1. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
  2. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. You can find out more by following.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

Playshare's problematic bonus abuse policy

Discussion in 'Casino Complaints - Bonus Issues' started by sdaddy, Aug 15, 2007.

    Aug 15, 2007
  1. sdaddy

    sdaddy Meister Member

    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Arizona
    I was surprised to see the following section in the terms and conditions page for casinos in the Playshare Group:
    And what is considered bonus abuse?
    Here's the problem: cases A and B above are too ambiguously-defined, IMO. What is a "reasonable degree of play" or "attempting a large wager?" I don't know. Such subjective criteria should not be used as justification for denying cash-ins, as the T&Cs now permit. I would call on Playshare to amend its T&Cs accordingly.
     
    4 people like this.
  2. Aug 15, 2007
  3. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    Occupation:
    STILL At Leisure
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    These bonus terms are the LEAST of their worries now:D
    They are embroiled in the MG "White label" debacle in "casino industry", and their policy has only ensured greater confusion when it comes to "bonus abuse".
    "Reasonable degree of play" should be meeting WR, but not EXACTLY. "Large wager" means not placing the entire bankroll on a single game of Roulette, and meeting WR with tiny bets should this win. Both are within the rules for EZBonus. Earning the "slots" bonus and "abusing" it on other games is THEIR FAULT, in having such an odd way of working out which bonus a player gets after 1x playthrough. If they simply added the bonus upfront, this problem could never arise. With game weightings, there is no need to have this slots and non-slots structure.

    Given that the WR is 30x for slots, and mathematically would just bust out your first deposit, this should be a reasonable degree of play. Also, it is perfectly "reasonable" for a player to cash-in earlier should they hit a really big win. This is known as "responsible gambling", however most online casinos call it "bonus abuse" or even "fraud".
     
    5 people like this.
  4. Aug 16, 2007
  5. sdaddy

    sdaddy Meister Member

    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Arizona
    If that's the intention of the wording of their bonus abuse policy, fine. I'm just saying that they need to be specific about exactly what "abusive" play is precluded. Something along the lines of, "no early cash-ins after receiving a bonus will be permitted until at least xx% of the wagering requirements have been completed," for example.
     
  6. Aug 16, 2007
  7. Nifty29

    Nifty29 Dormant account

    Occupation:
    PAID CASINO SHILL
    Location:
    Turn right, then right. then right again
    Have Playshare been taken over by Oliver Curran????
    :what:
     
  8. Aug 18, 2007
  9. sdaddy

    sdaddy Meister Member

    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Arizona
    A message has been sent to the Playshare rep requesting comment.
     
    1 person likes this.
  10. Aug 24, 2007
  11. GaryWatson

    GaryWatson Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Marketing Consultant
    Location:
    Europe
    On behalf of playshare* I have been requested to respond in a manner that should satisfy even the most sceptical of our wonderful once in a lifetime spectacular bonus bonanza extravaganza.

    sdaddy our organization have revised and organized a revision for clearer clarity of our definition. Hopefully our organizations revised revision of our bonus definition will satisfy your confusion.

    Our playthrough requirements of 30x are merely a minimum to collect your bonus. To withdraw, you must prove beyond a doubt that you are not playing through your bonus requirements. If we deem that this is the case we deem that you are a bonus abuser, in which case you forfeit your once in a lifetime spectacular bonus bonanza extravaganza and any other funds you have at our disposal.

    Gary Watson
    Playshare Communications Manager

    * Moderator Edit: To be clear, this post is sarcasm and GW is not a Playshare employee, before you get sucked in :rolleyes:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 26, 2007
  12. Aug 25, 2007
  13. sdaddy

    sdaddy Meister Member

    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Arizona
    Hi Gary,

    Thanks for undertaking a review of your bonus abuse policy. I don't the changes you mentioned being reflected on your casino websites yet, so I'm assuming the T&C pages are still in the process of being updated.

    With all due respect, however, this was not the revision I was hoping for.

    This indicates that you still intend to use unspecified, subjective criteria to label bonus abusers and that you retain the right to withhold withdrawals from such players. The combination of these two factors is what I find unacceptable.

    I am not saying that you can't label players bonus abusers for any reason and at any time, and then bar them from future bonuses. But the criteria you use to deny cash-ins after receiving a bonus have to be specific. Okay, so you don't like players wagering just 30x the bonus. Then please tell me what is your minimum. It shouldn't be a guessing game as to whether or not I'm entitled to withdraw my winnings.

    Until the changes I'm looking for have been made, I don't see myself playing again at Playshare.
     
    3 people like this.
  14. Aug 25, 2007
  15. lojo

    lojo Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Tradesman
    Location:
    USA
    Playshare may wish to contact their esteemed colleagues in the Fortune Lounge group to see where this ambiguity may lead them.
     
    2 people like this.
  16. Aug 25, 2007
  17. GaryWatson

    GaryWatson Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Marketing Consultant
    Location:
    Europe
    Oops, maybe I didnt make myself clear enough. I was mocking their official terms.

    Bonus abuse :

    A) Multiple accounts for the the sole purpose of collecting additional 1st deposit bonuses.

    B) Any software used to manipulate the maximization of bonuses.



    As there is a playthrough requirement, that is the specific requirement, nothing over and above. There is no vaguness in that term & if Playshare deem there is, they are themselves guilty of vague and misleading bonus offers, predatory terms and possibly false advertizing once the vague terms are clarified.
     
  18. Aug 25, 2007
  19. sdaddy

    sdaddy Meister Member

    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Arizona
    Yeah, I guess you need to be a little clearer next time. Sarcasm doesn't go over well when people don't realize that's what it is.

    Meanwhile, I'm still waiting to hear from an actual representative of Playshare on this serious topic...
     
  20. Sep 3, 2007
  21. lojo

    lojo Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Tradesman
    Location:
    USA
    Any word sdaddy?
     
  22. Sep 3, 2007
  23. sdaddy

    sdaddy Meister Member

    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Arizona
    ^ No, nothing. Let the record show that Playshare will not respond to the concerns over its bonus abuse policy.
     
    2 people like this.
  24. Sep 3, 2007
  25. Mousey

    Mousey Ueber Meister Mouse CAG

    Occupation:
    Pencil Pusher
    Location:
    Up$hitCreek
    In their defense, it is a holiday weekend (here in the states, anyway) and Playshare staff members are no doubt busy as little bees signing up affiliates for their very own generic (white label) casinos. They'll get around to the players eventually... maybe... :rolleyes:
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2007
    2 people like this.
  26. Sep 3, 2007
  27. lojo

    lojo Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Tradesman
    Location:
    USA
    His first attempt was at least the 18th, but some reps have said they didn't get their PM's in the past?
     
  28. Sep 25, 2007
  29. Pinababy69

    Pinababy69 RIP Lisa

    Occupation:
    Crusader
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario - Canada
    Did Playshare/Grand Mondial ever weigh in on this clause/issue? Sdaddy, did they ever reply to your PM?

    If I'm reading this correctly, they are saying that even if you follow their T&C's and bonus rules to the letter, they can still void your winnings? This is by far the worst FU clause I have seen yet...from any casino, running on any software.

    Max? Mario? Any comment?
     
  30. Sep 25, 2007
  31. NASHVEGAS

    NASHVEGAS Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin, unfor

    Occupation:
    LOL
    Location:
    MERS
    Would it mean anything anyway after their W/L BS?............Everyone remain calm:eek:
     
  32. Sep 25, 2007
  33. Pinababy69

    Pinababy69 RIP Lisa

    Occupation:
    Crusader
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario - Canada
    I'd still like to hear their interpretation of it, and more importantly..have that interpretation posted here for future reference.
     
  34. Sep 25, 2007
  35. lojo

    lojo Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Tradesman
    Location:
    USA
    Of course it's one thing to have a clause like that and another to actually use it...

    I'm sure they could get lots of help here defining a fair policy, then run the lay terms through the jawbones before incorporating it...

    But, yes, agreed; I'd like to see an answer to sdaddy's query.
     
  36. Sep 25, 2007
  37. sdaddy

    sdaddy Meister Member

    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Arizona
    Welcome back, Pinababy. I agree that this policy is unacceptable as it is written. Unfortunately, there was never any response by Playshare to my PM or invitation to respond publicly. Feel free to pick up where I left off.;)
     
  38. Oct 24, 2007
  39. Mario

    Mario Dormant account

    Occupation:
    CSC Supervisor
    Location:
    South Africa
    Hi there Sdaddy,

    Hope that everyone is well.

    Sorry but I did not get your PM message for some reason but I do apologize for this.

    I do want to thank all the participants for making me aware of this issue.

    So to get down to business!

    First off promotional abuse is a very hard and not easy subject or something to pin point in full but also do note that we dont forfeit a players cash-in should he be seen as a promotional abuser.

    What we do, do is that we do not send any further promotional offers to players who has been classified as promotional abusers.

    Also in regards to switching games, that terms should be in actual fact be removed as this was in accordance to the Slots bonus and Table games bonus which was offered some time ago so this is in actual fact null and voided.

    So to answer everyones question: what is seen as a promotional abuse

    I would say that it is a player who tries and manipulate the bonus terms and conditions to ensure that he proceeds in meeting the wager requirements to the dot and then switching to more profitable games.

    Again there is nothing wrong with the fact that you have met the wager requirements and then switching to tables games as that is what is required for you to be able to cash-in but it can and could be seen as trying to manipulate the offers Terms and Conditions.

    I cant empathize enough that we will not forfeit your winnings should you been deemed as a promotional abuser but we will not be sending any further promotional content to players.

    Hope this helps and any further issues please do feel free to let me know.

    Best regards
    Mario
    PlayShare Group Representative
     
    5 people like this.

Share This Page