- Joined
- Apr 2, 2001
Should we be considering class action lawsuits? Both against PWC and Microgaming.
Online Casinos
- Thread starter opa
- Start date
-
- Tags
- netclubcasino
pokeraddict
Webmaster
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2002
- Location
- Las Vegas
To answer my own question, according to wizardofodds.com you dont split 88 vs face or ace in no peak rule, you also dont double 11 vs face and you split AA vs face but not ace. According to WOO house % is only .62% but it says this includes being able to double after split, dont think you can do that on MG BJ. cant imagine i would only lose 62 cents every $100 on MG BJ. A response from MG or any of their licensees is noticeably absent.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2003
They also have a two deck version: Hit 8,8 vs 10/A; hit 11 vs 10/A; Split A,A vs everything. House edge is 0.39% but I'm sure MG have it at atleast 39%.
cipher
Banned member - being a jerk
- Joined
- May 15, 2002
- Location
- Visalia, California
With all that we hear these days of the various shenanigans that are being played by the less than honorable casinos, I wanted to relate an experience that I recently had at the Colosseum casino.
First off, I was fortunate enough to have hit a Royal Straight Flush for $4,000.00 there. But more importantly the two Neteller withdrawals ($2,000.00 each) that I made did not require any additional validation as to who I was or any other sort of snivelling. I won they paid.
Thanks to the Casinomeister I found my way to the Colosseum Casino through the Reputable Casinos area of this forum. Thanks again Bryan.
First off, I was fortunate enough to have hit a Royal Straight Flush for $4,000.00 there. But more importantly the two Neteller withdrawals ($2,000.00 each) that I made did not require any additional validation as to who I was or any other sort of snivelling. I won they paid.
Thanks to the Casinomeister I found my way to the Colosseum Casino through the Reputable Casinos area of this forum. Thanks again Bryan.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2003
- Location
- Home, sweet home
Congratulation! Good to hear some positive news 
after reading all the upseting news.
after reading all the upseting news.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2003
- Location
- The Boonies
Actually, the players will all be migrated.
Since I personally like RTG BJ a lot (I like the speed) I am delighted to see a group I trust move into this software. :yes:
Since I personally like RTG BJ a lot (I like the speed) I am delighted to see a group I trust move into this software. :yes:
Sorry Dominique - you are right...they are planning to migrate across old players, my point was that this is not going to happen instantly - the press release from the casinos stated "existing and new players will run on parallel platforms on parallel sites".
And you are right - it's good to see a decent set of casinos running on RTG - I too like the software, it's just a shame about the other jokers using it at the moment!
And you are right - it's good to see a decent set of casinos running on RTG - I too like the software, it's just a shame about the other jokers using it at the moment!
- Joined
- Jun 30, 1998
- Location
- Bierland
I just hope they are retaining their Kawanakee lisence. I spoke with RTG a couple of weeks ago about this, but I can't remember what they told me.
It must have been on a Friday (beernight)
:beer:
It must have been on a Friday (beernight)
:beer:
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2002
I basically don't split or double in that game, since the dealer is invincible. Hit the 11 and stand on the subsequent 14,15,or 16 that you end up with. Hit the 88, maybe split the AA but you probably won't see a 10 card.
My basic strategy for MG's european BJ is a FAR simpler system though. I DON'T PLAY IT! Try my strategy yourself and you'll always break even! Guaranteed :yes:
I don't believe its fair, so I stay away from it unless I am bored and flushed with cash and want to see if its still invincible.
My basic strategy for MG's european BJ is a FAR simpler system though. I DON'T PLAY IT! Try my strategy yourself and you'll always break even! Guaranteed :yes:
I don't believe its fair, so I stay away from it unless I am bored and flushed with cash and want to see if its still invincible.
I would hold off on the lawsuits for the time being.
The portal owners require more detail; fair enough, and I recall anyway that the Sept. 1st release was always a rough copy to satisfy the masses, with a more complete breakdown to follow. That should satify - or do mean silence? - the portal owners.
So, a reasonable compromise: forget about lawsuits for now; just stop playing Microgaming until all details, to the satisfation of all parties, have been released. Then, if it transpires that TrueGambler was in fact having us on all the time and Microgaming turn out to be the innocent victim of a heinous attempt to bring them down, players can return, and Microgaming can sue TG's ass for the rest of eternity.
And if (please, no) it turns out that the report was genuine and an accurate record and interpretation of the collected data, and Microgaming are in fact dealing a rigged game (surely not?), players can dump them and start contacting their legal representation.
Since the portal owners are so clearly not swayed by profit on this one, they surely can't object too much.
The portal owners require more detail; fair enough, and I recall anyway that the Sept. 1st release was always a rough copy to satisfy the masses, with a more complete breakdown to follow. That should satify - or do mean silence? - the portal owners.
So, a reasonable compromise: forget about lawsuits for now; just stop playing Microgaming until all details, to the satisfation of all parties, have been released. Then, if it transpires that TrueGambler was in fact having us on all the time and Microgaming turn out to be the innocent victim of a heinous attempt to bring them down, players can return, and Microgaming can sue TG's ass for the rest of eternity.
And if (please, no) it turns out that the report was genuine and an accurate record and interpretation of the collected data, and Microgaming are in fact dealing a rigged game (surely not?), players can dump them and start contacting their legal representation.
Since the portal owners are so clearly not swayed by profit on this one, they surely can't object too much.
- Joined
- Jun 30, 1998
- Location
- Bierland
From today's newsletter, so there isn't any question on how I feel about this:
WORD FROM THE MEISTER
TRUE GAMBLER'S REPORT
The long awaited OCA Black Jack report from True Gambler is finally here. This is a report that concerns the play action of Blackjack via the software providers Microgaming, Oddson, Random Logic and RTG. The report is a painstaking collection of data which represents over 3 million recorded hands from 200 players of online casinos. The Blackjack play was analyzed by the Online Casino Analyzer (OCA), a program that compares the actual play to the expected outcome of what the "dealer" deals out. Most of us had been anticipating the release of this report for some time now, actually since May. Unfortunately, this report is having damaging consequences.
But damaging to whom? Unfortunately, it's damaging everyone involved. The crux of the matter is that TrueGambler reported that the likelihood of a Microgaming dealer receiving the number of 17-21/BJ hands is very low, actually rounding this out to zero. Also the number of "pushed" hands was higher than expected, and the dealer lost less hands than would be expected. In other words, according to these results and in layman's terms Microgaming is using cheating software.
When the news hit the message boards and gambling related forums, there was an outcry from players. I'm not going to attempt to rehash what has been said in the forums concerning this because it is getting picked to death. Players are screaming "rip-off!" "We've been screwed!", "I knew it all along." etc. And a lot of the portal webmasters are arguing on how the data was analyzed and collected. Everyone seems to be a bit confused. Why? Because of the way the information has been presented. When it comes to presenting information that has the potentiality to bring a multi-million dollar industry to it's knees, you don't show up in an 84 VW Golf wearing jeans and a T-shirt handcarrying a manila folder with data and no explanation.
Truegambler chose to offer their information as more or less raw data; they intentionally did this so that players could come to their own conclusions. This is understandable since unhappy software providers could bring in a truckload of lawyers from hell. And who wants to get sued? But the data in this form is unfathomable to most players. Unless you are a math-head, your eyes will glaze over if anyone attempts to explain these findings.
But once they are explained, there are more questions at hand. Where is the methodology? What do we know about how this information was collected? This is not explained. Why is the software still in its Beta version? This gives the impression that the developers aren't yet convinced that the program is running at a full fledged 100%. Why does the Truegambler website still have Microgaming banners flapping in the breeze? If Truegambler believes that the results of this report indicate that Microgaming's software is cheating players, why haven't they taken five minutes to replace these banners?
What about casinos like Ladbrokes? As most of you are aware, this is a brick and mortar casino owned by the Hilton group that has an extremely high profile, especially in the UK. I would only assume that this casino watches their play outcome very carefully. To do otherwise would be unimaginable.
These aren't only my questions, these are the questions that are being tossed around by nearly everyone who has read this report.
In my opinion, for whatever this is worth, it seems that this was intended as a "forum offering"; something for everyone to fight over and pick apart in the forums. I know that Truegambler was under pressure to release the findings, and perhaps they thought they were doing the players a favor by warning them of possible dirty deeds by Microgaming, but in doing so, I think they left themselves too much out in the open for scrutiny.
And don't get me wrong. I'm not pooh-poohing the report or the data that they collected. But to be presented in this manner causes me to question the seriousness of it. Casinomeister is THE online casino watchdog. I'm here to protect the players by giving them information. I'm also here to assist casino operators, portal operators, and anyone else who has a stake in this industry. Am I expected to blacklist a software provider for what this report indicates? Tell me, what am I supposed to do?
And what gets me, is that this causes a player vs. portal owner thing to resurface. Players should be aware that most portal owners want nothing more than honest casinos that offer fair games. To insinuate that all portal operators think otherwise is a knee-jerk response in itself.
But for now, it looks as if Truegambler is regrouping. Presently on their site is the following:
We will be releasing an addendum to the BJ report on September 14th. This addendum will provide more explanations of the statistics displayed. It will also provide more details on how the theoreticals are calculated. We will also have a FAQ will contain questions asked here at TrueGambler regarding the report and complete answers to these questions. Hopefully this addendum will satisfy everyone concerns regarding the report. Thank you for your interest and support.
I hope this isn't too little too late. This is a classic example of 20/20 hindsight damage control. This should have been part of the initial report to begin with. Hopefully more sense can be made from this in the next couple of weeks.
In the meantime, I suggest that if you have questions pertaining to this report that you post them in Truegambler's forum so that they can be properly addressed.
WORD FROM THE MEISTER
TRUE GAMBLER'S REPORT
The long awaited OCA Black Jack report from True Gambler is finally here. This is a report that concerns the play action of Blackjack via the software providers Microgaming, Oddson, Random Logic and RTG. The report is a painstaking collection of data which represents over 3 million recorded hands from 200 players of online casinos. The Blackjack play was analyzed by the Online Casino Analyzer (OCA), a program that compares the actual play to the expected outcome of what the "dealer" deals out. Most of us had been anticipating the release of this report for some time now, actually since May. Unfortunately, this report is having damaging consequences.
But damaging to whom? Unfortunately, it's damaging everyone involved. The crux of the matter is that TrueGambler reported that the likelihood of a Microgaming dealer receiving the number of 17-21/BJ hands is very low, actually rounding this out to zero. Also the number of "pushed" hands was higher than expected, and the dealer lost less hands than would be expected. In other words, according to these results and in layman's terms Microgaming is using cheating software.
When the news hit the message boards and gambling related forums, there was an outcry from players. I'm not going to attempt to rehash what has been said in the forums concerning this because it is getting picked to death. Players are screaming "rip-off!" "We've been screwed!", "I knew it all along." etc. And a lot of the portal webmasters are arguing on how the data was analyzed and collected. Everyone seems to be a bit confused. Why? Because of the way the information has been presented. When it comes to presenting information that has the potentiality to bring a multi-million dollar industry to it's knees, you don't show up in an 84 VW Golf wearing jeans and a T-shirt handcarrying a manila folder with data and no explanation.
Truegambler chose to offer their information as more or less raw data; they intentionally did this so that players could come to their own conclusions. This is understandable since unhappy software providers could bring in a truckload of lawyers from hell. And who wants to get sued? But the data in this form is unfathomable to most players. Unless you are a math-head, your eyes will glaze over if anyone attempts to explain these findings.
But once they are explained, there are more questions at hand. Where is the methodology? What do we know about how this information was collected? This is not explained. Why is the software still in its Beta version? This gives the impression that the developers aren't yet convinced that the program is running at a full fledged 100%. Why does the Truegambler website still have Microgaming banners flapping in the breeze? If Truegambler believes that the results of this report indicate that Microgaming's software is cheating players, why haven't they taken five minutes to replace these banners?
What about casinos like Ladbrokes? As most of you are aware, this is a brick and mortar casino owned by the Hilton group that has an extremely high profile, especially in the UK. I would only assume that this casino watches their play outcome very carefully. To do otherwise would be unimaginable.
These aren't only my questions, these are the questions that are being tossed around by nearly everyone who has read this report.
In my opinion, for whatever this is worth, it seems that this was intended as a "forum offering"; something for everyone to fight over and pick apart in the forums. I know that Truegambler was under pressure to release the findings, and perhaps they thought they were doing the players a favor by warning them of possible dirty deeds by Microgaming, but in doing so, I think they left themselves too much out in the open for scrutiny.
And don't get me wrong. I'm not pooh-poohing the report or the data that they collected. But to be presented in this manner causes me to question the seriousness of it. Casinomeister is THE online casino watchdog. I'm here to protect the players by giving them information. I'm also here to assist casino operators, portal operators, and anyone else who has a stake in this industry. Am I expected to blacklist a software provider for what this report indicates? Tell me, what am I supposed to do?
And what gets me, is that this causes a player vs. portal owner thing to resurface. Players should be aware that most portal owners want nothing more than honest casinos that offer fair games. To insinuate that all portal operators think otherwise is a knee-jerk response in itself.
But for now, it looks as if Truegambler is regrouping. Presently on their site is the following:
We will be releasing an addendum to the BJ report on September 14th. This addendum will provide more explanations of the statistics displayed. It will also provide more details on how the theoreticals are calculated. We will also have a FAQ will contain questions asked here at TrueGambler regarding the report and complete answers to these questions. Hopefully this addendum will satisfy everyone concerns regarding the report. Thank you for your interest and support.
I hope this isn't too little too late. This is a classic example of 20/20 hindsight damage control. This should have been part of the initial report to begin with. Hopefully more sense can be made from this in the next couple of weeks.
In the meantime, I suggest that if you have questions pertaining to this report that you post them in Truegambler's forum so that they can be properly addressed.
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
Well a very well balanced and expressed statement above from casinomeister.
Unlike most other casino software providers, MG do not run the backend of the show. I can't believe that with such a report and investigation on MG that this fact is not included, along with many other facts, just a few of which I include below.
quote: Microgaming is a privately held company registered in the Isle of Man with a sales and marketing office and custom demonstration facility in London.
quote: The backbone of casino software is the Casino Management System. This is the system that manages player accounts and tracks all game activity and transactions. It is common for the casino management software to provide extensive data mining facilities to operators allowing them to keep in touch with the minute-by-minute changes in their casinos.
Unlike many of its competitors, Microgaming does not centrally host the back office systems for all of its clients. Instead, clients host and manage their own back office systems. While this restricts its ability to profit from technology hosting revenues, it feels that allowing clients to manage their own architectures benefits access to gaming and operating information and also allows it to focus on its core competency of casino software architecture.
quote: In 1995 Microgaming launched the Player Tracking System. This back office software enables the management of play within an online casino.
quote: Microgaming server structure Microgamings technology is structured somewhat differently from the majority of the competition. Unlike a lot of casino technology vendors, Microgaming does not host the back office technologies. The gaming network is always established in a licensed jurisdiction as it hosts the gambling engine. Other elements of the casino need not be co-located with the consumers gaming network and are just as likely to be hosted overseas or by a contracted third party. In particular financial processing and customer service are often handled by a contractor.
As a casino grows it is more and more likely for it to host and run more functions of the operation than when it started. The flexibility of Microgamings offering allows the operator to have as much or little control as they feel they can handle. In particular it is common for larger operators to own the web hosting and download servers and many also choose to bring customer service in house.
quote: Microgamings business model is based on an up-front reservation fee and then a monthly usage fee of between 15% and 25% of gross win, depending on casino revenues.
(Message edited by galaxy on September 06, 2003)
Unlike most other casino software providers, MG do not run the backend of the show. I can't believe that with such a report and investigation on MG that this fact is not included, along with many other facts, just a few of which I include below.
quote: Microgaming is a privately held company registered in the Isle of Man with a sales and marketing office and custom demonstration facility in London.
quote: The backbone of casino software is the Casino Management System. This is the system that manages player accounts and tracks all game activity and transactions. It is common for the casino management software to provide extensive data mining facilities to operators allowing them to keep in touch with the minute-by-minute changes in their casinos.
Unlike many of its competitors, Microgaming does not centrally host the back office systems for all of its clients. Instead, clients host and manage their own back office systems. While this restricts its ability to profit from technology hosting revenues, it feels that allowing clients to manage their own architectures benefits access to gaming and operating information and also allows it to focus on its core competency of casino software architecture.
quote: In 1995 Microgaming launched the Player Tracking System. This back office software enables the management of play within an online casino.
quote: Microgaming server structure Microgamings technology is structured somewhat differently from the majority of the competition. Unlike a lot of casino technology vendors, Microgaming does not host the back office technologies. The gaming network is always established in a licensed jurisdiction as it hosts the gambling engine. Other elements of the casino need not be co-located with the consumers gaming network and are just as likely to be hosted overseas or by a contracted third party. In particular financial processing and customer service are often handled by a contractor.
As a casino grows it is more and more likely for it to host and run more functions of the operation than when it started. The flexibility of Microgamings offering allows the operator to have as much or little control as they feel they can handle. In particular it is common for larger operators to own the web hosting and download servers and many also choose to bring customer service in house.
quote: Microgamings business model is based on an up-front reservation fee and then a monthly usage fee of between 15% and 25% of gross win, depending on casino revenues.
(Message edited by galaxy on September 06, 2003)
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2000
Murder, do you know when the incidents happened that necessitated a settlement in November 2000?
Galaxy, many Microgaming servers are hosted together on the Kahnawake Reserve in Canada. Sunny's were. Microgaming had access to those servers, and according to Sunny, seized the actual hardware in the course of their dispute. What percentage of Microsoft licensees have sole control of their game servers?
Galaxy, many Microgaming servers are hosted together on the Kahnawake Reserve in Canada. Sunny's were. Microgaming had access to those servers, and according to Sunny, seized the actual hardware in the course of their dispute. What percentage of Microsoft licensees have sole control of their game servers?
cipher
Banned member - being a jerk
- Joined
- May 15, 2002
- Location
- Visalia, California
This was just the other night at the Colosseum Casino. Have a good one.
Cipher
Attach Removed (Old not found)
Cipher
Attach Removed (Old not found)
Mary - yes that Sunny story certainly makes for interesting reading with CF stating that MG made intrusions in to their servers, which MG deny.
As of 04/02 MG market share of operators was estimated to be 38%*
* = Software suppliers by revenue of operators
(I wonder the extent of the power backend controls give operators/their chosen third parties? .. although MG must surely have some form of access so that it may access hard infomation on the monthly revenue it has earned from the individual casinos profits. Its certainly not going to be a trust agreement between MG and a casino.)
These are two interesting MG sourced brochures.
(in PDF)
Re you post on the previous page about the Antigua and the black box system - this is how it was reported in the UK Goverment Culture Gambling Review (re recommendations towards the new Gaming Bill of Britain which is still being prepared)
the special attributes of interactive gambling,
...plans to attempt to regulate the internet companies in Antigua have been met with hostility from many operators. Last year plans to introduce a black box system, which would enable regulators to track financial transactions led to many operators threatening to pull out of Antigua all together and sawthe Antiguan Director of Offshore Gaming receiving death threats.
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
As of 04/02 MG market share of operators was estimated to be 38%*
* = Software suppliers by revenue of operators
(I wonder the extent of the power backend controls give operators/their chosen third parties? .. although MG must surely have some form of access so that it may access hard infomation on the monthly revenue it has earned from the individual casinos profits. Its certainly not going to be a trust agreement between MG and a casino.)
These are two interesting MG sourced brochures.
(in PDF)
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
Re you post on the previous page about the Antigua and the black box system - this is how it was reported in the UK Goverment Culture Gambling Review (re recommendations towards the new Gaming Bill of Britain which is still being prepared)
the special attributes of interactive gambling,
...plans to attempt to regulate the internet companies in Antigua have been met with hostility from many operators. Last year plans to introduce a black box system, which would enable regulators to track financial transactions led to many operators threatening to pull out of Antigua all together and sawthe Antiguan Director of Offshore Gaming receiving death threats.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2000
Well, well, well. Why would Microgaming hire Datamonitor to do a report on them? That sort of thing is done for public companies to impress analysts and investors.
Having just returned after a couple of days absence I see some pretty alarming (in the sense of fairness and bias, which is what this is all fundamentally about) concepts being thrown around here, and I imagine probably at WOL, too.
Some examples:
Treat the software providers as guilty until proven innocent
This wasn't a "real" release - just that much abused term "soft launch" using software that is apparently still in Beta mode.
Some mistakes are possible and some number recrunching and "further detail" re-drafting is already in progress at TG.
Funding was a problem, as was pressure to release results - "publish and be damned" in effect.
The Sunny issue is being brought up yet again, presumably in an attempt to discredit one of the software providers mentioned in the report.
Most all software providers are crooks following the money trail.
This is a very serious issue with the potential to involve millions of dollars in damage to innocent parties - on both sides of the fence.
That is why I continue to believe that a real sense of consideration and responsibility should have attended the release of these statistics, and why I think that it should have been done in a more professional and complete - I repeat complete - manner.
This is not some spat on a message board - it is action that is casting serious aspersions on the products of companies in an industry where trust is a critical business component.
I am not saying the results are false or dishonest - hell, I can't even interpret them as they stand right now. But clearly there is something very wrong with the way in which this information has been launched and there are doubts about how it was obtained and those need to be urgently addressed if the report is to be credible.
If I were in the hotseat at any of the software providers concerned I would not be making any statements at present. Not because I felt a sense of guilt or even arrogance but because I would want to get at the facts before I opened my mouth or briefed my lawyers on litigation if that was warranted.
I would bet that the bigger operators and the software companies themselves are having experts study the report and what they can fathom of the methodology and the software (which I think someone has posted originated from a software academic called Gary Koehler) They may even be commissioning independent reports.
That is probably what you would do in their shoes when an attack is being made on your business credibility, and I for one suggested to TG months back that this would happen.
Bearing in mind the admittedly *informal* manner in which this exercise has so far been introduced I would prefer to see what the results of independent examinations, and what other experts already named in this thread have to say before I form an opinion.
The most evenly balanced post in this entire thread so far in my view is that from the Casinomeister's newsletter and I commend that to readers who are interested in seeing balanced comment rather than score-settling and anger.
Some examples:
Treat the software providers as guilty until proven innocent
This wasn't a "real" release - just that much abused term "soft launch" using software that is apparently still in Beta mode.
Some mistakes are possible and some number recrunching and "further detail" re-drafting is already in progress at TG.
Funding was a problem, as was pressure to release results - "publish and be damned" in effect.
The Sunny issue is being brought up yet again, presumably in an attempt to discredit one of the software providers mentioned in the report.
Most all software providers are crooks following the money trail.
This is a very serious issue with the potential to involve millions of dollars in damage to innocent parties - on both sides of the fence.
That is why I continue to believe that a real sense of consideration and responsibility should have attended the release of these statistics, and why I think that it should have been done in a more professional and complete - I repeat complete - manner.
This is not some spat on a message board - it is action that is casting serious aspersions on the products of companies in an industry where trust is a critical business component.
I am not saying the results are false or dishonest - hell, I can't even interpret them as they stand right now. But clearly there is something very wrong with the way in which this information has been launched and there are doubts about how it was obtained and those need to be urgently addressed if the report is to be credible.
If I were in the hotseat at any of the software providers concerned I would not be making any statements at present. Not because I felt a sense of guilt or even arrogance but because I would want to get at the facts before I opened my mouth or briefed my lawyers on litigation if that was warranted.
I would bet that the bigger operators and the software companies themselves are having experts study the report and what they can fathom of the methodology and the software (which I think someone has posted originated from a software academic called Gary Koehler) They may even be commissioning independent reports.
That is probably what you would do in their shoes when an attack is being made on your business credibility, and I for one suggested to TG months back that this would happen.
Bearing in mind the admittedly *informal* manner in which this exercise has so far been introduced I would prefer to see what the results of independent examinations, and what other experts already named in this thread have to say before I form an opinion.
The most evenly balanced post in this entire thread so far in my view is that from the Casinomeister's newsletter and I commend that to readers who are interested in seeing balanced comment rather than score-settling and anger.
Having just returned after a couple of days absence I see some pretty alarming (in the sense of fairness and bias, which is what this is all fundamentally about) concepts being thrown around here, and I imagine probably at WOL, too.
Some examples:
Treat the software providers as guilty until proven innocent
This wasn't a "real" release - just that much abused term "soft launch" using software that is apparently still in Beta mode.
Some mistakes are possible and some number recrunching and "further detail" re-drafting is already in progress at TG.
Funding was a problem, as was pressure to release results - "publish and be damned" in effect.
The Sunny issue is being brought up yet again, presumably in an attempt to discredit one of the software providers mentioned in the report.
Most all software providers are crooks following the money trail.
This is a very serious issue with the potential to involve millions of dollars in damage to innocent parties - on both sides of the fence.
That is why I continue to believe that a real sense of consideration and responsibility should have attended the release of these statistics, and why I think that it should have been done in a more professional and complete - I repeat complete - manner.
This is not some spat on a message board - it is action that is casting serious aspersions on the products of companies in an industry where trust is a critical business component.
I am not saying the results are false or dishonest - hell, I can't even interpret them as they stand right now. But clearly there is something very wrong with the way in which this information has been launched and there are doubts about how it was obtained and those need to be urgently addressed if the report is to be credible.
If I were in the hotseat at any of the software providers concerned I would not be making any statements at present. Not because I felt a sense of guilt or even arrogance but because I would want to get at the facts before I opened my mouth or briefed my lawyers on litigation if that was warranted.
I would bet that the bigger operators and the software companies themselves are having experts study the report and what they can fathom of the methodology and the software (which I think someone has posted originated from a software academic called Gary Koehler) They may even be commissioning independent reports.
That is probably what you would do in their shoes when an attack is being made on your business credibility, and I for one suggested to TG months back that this would happen.
Bearing in mind the admittedly *informal* manner in which this exercise has so far been introduced I would prefer to see what the results of independent examinations, and what other experts already named in this thread have to say before I form an opinion.
The most evenly balanced post in this entire thread so far in my view is that from the Casinomeister's newsletter and I commend that to readers who are interested in seeing balanced comment rather than score-settling and anger.
Some examples:
Treat the software providers as guilty until proven innocent
This wasn't a "real" release - just that much abused term "soft launch" using software that is apparently still in Beta mode.
Some mistakes are possible and some number recrunching and "further detail" re-drafting is already in progress at TG.
Funding was a problem, as was pressure to release results - "publish and be damned" in effect.
The Sunny issue is being brought up yet again, presumably in an attempt to discredit one of the software providers mentioned in the report.
Most all software providers are crooks following the money trail.
This is a very serious issue with the potential to involve millions of dollars in damage to innocent parties - on both sides of the fence.
That is why I continue to believe that a real sense of consideration and responsibility should have attended the release of these statistics, and why I think that it should have been done in a more professional and complete - I repeat complete - manner.
This is not some spat on a message board - it is action that is casting serious aspersions on the products of companies in an industry where trust is a critical business component.
I am not saying the results are false or dishonest - hell, I can't even interpret them as they stand right now. But clearly there is something very wrong with the way in which this information has been launched and there are doubts about how it was obtained and those need to be urgently addressed if the report is to be credible.
If I were in the hotseat at any of the software providers concerned I would not be making any statements at present. Not because I felt a sense of guilt or even arrogance but because I would want to get at the facts before I opened my mouth or briefed my lawyers on litigation if that was warranted.
I would bet that the bigger operators and the software companies themselves are having experts study the report and what they can fathom of the methodology and the software (which I think someone has posted originated from a software academic called Gary Koehler) They may even be commissioning independent reports.
That is probably what you would do in their shoes when an attack is being made on your business credibility, and I for one suggested to TG months back that this would happen.
Bearing in mind the admittedly *informal* manner in which this exercise has so far been introduced I would prefer to see what the results of independent examinations, and what other experts already named in this thread have to say before I form an opinion.
The most evenly balanced post in this entire thread so far in my view is that from the Casinomeister's newsletter and I commend that to readers who are interested in seeing balanced comment rather than score-settling and anger.
DaveR those were good posts, but having recently liaised with Price Waterhouse Coopers to write an article on the Total Gaming Transaction Review process (monthly payout percentages) I would like to point out that I was informed that raw and undistilled data flows from the casinos concerned to a dedicated server, which is where PwC accesses the information for their reviews.
Back in late 2000, Max Drayman (WinnerOnline.com) did an interview with Jacques Louw, Director of Global Risk Management Solutions at PriceWaterhouseCoopers, who stated:
"We have been very careful not to imply that we perform any review of the casinos or their financial results. However, we have performed various detailed reviews of casino backoffices, and have no reason to believe that any dishonesty exists. I want to assure you that my firm will resign immediately should there be any sign of dishonesty by any of our clients. Our reputation is worth much more than any fees any client could pay us."
Jetset recently contacted PWC to get in-depth info on the "auditing" process. Jetset's article "PWC Reports Bring Credibility To Online Casinos" is now available at WinnerOnline (Aug 2003). A relatively NEW part of the "audit" is a patented process called TGTR (Total Gaming Transaction Review), in which PWC performs a financial review of each casino:
"An independent financial reconciliation is then carried out by PwC to confirm the Closing Balance for each casino. This is done by balancing the total wagered and payout amounts to movements on players account balances.
This Calculated Closing Balance is then matched to the Actual Closing Balance, which is the sum of all players' balances on the casino's live gaming server at exactly midnight on the final day of the month."
The bottom line is that back in late 2000, PWC did not analyze this financial information.
NOW THEY DO.
PWC will only publish its monthly Payout Percentage reports if EACH casino passes this important test.
However, in my opinion, just because the decidated server data matches the live server data DOES NOT PROVE ANYTHING.
If a software developer truly wants to cheat, it is still very possible. How? By creating audit trails for players that don't really exist. (Or using real logs from PRACTICE MODE players)
In this way the software devloper could kill two birds at the same time:
1) Use these phony players to create artificaially large wins, thereby stealing $$$ from casino licensees.
2) Make absolutely sure the monthly payout % is somewhere around 97%.
Its a win-win situation for the software developer and NOONE can prove otherwise. Lack of regulation truly is a license to steal.
"We have been very careful not to imply that we perform any review of the casinos or their financial results. However, we have performed various detailed reviews of casino backoffices, and have no reason to believe that any dishonesty exists. I want to assure you that my firm will resign immediately should there be any sign of dishonesty by any of our clients. Our reputation is worth much more than any fees any client could pay us."
Jetset recently contacted PWC to get in-depth info on the "auditing" process. Jetset's article "PWC Reports Bring Credibility To Online Casinos" is now available at WinnerOnline (Aug 2003). A relatively NEW part of the "audit" is a patented process called TGTR (Total Gaming Transaction Review), in which PWC performs a financial review of each casino:
"An independent financial reconciliation is then carried out by PwC to confirm the Closing Balance for each casino. This is done by balancing the total wagered and payout amounts to movements on players account balances.
This Calculated Closing Balance is then matched to the Actual Closing Balance, which is the sum of all players' balances on the casino's live gaming server at exactly midnight on the final day of the month."
The bottom line is that back in late 2000, PWC did not analyze this financial information.
NOW THEY DO.
PWC will only publish its monthly Payout Percentage reports if EACH casino passes this important test.
However, in my opinion, just because the decidated server data matches the live server data DOES NOT PROVE ANYTHING.
If a software developer truly wants to cheat, it is still very possible. How? By creating audit trails for players that don't really exist. (Or using real logs from PRACTICE MODE players)
In this way the software devloper could kill two birds at the same time:
1) Use these phony players to create artificaially large wins, thereby stealing $$$ from casino licensees.
2) Make absolutely sure the monthly payout % is somewhere around 97%.
Its a win-win situation for the software developer and NOONE can prove otherwise. Lack of regulation truly is a license to steal.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Hi, I was doing some surfing and found a few casinos run by B3w. Montecasino was one. Can anyone tell me anything about these guys?
Hello! I need help in receiveing winings from casino. I live in Russia but many of casinos do not work with Russia. But i wish to advertize this casino and play in the casinos. I have a great experience in gambling and large winings and i need friends in USA and Europa to help me in receiveing money from casino (to their bank accounts) for fee of 10% from the received summ. If you are interested in this suggestion, please, e-mail me and i'll call you to discuss the problem.
[email protected]
[email protected]
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2001
Their software is some extremely buggy (easily confused with rigged)
https://www.casinomeister.com/rogue-casinos/
https://www.casinomeister.com/rogue-casinos/
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2001
Hahaha - idiot. I'm sure a bunch of people can't wait to get involved with a Russian scammer.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2003
what a joke!
Get lost idiot!
Get lost idiot!
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2002
OK, I'll help you get your casino winnings if you can help me get my commission from the Nigerian ex-government official who I helped retrieve $357 Million that he'd hidden away. I gave him my bank account number and have been waiting for the $70 Million commission he promised me for months now, but all that's happened is the money that was in the account was removed. This must have been a mistake, I'm sure they meant to deposit rather than withdraw, but I'm still waiting.
Also, I got a note the other day that one of relatives was in the plane that crashed a month or so ago in Africa. Apparently he was some kind of oil tycoon and has quite an estate that I should inherit, being his only living relative and all. I gave the lawyer who contacted me about this another bank account number, but the same thing happened there. Just a withdrawl and no deposit. I wish these banks would get these things right, I'm still waiting for that deposit too!
I hope you can help me, I've been so lucky lately with all these people contacting me with millions of dollars just waiting for me to claim. I won't even charge you the 10% you're offering to get your winnings out of the casino. And if you help me get my Nigerian money and/or my inheritance from my dear departed relative, I'll give you 15% of the money! Call me!!
Also, I got a note the other day that one of relatives was in the plane that crashed a month or so ago in Africa. Apparently he was some kind of oil tycoon and has quite an estate that I should inherit, being his only living relative and all. I gave the lawyer who contacted me about this another bank account number, but the same thing happened there. Just a withdrawl and no deposit. I wish these banks would get these things right, I'm still waiting for that deposit too!
I hope you can help me, I've been so lucky lately with all these people contacting me with millions of dollars just waiting for me to claim. I won't even charge you the 10% you're offering to get your winnings out of the casino. And if you help me get my Nigerian money and/or my inheritance from my dear departed relative, I'll give you 15% of the money! Call me!!
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2002
Not to mention that if the software is rigged, the books are still going to match. That won't be picked up in this type of audit, but the payout percentage would presumably show this. Although, one good win on a progressive would easily offset rigged losses from other games over the course of a month. You can always make the numbers show what you want them to show when you know you're being audited.
Dear sirs, don't be so agressive. About what scam you are saying?
I am not going to make any abuse to you. You can see that you do not risk cooperating with me. If you afraid of your money (in your bank account) you can open new bank account with only 1$ deposit on it. I can send ACH to you bank account or check to your home address.
I am not going to make any abuse to you. You can see that you do not risk cooperating with me. If you afraid of your money (in your bank account) you can open new bank account with only 1$ deposit on it. I can send ACH to you bank account or check to your home address.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2001
What scam? Read your own freakin post.
My personal opinion is that Microgaming infringed on a number of IGT's copyrights by duplicating 13+ games. MGS did a great job and ofcourse the RNG is proprietary to MGS. Nevertheless, a copy is a copy, and before anyone blasts the 3W group, they need to realize there are others just as guilty.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2001
You're confusing B3wgroup (French - Monte Casino, Aero Player) with 3wgraphics (Russian - Cloud, Homebets)
3wgraphics is copying Microgaming games - B3wgroup isn't
3wgraphics is copying Microgaming games - B3wgroup isn't
Dear Members & Guests,
Said without prejudice.
Since opening on the 27'th of June 2003, my requests to view necessary player data information
pertaining to cash flow, player deposits, & other critical data have fallen on deaf ears, in
regards to my partnership with GetACut, the casino back end administration.
Vegas Heat Casino was operating as a white label casino, in partnership with GetACut; as far as I
can attain a subsidiary of Telton Ltd ( currently a IGC member; Mr Keith Furlong ( IGC Deputy Director ) has been made aware of this current situation, who also owns Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)
On the web site of
and benefit of the back end tools available to webmasters who partner with the this program.
However nothing of the kind is present & or has ever existed, least while Vegas Heat Casino has been in partnership with GetACut; numerous promises to activate & or supply the stats have never materialized.
In essence without the ability to check this data at my convenience, I would have always been
faced with doubts, to the integrity of back end management.
IMHO there are a large number of discrepancy of which I required answers, answers to this day, which still remain unanswered.
Yes to be honest, I feel as I've been scammed, deceived & if not cheated.
Throughout the GetACut site they boast a 50% profit share, and compare their program against
other affiliate programs; no names mentioned, as literally paying webmaster's peanuts in
comparison to their 50% revenue share offered by GetAcut.
However in reality and truth, after costs are taken out from the profit which is 50%, you then
split the remaining profit with GetACut, in affect earning you 25%, while they take 75%. Yet
another attempt to twist the truth IMHO.
Again added throughout their site, any player introduced & or brought through the Webmasters
front end casino, these players are referred to as " Your Players ".
However as I have now cut all ties with GetACut, my request for the e-mails of all " My Players " have been refused.
Currently I have an outstanding commission owed to me by GetAcut. Also my request for " My
Players " e-mail addresses is yet to be received.
As of 5:30am AEST September the 9'th 2003, I
issued a formal request, allowing 48 hours for this debt & the supply of " My Players " e-mails
to be handed over.
In reflection I hold no doubt towards their financial status & their ability to pay winning players,( this includes winning players of Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) ).
I can only surmise IMHO that their; GetACut, pre-meditated failure to reveal the true facts in relationship to the GetACut casino partnership program, including accountability to stand by their words, as extremely alarming.
IMHO definately not in keeping with my beliefs & or befitting actions of an enterprise based on integrity & honest.
Active player accounts
If you have funds in your player account, please visit
Even though I have relinquished the casino software, I'm standing by all my players & am available to assist with a number of options:
You can have your funds transfered to Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) , request a cash out ( accounts still using bonus play throughs will be met with an amicable outcome ).
If anyone has any questions please feel free to contact me at the e-mail address available on the Veage Heat Casino web site, thank you.
In closing I would however like to take this opportunity to thank those of you who supported Vegas Heat Casino both by depositing & also by voting for us at Gambling.com .
I understand how frustrating this may be in your regard, however it is my firm belief, and also in keeping with my views towards operating an online casino with integrity & honesty, that my decision to end this partnership, is in everyone's best interests.
Sincere Regards
Joel - Manager
Vegas Heat Casino
Said without prejudice.
Since opening on the 27'th of June 2003, my requests to view necessary player data information
pertaining to cash flow, player deposits, & other critical data have fallen on deaf ears, in
regards to my partnership with GetACut, the casino back end administration.
Vegas Heat Casino was operating as a white label casino, in partnership with GetACut; as far as I
can attain a subsidiary of Telton Ltd ( currently a IGC member; Mr Keith Furlong ( IGC Deputy Director ) has been made aware of this current situation, who also owns Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
&
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
among other domain names.On the web site of
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
the above back end functionality is trumped as an major assetand benefit of the back end tools available to webmasters who partner with the this program.
However nothing of the kind is present & or has ever existed, least while Vegas Heat Casino has been in partnership with GetACut; numerous promises to activate & or supply the stats have never materialized.
In essence without the ability to check this data at my convenience, I would have always been
faced with doubts, to the integrity of back end management.
IMHO there are a large number of discrepancy of which I required answers, answers to this day, which still remain unanswered.
Yes to be honest, I feel as I've been scammed, deceived & if not cheated.
Throughout the GetACut site they boast a 50% profit share, and compare their program against
other affiliate programs; no names mentioned, as literally paying webmaster's peanuts in
comparison to their 50% revenue share offered by GetAcut.
However in reality and truth, after costs are taken out from the profit which is 50%, you then
split the remaining profit with GetACut, in affect earning you 25%, while they take 75%. Yet
another attempt to twist the truth IMHO.
Again added throughout their site, any player introduced & or brought through the Webmasters
front end casino, these players are referred to as " Your Players ".
However as I have now cut all ties with GetACut, my request for the e-mails of all " My Players " have been refused.
Currently I have an outstanding commission owed to me by GetAcut. Also my request for " My
Players " e-mail addresses is yet to be received.
As of 5:30am AEST September the 9'th 2003, I
issued a formal request, allowing 48 hours for this debt & the supply of " My Players " e-mails
to be handed over.
In reflection I hold no doubt towards their financial status & their ability to pay winning players,( this includes winning players of Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) ).
I can only surmise IMHO that their; GetACut, pre-meditated failure to reveal the true facts in relationship to the GetACut casino partnership program, including accountability to stand by their words, as extremely alarming.
IMHO definately not in keeping with my beliefs & or befitting actions of an enterprise based on integrity & honest.
Active player accounts
If you have funds in your player account, please visit
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
where my personal contact details are available.Even though I have relinquished the casino software, I'm standing by all my players & am available to assist with a number of options:
You can have your funds transfered to Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) , request a cash out ( accounts still using bonus play throughs will be met with an amicable outcome ).
If anyone has any questions please feel free to contact me at the e-mail address available on the Veage Heat Casino web site, thank you.
In closing I would however like to take this opportunity to thank those of you who supported Vegas Heat Casino both by depositing & also by voting for us at Gambling.com .
I understand how frustrating this may be in your regard, however it is my firm belief, and also in keeping with my views towards operating an online casino with integrity & honesty, that my decision to end this partnership, is in everyone's best interests.
Sincere Regards
Joel - Manager
Vegas Heat Casino
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2003
- Location
- Home, sweet home
Okay, I broke my promise about not to gamble online.
I got an email from SuperVegas Casino saying I have $75 on my account. I thought I already cash out all my money there almost 1 month ago. So I went to the website and check my account :$0. So I ask the live help and he said $0, too. Maybe a mistake? And he didn't know the sender's email address.
I even forward the email to them just in case it's a scam (like paypal one). But I download the software anyway. Just want to see myself.
Guess what? There is $75 bonus sitting at my account. LOL. So I broke my promise. I played some BJ and start to lose the bonus. So I try the slot Golden Pariate (? I think). Got several nice payout and now my account reach over $131.
I am "allowed" to cash in $108, so I did. I start to think why I have $75 sitting there and I don't even know. My guess is the sign up bonus since I didn't take it at first place. Not sure.
But it's really a nice surprise. I sure have fun but feel quilty, too. LOL!
(Message edited by bewitch on September 10, 2003)
I got an email from SuperVegas Casino saying I have $75 on my account. I thought I already cash out all my money there almost 1 month ago. So I went to the website and check my account :$0. So I ask the live help and he said $0, too. Maybe a mistake? And he didn't know the sender's email address.
I even forward the email to them just in case it's a scam (like paypal one). But I download the software anyway. Just want to see myself.
Guess what? There is $75 bonus sitting at my account. LOL. So I broke my promise. I played some BJ and start to lose the bonus. So I try the slot Golden Pariate (? I think). Got several nice payout and now my account reach over $131.
I am "allowed" to cash in $108, so I did. I start to think why I have $75 sitting there and I don't even know. My guess is the sign up bonus since I didn't take it at first place. Not sure.
But it's really a nice surprise. I sure have fun but feel quilty, too. LOL!
(Message edited by bewitch on September 10, 2003)
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Hi Guys,
Want to play poker online against real people? I have the place for you! Play at
PokerPromos
Want to play poker online against real people? I have the place for you! Play at
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
. Party Poker often has as many as 15,000 players online simultaneously. If you use the bonus code FUNTIME you will receive a $25 bonus on as little as a $50 deposit. If you use the bonus code THEBIG20 you will receive a bonus of 20% on your first deposit. The 20% bonus can be as large as $100. So come on by and play with other people that love to play poker.PokerPromos
pokeraddict
Webmaster
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2002
- Location
- Las Vegas
Bryan has warned you about posting here, I also took your spammed bonus codes and talked to a marketing rep and party, this is a violation of T&C here and from Party Poker and, at least according to PP, any signups with your bonus codes will not result in any referral $$ for you since spamming message boards is a clear violation of your agreement.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2002
Good job pokeraddict, I hadn't really noticed his affiliate code or I would have done the same as well. Friggin spammers
pokeraddict
Webmaster
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2002
- Location
- Las Vegas
Even though I have been playing at other rooms with better promos lately im still on great terms with party so i figured id go to live chat and wait for someone in marketing. You know Party hates spammers like this, as far as i know they have a 100% respectable reputation and wouldnt want that to be tarnished.
Dear Members & Guests,
I have just discovered that this site is a scam!!!
Do not enter any of your details into this site, or you risk having your bank accounts & or credit cards defrauded of all funds.
I have sent an e-mail to neteller.com to advise them of this scam. If at any stage you receive anything like this in future, if the site does not have at the start of the URL https it is not secure & it is likely that it is dodgy.
Whois info for NETELLERUK.COM
Administrative Contact:
Glavine Steve
Glavine Steve
Suite 532 (2nd Floor)
Toronto Hongkong 532
China
tel: 1 888 258 5859
fax: 1 888 258 5859
[email protected]
Technical Contact:
Su yang
Beijing hvtong online network
beijing changping tiantongxiyuan
beijing Beijing 102218
China
tel: 86 10 84848521 815
fax: 86 10 84848529
[email protected]
Billing Contact:
Wang jiaoyue
Beijing hvtong online network
beijing changping tiantongxiyuan
beijing Beijing 102218
China
tel: 86 10 84848521 802
fax: 86 10 84848529
[email protected]
Registration Date: 2003-09-08
Update Date: 2003-09-08
Expiration Date: 2004-09-08
Primary DNS: ns3.chinadns.com 211.154.211.88
Secondary DNS: ns4.chinadns.com 211.154.211.89
I have just discovered that this site is a scam!!!
Do not enter any of your details into this site, or you risk having your bank accounts & or credit cards defrauded of all funds.
I have sent an e-mail to neteller.com to advise them of this scam. If at any stage you receive anything like this in future, if the site does not have at the start of the URL https it is not secure & it is likely that it is dodgy.
Whois info for NETELLERUK.COM
Administrative Contact:
Glavine Steve
Glavine Steve
Suite 532 (2nd Floor)
Toronto Hongkong 532
China
tel: 1 888 258 5859
fax: 1 888 258 5859
[email protected]
Technical Contact:
Su yang
Beijing hvtong online network
beijing changping tiantongxiyuan
beijing Beijing 102218
China
tel: 86 10 84848521 815
fax: 86 10 84848529
[email protected]
Billing Contact:
Wang jiaoyue
Beijing hvtong online network
beijing changping tiantongxiyuan
beijing Beijing 102218
China
tel: 86 10 84848521 802
fax: 86 10 84848529
[email protected]
Registration Date: 2003-09-08
Update Date: 2003-09-08
Expiration Date: 2004-09-08
Primary DNS: ns3.chinadns.com 211.154.211.88
Secondary DNS: ns4.chinadns.com 211.154.211.89
I just spoke to Neteller.
They say this is the future home of their UK site. It isn't functional or intended to be yet.
This no doubt in preparation, and precaution to the US legislative BS going on, which I don't think will make this year anyway.
Target adjournment is Oct 3rd and they have a ton of other stuff to deal with first.
(Message edited by The_Cpa on September 11, 2003)
They say this is the future home of their UK site. It isn't functional or intended to be yet.
This no doubt in preparation, and precaution to the US legislative BS going on, which I don't think will make this year anyway.
Target adjournment is Oct 3rd and they have a ton of other stuff to deal with first.
(Message edited by The_Cpa on September 11, 2003)
the_cpa,
Well I spoke with them also and also checked out the site, it allowed me to enter a Fake account #, Fake pw & then dirrected me to the secure ID page which then accepted a Fake login.
I have also looked into the source code & this is suss. I also find it hard to believe that going by the whois info
Glavine Steve
Glavine Steve
Suite 532 (2nd Floor)
Toronto Hongkong 532
China
and the servers
Primary DNS: ns3.chinadns.com 211.154.211.88
Secondary DNS: ns4.chinadns.com 211.154.211.89
that this is at all connected to neteller, looks very suss to me, anyway I was told by neteller that it is not owned or related to Neteller.com
Well I spoke with them also and also checked out the site, it allowed me to enter a Fake account #, Fake pw & then dirrected me to the secure ID page which then accepted a Fake login.
I have also looked into the source code & this is suss. I also find it hard to believe that going by the whois info
Glavine Steve
Glavine Steve
Suite 532 (2nd Floor)
Toronto Hongkong 532
China
and the servers
Primary DNS: ns3.chinadns.com 211.154.211.88
Secondary DNS: ns4.chinadns.com 211.154.211.89
that this is at all connected to neteller, looks very suss to me, anyway I was told by neteller that it is not owned or related to Neteller.com
"Well I spoke with them also and also checked out the site"
What did they tell you?
I agree that the servers and the domain look a little screwy, but then again, we don't what the are doing either. They may just be testing different things.
They said it was was theirs, so I have no reason not to believe that.
He asked me to post on it so people wouldn't freak out. So I did that for him.}
What did they tell you?
I agree that the servers and the domain look a little screwy, but then again, we don't what the are doing either. They may just be testing different things.
They said it was was theirs, so I have no reason not to believe that.
He asked me to post on it so people wouldn't freak out. So I did that for him.}
the_cpa,
What I was told amounted to " Neteller does not own this site "
I just find it rather strange, that Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) is a legit web site. However it does not begin with the usual https as does
The neteller.co.uk site, allowed me to enter a fake account, p/w but unlike the netelleruk.com site, it informed me that the account I entered was not a valid neteller account. Hence I'm assuming it actually accesses the neteller.com db?
Maybe we need to obtain an offical word from neteller.com on this.
(Message edited by glodge on September 11, 2003)
What I was told amounted to " Neteller does not own this site "
I just find it rather strange, that Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) is a legit web site. However it does not begin with the usual https as does
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
The neteller.co.uk site, allowed me to enter a fake account, p/w but unlike the netelleruk.com site, it informed me that the account I entered was not a valid neteller account. Hence I'm assuming it actually accesses the neteller.com db?
Maybe we need to obtain an offical word from neteller.com on this.
(Message edited by glodge on September 11, 2003)
Hold the phone!
This is a scam!!!
I decided to go to the head of security. The .co.uk is theirs, so they were telling everyone thatthe UK site was in fact theirs assuming they were talking about the .co.uk domain.
This bogus site came up on the 8th. They are getting it shut down.
I ask the Security for Neteller to come here and post instructions for anyone that may have entered their info on the Bogus UK site.
(Message edited by The_Cpa on September 11, 2003)
This is a scam!!!
I decided to go to the head of security. The .co.uk is theirs, so they were telling everyone thatthe UK site was in fact theirs assuming they were talking about the .co.uk domain.
This bogus site came up on the 8th. They are getting it shut down.
I ask the Security for Neteller to come here and post instructions for anyone that may have entered their info on the Bogus UK site.
(Message edited by The_Cpa on September 11, 2003)
Similar threads
