New Casino Rep QueenVegas Representative

In QV all bonuses have to be wagered, so no disputes in this case I assume :)


No, you didn't really answer my question - do you have excluded slots, and if so where can I see them?
What I meant by disputes is that if there is no list in the terms, players can easily open one up and full foul of the bonus terms.
 
Some serious question dodging going on here!
I wonder if the rep used to be a politician...? :eek2:

Apart from their "questionable" bonus terms, there are also "questionable" worries about their affiliate system.
No proof, so I will not be making any accusations on this forum, but caution is advised.

KK
 
No, you didn't really answer my question - do you have excluded slots, and if so where can I see them?
What I meant by disputes is that if there is no list in the terms, players can easily open one up and full foul of the bonus terms.
Unless something has changed.
You basically have to make a 'blind' deposit.
Any games that are excluded from play with a bonus, only show your cash balance.

P.S. Bonanza is one of the many excluded games.

There is not only, no excluded games listed, but any reference to excluded games seems to have disappeared from the bonus T&C at all Skill-on-net sites
 
Unless something has changed.
You basically have to make a 'blind' deposit.
Any games that are excluded from play with a bonus, only show your cash balance.

P.S. Bonanza is one of the many excluded games.

There is not only, no excluded games listed, but any reference to excluded games seems to have disappeared from the bonus T&C at all Skill-on-net sites


Yeah, that's what I discovered when I looked about too.

So in your example I like, Bonanza, see it's on their site and deposit thinking I'll take the bugger on with a bonus and then I will subsequently discover that I cannot play it using one?

That's nearly as bad as bait-and-switch IMO.

In that case their terms are unfair and prejudicial by way of being incomplete, which is legally not permissible and I fail to see while this prevails how they can pass accreditation.
 
Yeah, that's what I discovered when I looked about too.

So in your example I like, Bonanza, see it's on their site and deposit thinking I'll take the bugger on with a bonus and then I will subsequently discover that I cannot play it using one?

That's nearly as bad as bait-and-switch IMO.

In that case their terms are unfair and prejudicial by way of being incomplete, which is legally not permissible and I fail to see while this prevails how they can pass accreditation.

They aren't trying to be accredited. They just have a review and a rep here :)
 
They aren't trying to be accredited. They just have a review and a rep here :)
There are some Skill-on-net casino though, who are accredited. Who now have the same bonus T&C.
They obviously had different T&C when they received accreditation though
 
Its always nice to have a rep from casinos here so thanks for joining! Sometimes its nice for players to have someone to contact directly :D

Any feedback you get here dont take offense even though some of us can come on a bit strong. Hopefully your casino has an open mind and listens to the feedback here because this is the place to come for it. Most people know the ins and out and what it takes to be reliable and trusting casino so anything anyone is suggesting in here is nothing but good advice.
 
They aren't trying to be accredited. They just have a review and a rep here :)
I never said they were! I said that while these terms prevail that they couldn't pass accreditation, i.e. was providing some context to the deficiencies in the terms!

I can see how you may have read it that way though as it infers somewhat that they are, or will do. :thumbsup:

If the accredited Skillonnet casinos have indeed, as brianmon states, removed their excluded games from visible terms then that will need addressing as well. It's tempting players to sign-up with a bonus who may be intending to play certain games only to find after deposit that they cannot. Not good.
 
Unless something has changed.
You basically have to make a 'blind' deposit.
Any games that are excluded from play with a bonus, only show your cash balance.

P.S. Bonanza is one of the many excluded games.

There is not only, no excluded games listed, but any reference to excluded games seems to have disappeared from the bonus T&C at all Skill-on-net sites

You are right, they used to have a link to the list with games where it showed the contribution of each game. There you could see that only the GVG games were conributing 100%.

Now it is a blind fishing, but it is probably still the same as it was that only GVG games give you 100%. I look through some of my blog posts for LuckiNiki, DrueckGlueck etc. and it was usually 100% - GVG, 75% - all other slots.
 
I never said they were! I said that while these terms prevail that they couldn't pass accreditation, i.e. was providing some context to the deficiencies in the terms!

I can see how you may have read it that way though as it infers somewhat that they are, or will do. :thumbsup:

If the accredited Skillonnet casinos have indeed, as brianmon states, removed their excluded games from visible terms then that will need addressing as well. It's tempting players to sign-up with a bonus who may be intending to play certain games only to find after deposit that they cannot. Not good.

No, it's definitely not good, but I remember they said they couldn't have a list because it would be too long:p and they thought that as long as people could play them with cash then all was good.
I would think it was fine if it was a huge warning as soon as someone was offered a bonus.
 
Actually there is a clause in the bonus T&C, (sort of) covering excluded games...

29. Players are allowed to play in any game while having an active bonus. In certain games bonus balance funds are not available to play with and when you open those games you will only see your real balance.

It's the same at Dreuck Glueck and Slots Magic, both of whom are accredited.
 
Actually there is a clause in the bonus T&C, (sort of) covering excluded games...

29. Players are allowed to play in any game while having an active bonus. In certain games bonus balance funds are not available to play with and when you open those games you will only see your real balance.

It's the same at Dreuck Glueck and Slots Magic, both of whom are accredited.


Yeah, totally inadequate though from the point of view of a person thinking of joining the casino(s) and taking a bonus. Lack of specificity and detail - this information regarding excluded games should be provided to visitors up front as it could affect their decision whether to deposit or not. And therein lies the probable reason why it is missing....

Tirilej is correct in the fact the list is huge regarding disqualified and lower-contribution games as I remember seeing it before - it was a joke, tempting players in with a wagering requirement equating to 60xB or whatever and then finding a list 300-odd games that weren't Green Valley and only contributed 75% thus making the real wagering on games you actually wanted to play something like 80-90x !!

So to get around this disingenuous and misleading bonus offer they simply remove the list so you know nothing until you join and deposit and try to play them. Just brilliant, spiffing.
 
Its always nice to have a rep from casinos here so thanks for joining! Sometimes its nice for players to have someone to contact directly :D

Any feedback you get here dont take offense even though some of us can come on a bit strong. Hopefully your casino has an open mind and listens to the feedback here because this is the place to come for it. Most people know the ins and out and what it takes to be reliable and trusting casino so anything anyone is suggesting in here is nothing but good advice.
thank you for your kind "welcome" :)
QueenVegas is very attentive to users attitude and trying to compromise in a best way.
 
[QUOTE="colinsunderland, post: 960260, member: 40684"
  1. Increasing the balance then changing the gaming pattern significantly (bet, game type, bet structure, etc) in order to complete the wagering requirements for that bonus.
Another casino with that dodgy term in, which can be used to void winnings if anyone dares to change their stake.[/QUOTE]


Roshtein plays there and he does that.

I personally will not play at Queen Vegas as I have my favorite slots and have no idea if I can play them with bonus money. :confused: .with real money I make deposits casinos where I am vip and it's worth it.
 
Yeah, totally inadequate though from the point of view of a person thinking of joining the casino(s) and taking a bonus. Lack of specificity and detail - this information regarding excluded games should be provided to visitors up front as it could affect their decision whether to deposit or not. And therein lies the probable reason why it is missing....

Tirilej is correct in the fact the list is huge regarding disqualified and lower-contribution games as I remember seeing it before - it was a joke, tempting players in with a wagering requirement equating to 60xB or whatever and then finding a list 300-odd games that weren't Green Valley and only contributed 75% thus making the real wagering on games you actually wanted to play something like 80-90x !!

So to get around this disingenuous and misleading bonus offer they simply remove the list so you know nothing until you join and deposit and try to play them. Just brilliant, spiffing.
What makes it even worse is that Slots Magic and Drueck Glueck, who have exactly the same bonus T&C, are in the CM list of 'Top Certified Casinos' with scores of 9.1 and 8.7 respectively
 
So still no answer as to why you are concealing lists of reduced-contribution or ineligible slots from visitors before they sign-up, deposit and take the bonus? :confused:
Hello. If this question was question addressed to me, it's already mentioned before by brianmon about the clause 29 in T&C. When you read and accept T&C by registering means you agree with it.
 
Hello. If this question was question addressed to me, it's already mentioned before by brianmon about the clause 29 in T&C. When you read and accept T&C by registering means you agree with it.

Again, you haven't addressed my point and also made by one or two others here about entering the casino and depositing 'blind'. Just to re-clarify, that means game exclusions or weightings are NOT obvious in the terms and the terms are therefore unfair, incomplete and misleading and would undoubtedly fall foul of UKGC rules and Advertising Regulations. Other reputable casinos include this information openly for the same reason - it is not good ethically to entice players with bonuses without telling them up front on which games these can be utilized. Simply not acceptable in my opinion.

I am saying you are only doing this because previously myself and others have pointed out the misleading way Skillonnet sites offer a wagering i.e. 30x D+B whereupon the player then sees a ridiculously long list of 300-odd games that actually DON'T have the 30x D+B but a far higher WR. So in order you can still use the favourable 30x D+B in your 'hook' you simply removed the list altogether as if that somehow sorts the issue. It hasn't, but made it even worse. Whereas before it was simply misleading until the point the player became aware of this list, which they could BEFORE depositing, now it's misleading AND entrapment because the visitor or player cannot be availed of this vital information until they have joined and paid their deposit.

I think you know exactly what posters are getting at here yet choose to evade the obvious issue.
 
Hello. If this question was question addressed to me, it's already mentioned before by brianmon about the clause 29 in T&C. When you read and accept T&C by registering means you agree with it.


??? So clause 29 says you agree that the casino can conceal lists of reduced contribution slots or ineligible slots and that you therefore deposit blind not knowing what you can play with a bonus.
Ooh sounds fantastic.

Next.........
 
Again, you haven't addressed my point and also made by one or two others here about entering the casino and depositing 'blind'. Just to re-clarify, that means game exclusions or weightings are NOT obvious in the terms and the terms are therefore unfair, incomplete and misleading and would undoubtedly fall foul of UKGC rules and Advertising Regulations. Other reputable casinos include this information openly for the same reason - it is not good ethically to entice players with bonuses without telling them up front on which games these can be utilized. Simply not acceptable in my opinion.

I am saying you are only doing this because previously myself and others have pointed out the misleading way Skillonnet sites offer a wagering i.e. 30x D+B whereupon the player then sees a ridiculously long list of 300-odd games that actually DON'T have the 30x D+B but a far higher WR. So in order you can still use the favourable 30x D+B in your 'hook' you simply removed the list altogether as if that somehow sorts the issue. It hasn't, but made it even worse. Whereas before it was simply misleading until the point the player became aware of this list, which they could BEFORE depositing, now it's misleading AND entrapment because the visitor or player cannot be availed of this vital information until they have joined and paid their deposit.

I think you know exactly what posters are getting at here yet choose to evade the obvious issue.

Hi Dunover,

my name is David and as long as I'm waiting for an own account I hope you don't mind using Kate's for now.

First of all I truly understand the frustration of not being able to see what wager requirements every Slot has. We will try to see what we can do in this case to show it or even finding another solution for that.

Right now what I can say, that high volatile games are all not eligible for wagering requirements which are all BTG Games, Dead or Alive ect. .. i understand that this is not solving the issue.

I will keep everyone updated regarding any solution we can find even if we can't find one.

Aren't these blacklisted by the pogg with rouge terms and skill in net dodgy gambles etc?

About ThePOGG :

We have contacted them few times to see if we can reach an agreement, as explained we did not run the Casino when the issue happened. We took over QueenVegas in 2016 and I hope that ThePogg can confirm that we are open and also helping, with any player queries he gets on his Website related to QueenVegas.. even we are blacklisted on his site.

Apart from their "questionable" bonus terms, there are also "questionable" worries about their affiliate system.
No proof, so I will not be making any accusations on this forum, but caution is advised.

Hi KK

It would be great if you could let me know what problem you had and I would be happy to assist you and resolve it.

Last Point, about Min Bet: as explained if you deposit €50, you can bet €5 all the time ... If anyone had / has a problem with not getting their winnings regarding this rule, I'm happy to assist and check the issue personally.

Hope everyone has a great day

David, QV Team
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top