Platinum Play booby-trap

MeganSpot

Dormant account
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Location
a land down under
It may have been mentioned before but Fortune Lounge (and Wim) should be applauded for presenting the Casino side of the equation within a public forum such as this. With the pleasantries out of the way Ill get on with giving FL the bake they deserve. Here are the facts:

1.The Platinum Play home page is explicit in declaring the Total bonus on offer is $110. The NeTeller bonus (penalty) conspicuously doesnt rate a mention. A click here button opens another window that reinforces the view that the Total bonus is $110. Again no mention of the offending NeTeller bonus (penalty) despite ample advertising opportunity. This lack of transparency is hardly surprising given the onerous T+C.
2.In this instance the $5 NeTeller bonus (penalty) carries wagering requirements of $550 (x110b) with qualifying games severely restricted. By comparison Intercasino, Omnicasino and the Sands offer monthly $100 bonuses with x25b and very few game restrictions. Chalk and cheese. What right thinking player would knowingly dare contemplate engaging the NeTeller bonus (penalty) under these circumstances? Where is the financial incentive? Certainly not with the player (perhaps FL could spell it out).
3.In my particular case I played without knowledge of the NeTeller bonus (penalty) being applied to my casino account. FL do not deny this but equally I accept a type of automated email advice was at least attempted to be sent by PP to my registered email address.

Lets cut to the chase. As an unanimous block players dont want sneaky, miniscule bonuses with disproportionate wagering requirements added to their casino accounts under the cloak of darkness. Casinos engaging in such a practice will be rightly condemned of attempting to take advantage of players (player abuse) especially when seen to confiscate bonuses from otherwise legitimate cash-ins. The indecent haste with which Casinos perform this confiscation, together with their "no correspondence will entered into" attitude, could in all probability be seen to betray an illicit if not prescribed intent. In other words, it was all planned from the start.

Having now had the advantage of reading previous threads in this and other forums it is quite apparent this issue is hardly a recent phenomenon. Let me finish up with a question to FL.

If players do not want (in their wildest dreams) the subject NeTeller type of bonus, why do FL casinos, in particular Platinum Play, continue to insist upon such a maligned and discredited practice?
 

Stanford

Dormant account
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Location
USA
jetset said:
Quote You should not even have these auto bonuses without having the player opt in to receive them.Unquote

I agree with you Black21Jack.
I also agree. I think it just a matter of time before they reverse this policy if players continue to press the issue. Having read this thread, the word "trap" (intential or not) is approriate.
 

GrandMaster

Ueber Meister
CAG
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Location
UK
fortunelounge said:
Grandmaster: I am not sure what you mean by CS using more common sense ? If wagering requirements have not been met, they have not been met. We cannot start making exceptions.

VP Operations
Fortune Lounge
My point is that if she met the requirements for the $100 sign-up bonus, but not the additional WR for the $5 Neteller bonus, then the latter should be removed, not the former.

Furthermore, your terms and conditions say:
"Wagering counts towards bonus requirements in the order that each bonus offer is taken up", not what the CS rep wrote that "as per the Terms & Conditions of the casino if wagering requirements are not met on the bonuses the bonuses will be forfeited from the larger amount to the smallest until the wagering requirement is met. If the sign-up bonus was applied first, then you are wrong to remove it, if the Neteller bonus, then you are clearly entitled to remove the sign-up bonus, and be happy that you stuck to the rules and alienated a player.
 

MeganSpot

Dormant account
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Location
a land down under
Firstlty, I want to acknowlegde the contribution of forum members to my original complaint, in particular to Vesuvio and Grandmaster, for the links and information supplied that I otherwse would have been unaware. My previous silence in this regard was not meant to be a sign of ingratitude.

Grandmaster proceeding post is a revelation that for my own purposes I will repeat and expand upon. With reference to the Platinum Play website it reads under:

"GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR ALL PROMOTIONS AND OFFERS

Paragraph 11.

Wagering counts towards bonus requirements in the order that each bonus offer is taken up. i.e. wagering requirements need to be met for each bonus before subsequent bonuses may be withdrawn."

Furthermore, Grandmaster is quite correct to say that the position put to me by Platinum Play CS staff that,

"as per the Terms & Conditions of the casino if wagering requirements are not met on the bonuses the bonuses will be forfeited from the larger amount to the smallest until the wagering requirement is met"

is unsupported by any reference to the published T+C or indeed at any place on the Platinum Play website. For the record the 200% bonus was indeed the original bonus to be applied to my account.

Before proceeding or commenting any further I think it appropriate to allow FL (wim) or Platinum Play to reconsider their position and take whatever remedial action is deemed appropriate.
 
Last edited:

jpm

Dormant account
Joined
Mar 29, 2002
Remember too that you can always opt out of these bonuses at pretty much any casino. That's the first thing I do, email them and tell them you never want these neteller/alternative deposits applied to your account. Then you don't have to watch your account for these negligible bonuses that do nothing but tie up your money unneccessarily.
 

seanjohn

Banned User - Violation of posting rules
Joined
Aug 28, 2004
Location
somwhere
I totally agree with Grandmaster and the others

FL set up this trap on purpose.
It is deliberate, with malice aforehead.

And all their VPOP can come up with is these bullshit responses which are totally irrelevant as to why they remove all bonuses instead of just the NETeller 5%.

No brains, no shame.
 

fortunelounge

Dormant account
Joined
Mar 7, 2003
Location
South Africa
There will be no further responses to this thread in this forum.

Anyone wishing to discuss this issue in a sensible, civilized manner is welcome to mail me at vpops@fortunelounge.com

VP Operations
Fortune Lounge
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
seanjohn said:
geese, then you must go back to grade school and learn your algebra!!
seanjohn said:
FL set up this trap on purpose.
It is deliberate, with malice aforehead.

And all their VPOP can come up with is these bullshit responses which are totally irrelevant as to why they remove all bonuses instead of just the NETeller 5%.

No brains, no shame.
Like I mentioned before - and this applies to everyone - expressing oneself is fine, but it should be done without needless subjectivity (or negativity). There is no need to make comments such these, I have been giving everyone fair warning about this.

This is not a board where insulting or flippant remarks are tolerated. seanjohn's account has been suspended for 30 days.

The only bullshit in this thread are comments like Seanjohn's.

And my word to everyone - knock it off, I'm serious as a heart attack.
 
Last edited:

Vesuvio

Dormant account
Joined
Apr 23, 2004
Location
UK
fortunelounge said:
There will be no further responses to this thread in this forum.

Anyone wishing to discuss this issue in a sensible, civilized manner is welcome to mail me at vpops@fortunelounge.com

VP Operations
Fortune Lounge
Well, that's a neat way out of a tricky situation. Ban me as well if you like, Casinomeister. Seanjohn might have chosen his words better, but his points are all fair.

It's been a pleasant suprise on this thread that no-one has tried to defend Fortune Lounge. They know what they're doing and if they won't change it they deserve only contempt.

p.s. though the 'no brains' comment was unfair - it's a well-thought out policy :D
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
Vesuvio said:
Well, that's a neat way out of a tricky situation. Ban me as well if you like, Casinomeister. Seanjohn might have chosen his words better, but his points are all fair.

It's been a pleasant suprise on this thread that no-one has tried to defend Fortune Lounge. They know what they're doing and if they won't change it they deserve only contempt.

p.s. though the 'no brains' comment was unfair - it's a well-thought out policy :D
There is no one getting out of a tricky situation - there is plenty going on behind the scenes. What is happening is that some posters feel it is acceptable to throw in a personal insult or two; this is what is not tolerated. You can make posts like this elsewhere - not here. And if posters fail to abide by this, then tsch!
 

trick

Dormant account
Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Looking back at the thread it is clear that it has been on the wrong side regarding language and namecalling. There is no excuse for this but it might be a hint that NETeller bonuses like this are a real annoyance for players in general. I remember a player posting about such a NETeller bonus arriving in his account while it was running in autoplay on some slot. Pretty hard to spot.

So, the not so proper language aside, there is still the question of why the NETeller bonus is designed specifically like it is when it from a players perspective easily can be mistaken for a WR trap designed to keep you from recieving a withdrawal that you thought you were cleared for? I'm not saying that this it what it is - all I'm saying is that this is what it could look like when it is designed the way it is. But maybe there is a good (technical?) explanation why the NETeller bonus is designed in this way?

BTW: It is good to know that "there is plenty going on behind the scenes", so we know the issue is not being ignored.
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
Location
Bexhill on sea, England
Look before you leap!

I have read through all the posts on this thread, and have to mostly agree with the players. I too was 'caught out' by this Neteller bonus once before - but only once!
But I don't blame the casino - it was MY fault. (However I do still agree with above comments that this type of bonus is a kind of a trap - that's why it's always hidden in the small print).
This is a lesson for all new or experienced gamers:
ALWAYS READ THE BONUS TERMS & CONDITIONS FIRST!
If you are not 100% happy that you understand ALL the requirements, contact the casino & get it clarified. (Or don't play there).

And I TOTALLY agree with 'trick' - all Crypto casino's and many others (even Roman - remember them!), make it clear before you click the 'withdraw' button exactly how much they are going to allow you. (The new Will Hill Crypo software even tells you exactly how much more you need to wager to fulfill their bonus contitions!)
No-one can tell me it is beyond Microgaming's capabilities to add this to their banking screen, which begs the question: Why is it not there already?

(Please don't answer that - we already know!) :D
 
Last edited:

Freudian

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Location
europe
This is one of the reasons I don't play at FL casinos anymore. Calling it a trap is correct. Hopefully practices like this will end up costing casinos more than they make from it.
 

MeganSpot

Dormant account
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Location
a land down under
This matter has not progressed since my complaint was registered with both the FL and Casinomeister (pitch a bitch) over two weeks ago.

This is not a complicated matter. Bogus T+Cs were invented in order to confiscate otherwise legitimate winnings.

These facts remain uncontested (I am happy to reproduce the exchange of emails where the bogus T+Cs were reiterated and emphasised by more than one PP customer service rep).

I trust this matter will be resolved shortly.
 

bbooze

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 5, 2004
Location
Milwaukee
I read this entire thread, and too completely agree with the players. Also.... if we aren't allowed to state our opionions within a forum like this, in an effort to inform and educate the people we feel a kinship with (the players), then where can we?

The couple posters who were thought too harsh in their wording were merely calling a spade a spade, I think that was agreed upon by all. I'll admit, Casinomeister has more internet gambling know-how in his finger nail than I have in my whole body; but it seems an unfair stance against players who are simply looking out for players.

Did FL stiff this person on a cashout for no reason? No. But they did use a ruse of sorts to insure that end.
 

Stanford

Dormant account
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Location
USA
fortunelounge said:
There will be no further responses to this thread in this forum.

Anyone wishing to discuss this issue in a sensible, civilized manner is welcome to mail me at vpops@fortunelounge.com

VP Operations
Fortune Lounge
This matter is also being discussed at WOL. I thought Megan's point had been conceded and FL was looking into rewriting their TsCs - see that thread. So FL and Megan, what seems to be the hold up? CMeister, is this just taking a bit?

Stanford
 

OBR

Dormant account
Joined
Sep 26, 2004
Location
Ottawa, Canada
I hope that players can get Platinum Play to change their policies. Maybe I can help in a small way as I run a couple of online casino portals.

Platinum Play has been one of my top recommended casinos for almost a year. I have played them many times in the past and everything has been great. I have never had a player complaint.

I have just removed Platinum Play from our top casinos lists. Their current bonus criteria and the advertising of bonus criteria do not meet our requirements for fairness.

I sincerely hope that things change for the better.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top