS]

In the The TIV thread, John states they are going to remove the limits on flushes across his entire group, iirc, so unlimited flushes for VIP and maybe all players . Did they do that and could you also as John posts in the TIV thread where John also states as always sorry,miscommunication,blah,blah? And his great quote (as he did not read that thread either where I and few others question ethics and I add then just as now with intent) paraphrasing---no I will get the direct quote and add as an edit in a few

Well, I was told so and agreed to return as a player 3 or 4 months later. So I have a nice run, I make sure everything is in order and per that skin they are waiting on me. Lianne (asst. affy manager) just needs the amount I desire to flush and a done deal. Wanna bet? To be continued T-ROW!!

On the iirc above it was not the entire group, ftr.

APRIL 2008 BY JOHN WRIGHT

Our current terms are as follows, 2k/day and 4k/week for limits at thisisvegas.

We will now flush full amounts but will pay based on the terms. We are doing this now due to player and affiliate complaints and recommendations. This thread certainly has helped. Before we would not do this.

All casinos want you to play back your winnings. This topic will open up a larger debate involving floats (IMO confidential to casino), payment processing fees (fairly confidential to casino), ethics

Yeah, they are all just furious at the operator.

Markopolos was an idiot for 9 years. And others just masters of their own domain. An idiot, I am I said.