Rival's aka Bonne Chance's First Forum Reply-Post

NASHVEGAS

Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Location
MERS
Old / Expired Link

VIA AGD:

06-29-2010
Bonne Chance N.V
.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Bonne Chance N.V., an E-zone Company registered and licensed in the Netherlands Antilles, sublicenses Rival Powered games to the White Label operator(s) discussed in this thread. For its payment processing Bonne Chance N.V. has contracts with third party payment processors, these services are part of the White Label agreement for its marketing partners (the White Label). From time to time, its White Label partners may enter into an arrears situation due to high withdrawals. The White Label typically has a certain number of days to correct any such arrears.

It is important to note that the most typical reason for this arrears is bad promotion setup and misguided player classification. The White Label is 100% responsible for the marketing of their own property. This includes promotional design and configuration. When a White Label fails to pay its arrears it creates an awkward relationship between Operator (Bonne Chance N.V.) and the White Label partner whereas Bonne Chance N.V. is effectively bankrolling the property. ie paying the White Label's affiliates and customers.

In both this particular instance and instances in the past, Bonne Chance N.V. has taken a tough stance on its accounts receivable. Let it be clear that there currently is not, nor has there ever a doubling (or any false increase in) of hold or a 40% reserve taken on any deposits. These statements are simply incorrect."

Well contrary to most, Jet and I followed by a few others seem to have been correct in somewhat understanding the complicated corporate ownership structure. (prolly with intent to deceive).

B.C.'s actions have never been consistent with what their so called reps stated while B.C. stayed in the closet.

Affy's behavior is already interesting and seems to be pro-Rival once B.C. assured the affiliate community they would be paid. Nevermind the trip to the "PIT"..........Shocking, no?
 

jetset

RIP Brian
Joined
Feb 22, 2001
Location
Earth
Thanks for posting that, Nash.

The whole Rival structure smacks of covert activity and a sort of string-and-chewing-gum corporate set-up....even more than is usual in this strange industry, imo.

I would like to see a little more information on this Silverstone Overseas outfit and its relationships, too.
 

zap987

Meister Member
PABnononaccred2
Joined
Jul 22, 2004
Location
Sweden
Sounds to me like they are blaming the white lables for not sticking to Rivals automated bonus banning system.
 

NASHVEGAS

Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Location
MERS
Sounds to me like they are blaming the white lables for not sticking to Rivals automated bonus banning system.
But that would be like BP's blaming of Halliburton and Transocean. Oh yeah, behind closed doors why not blame the "small people" too........It did not fly for BP and it will not have legs for the savants at Rival.
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
...It is important to note that the most typical reason for this arrears is bad promotion setup and misguided player classification. The White Label is 100% responsible for the marketing of their own property. This includes promotional design and configuration...
Well yeah, but if you have iGaming Pro, First Gaming Partner, 23 Partners, and Royal Apollo screwing up their player classification and bonuses, perhaps it's not an operator problem but a Rival based problem.

By the way, I'm guessing there will probably be more closures in the next few weeks. Just a gut based guess.
 

Lucky Loser

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2010
Location
Planet Earth
I am very glad Royal Apollo is going out of business.

They bonus banned me as soon as I won $2000 from playing Scary Rich, which was just pure luck.
 

zap987

Meister Member
PABnononaccred2
Joined
Jul 22, 2004
Location
Sweden
I'm convinced most of Rivals problems is because they offer too high variance games which is just too good for the player. Even someone with no clue about how to play a bonus the best way will end up playing with a positive EV just because of the variance on games like Scary Rich, and that is going to hurt the bottom line in a bad way.

Even if people play without bonuses on the high variance games they will generate very little playthrough for the casino so it takes a lot of players to make up for any kind of positive EV given in bonuses and they will have some players cashing out large amounts on small deposits.
 

liquuid_fusion

Meister Member
PABaccred
PABnorogue
PABnononaccred2
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Location
UK
You're probably right there. I wonder if there is a negative correlation between total player stake and game variance. It would make sense.
 

felicie

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Location
somewhere else
I have basically quit playing rivals totally for about a year now but keep coming back to all this because it is such a maze of unbelievable for lack of a better word, crap. I cannot understand the 'white label' thing and have just about decided it means nothing, it's just another detour to distract and confuse which it does really well. (if someone could give me another example of 'white label' kinds of businesses I would really appreciate it). Is it like the generic brand or something? or franchises? no, they would have the same name ie McDonalds, Burger King or a Chevron Gas station.

I played rival the first time at Pantasia, then Cocoa, Superior, sloto etc. and it seems like there were 6 or so back then and I thought these were the true original (Not white label) Rival casinos and although small and somewhat hokey compared to MGS for example, I found them all to be reasonably fair and consistent in their t&cs.

And then something changed and it started raining crap or better still raining rivals. And I mistakenly assumed the new phrase I was hearing, 'white label' pertained to all of those that followed the first 6 or 8 mentioned above. So some are white labels and some are called ???? what? generic? designer? what?

Do you ever feel like it's a big joke or that your intelligence is being insulted on a regular basis by this group? I think they're just a bowl of nuts. The more we bitch the more bullsht they hand us. How many reps have come and gone and where have all the rival reps gone? long time passing.....
where have all the rival reps gone long time ago....
gone to casino graveyards every one....
when will we ever learn when will we evvvver learn. or something like that. :D


P.s. And Bryan gives us a little heads up on the situation and in one fell swoop brings down the whole bunch one by one? and I think thru no fault of their own. Did you know Bryan - you are my hero and how soon can you get to D.C? :)
 
Last edited:

dominique

Dormant account
Joined
Jul 5, 2003
Location
The Boonies
White labels are sort of like a McDonalds franchise - in that the parent company runs and controls much of the business. Of course you can't have dozens of casinos with the same name online, for casinos individual branding is crucial.

So one of the tasks the white label operator has to tackle is branding, marketing and promotion. So, while things like processing and customer support and whatnot are handled by the parent company, and of course you have all the same games, the look and feel of the casinos is different. The bonuses you can get are different. Who promotes them is different, what sites they appear on can differ etc.

Not all Rivals are white labels, and it doesn't have to do with when they were opened. It's the choice of an operator whether to go white label or independent. White labels require less funding, because the parent company handles a lot of everyday business functions for them.

In this situation, I venture to say that Bonne Chance likely did not require enough funding from them. So big winners put a strain on operating finances - winners, affiliates and employees need to be paid by the white label.

So far Bonne Chance has always stepped in to take over, but that means that they now have to market and brand more and more properties. That must put a strain on them, too.

On the other hand, you have the white label operators building a brand and spending lots of time and money on this, and suddenly - poof - they've got nothing to show for it.

The non-white label Rival casinos handle their own processing and customer support, have to show better funding and enjoy independence from the mother-ship.

White labels traditionally have a bad reputation because of underfunding. Theoretically that wouldn't have to be that way, it's just bad planning. US facing casinos have suffered a lot of blows over the last few years, because of the way the US government conducts itself. So what may have looked like reasonable funding a couple years ago, is not today.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
It seems to suggest that operators blaming Rival for delays in payment to players has been a smokescreen to cover the fact that the white label operators themselves are so strapped for cash that they are unable to cover their arrears with Rival, which has caused the Rival processing system to seize up, creating delays.

However, on top of this, the statement, if true, contradicts many of the earlier explanations and excuses given for the problems players have faced, and the main deception, that of all the different casinos being 100% independent, yet "illegally" sharing player information between themselves, has been exposed "officially".

The problem is that it was not just "advantage" players that got the "treatment", but players that were simply LUCKY enough to have a big win, even when this was WITHOUT any kind of bonus, got the same "treatment", which flies in the face of what would be EXPECTED for the casino industry, which is to use big winners for positive publicity. In Rival's case, big winners have often given them NEGATIVE publicity, which has lead to the impression that winners are simply not tolerated at Rival, and this then means the winners take their money elsewhere, denying Rival the chance of winning it back (and more) over the longer term.

Badly designed promotions also play a part, and in order to design a promotion, an operator must understand the games. Maybe they were simply using the long term edge to work out what would be profitable, without taking into account the game variance, with for Rival is pretty high.

The statement also shows that Rival most certainly are NOT responsible for paying players if the white label operator goes bust, but have done so on a "goodwill" basis. They may NOT do this if operators go bust on a larger scale, they may decide to close the casino, rather than take it on along with the player base & debt.

With so many white label operators walking away because of "Rival issues", I have to wonder how many are walking away from DEBT owed to Rival to cover payments to players and affiliates, expecting Rival to pick up the tab.

Rival themselves are guilty of running a business model that doesn't work all that well when things turn sour, and a culture of secrecy that makes it easy for blame to be passed around, rather than accepted & dealt with by the guilty party.

This has now lead to white label Rival casinos losing the trust of many players and affiliates, which now makes it even harder for them to turn around the losses, even if they started doing things much better.

Rival had better be telling the TRUTH in that statement, else they risk being found out, which would probably finish them off for good.
 

NASHVEGAS

Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Location
MERS
White labels are sort of like a McDonalds franchise
LOL, ah not quite considering the amount of capital required, background and financial screening, lengthy waiting list for a franchise until like year 4069, proven sucessful track record of the franchisor, franchisees must pay their bills usually within 30 days (heard they tried the $4000/week deal but it didn't fly). The terms and conditions comply with the jurisdictional laws. No affiliates getting paid on how many Happy Meals you lose but Rival's white label affiliates do eat Happy Meals too.:eat: Can I stop now?? Ray Kroc turned 38 times in his grave when you posted Mickey D's.;)

White labels are sort of like Jim Bob's Toilet Repair!! "I'm loving it" and the affiliate manager is a golddigger!:xxx:xxx
 
Last edited:

NASHVEGAS

Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Location
MERS
Rival had better be telling the TRUTH in that statement, else they risk being found out, which would probably finish them off for good
I realize there is no access to a W/L sublicense (or partner) agreement nor reliable source for accurate information other than the typical biased hearsay (primarily webbys et affys to date).

That said, based on below Bonne Chance's recent statement just does not fly. Who really owns the casinos and thus is actually financially responsible afterall there is a hold?

What is this arrears and the real source of the arrears, if any?

What in the hell could these marketing partners, lol , truly be financially responsible for? Maybe BC just makes rules as they go, as they basically did with this player afterall BC was always in the arrears with this player until I hauled in Jan.2009.

Anybody else have a problem with the two quotes below????

Every white label per each website is owned as follows:

"__________is a casino owned and operated by Silverstone Overseas Limited, 30 Elm Park Terrace, Shotley Bridge, Consett, County Durham, DH8 0NA, United Kingdom (hereafter "Silverstone") a company wholly owned by Bonne Chance NV (hereafter "BC"). Bonne Chance NV is a company incorporated, licensed and regulated by the Government of Curacao for the purpose of operating an online casino."

Bonne Chance's statement a few days ago:

"Bonne Chance N.V. has contracts with third party payment processors, these services are part of the White Label agreement for its marketing partners (the White Label). From time to time, its White Label partners may enter into an arrears situation due to high withdrawals. The White Label typically has a certain number of days to correct any such arrears.

It is important to note that the most typical reason for this arrears is bad promotion setup and misguided player classification. The White Label is 100% responsible for the marketing of their own property. This includes promotional design and configuration. When a White Label fails to pay its arrears it creates an awkward relationship between Operator (Bonne Chance N.V.) and the White Label partner whereas Bonne Chance N.V. is effectively bankrolling the property. ie paying the White Label's affiliates and customers.

In both this particular instance and instances in the past, Bonne Chance N.V. has taken a tough stance on its accounts receivable. Let it be clear that there currently is not, nor has there ever a doubling (or any false increase in) of hold or a 40% reserve taken on any deposits. These statements are simply incorrect."
 

dominique

Dormant account
Joined
Jul 5, 2003
Location
The Boonies
LOL, ah not quite considering the amount of capital required, background and financial screening, lengthy waiting list for a franchise until like year 4069, proven sucessful track record of the franchisor, franchisees must pay their bills usually within 30 days (heard they tried the $4000/week deal but it didn't fly). The terms and conditions comply with the jurisdictional laws. No affiliates getting paid on how many Happy Meals you lose but Rival's white label affiliates do eat Happy Meals too.:eat: Can I stop now?? Ray Kroc turned 38 times in his grave when you posted Mickey D's.;)

White labels are sort of like Jim Bob's Toilet Repair!! "I'm loving it" and the affiliate manager is a golddigger!:xxx:xxx

Unfortunately I understand very little, if any of this reply...

The analogy with McDonalds was in reply to Felicie's question what a white label was, and it was her analogy. I described how it works structurally compared to MacDonalds, not in detail including franchise costs and conditions.

I have no idea what's up with the happy meals.... or the 38 turns in the grave (poor Ray must be dizzy by now).
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Every white label per each website is owned as follows:



Bonne Chance's statement a few days ago:


Interesting, given that when Vanguard & Slot Power ditched Rival, it turned out that Bonne Chance did NOT own the WEBSITE at all, and had to get together a different domain in order to take over the casino because Vanguard "took their ball home", and rather than let the casino continue to operate from it's usual domain, deleted it & put up a redirect to Manhattan Slots (without permission from CWC as it turns out).

This is an illustration of the "lies & deception", and the official statement DOES more closely reflect the TRUTH, in that Rival have NO ownership of the website, and therefore could NOT stop the operators from temporarily "sabotaging" the casino that they had handed back to Rival.

They don't REALLY "own & operate" the casino either, as the money situation is FAR more complicated than that, and makes it hard to figure out just WHO carries the can if things turn VERY sour.

It is possible that a white label could miscalculate a promotion so severely that it not only finishes them off, but saddles Rival with a liability to winning players so large that they may be unable to cover it without themselves having to find a way of using money from other, solvent, white labels to temporarily cover for the short term cashflow variance. It seems to offer limited risk to white labels, who can ring fence the white label casino from it's other operations, let it go bust, and hope Rival pays outstanding debts to players & affiliates.

There is clearly no OBLIGATION to do so on the part of Rival, since the closing statements from former white label operators often use words like "we HOPE that Rival will continue to honour............"
 

felicie

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Location
somewhere else
LOL, ah not quite considering the amount of capital required, background and financial screening, lengthy waiting list for a franchise until like year 4069, proven sucessful track record of the franchisor, franchisees must pay their bills usually within 30 days (heard they tried the $4000/week deal but it didn't fly). The terms and conditions comply with the jurisdictional laws. No affiliates getting paid on how many Happy Meals you lose but Rival's white label affiliates do eat Happy Meals too.:eat: Can I stop now?? Ray Kroc turned 38 times in his grave when you posted Mickey D's.;)

White labels are sort of like Jim Bob's Toilet Repair!! "I'm loving it" and the affiliate manager is a golddigger!:xxx:xxx


LOL I asked for a simple comparison for my simple mind and she delivered. the mud is clearing, I greatly appreciate it and hell, I can't even deposit so far this month so what's left for me to do? what was that again? :rolleyes:
 

felicie

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Location
somewhere else
Interesting, given that when Vanguard & Slot Power ditched Rival, it turned out that Bonne Chance did NOT own the WEBSITE at all, and had to get together a different domain in order to take over the casino because Vanguard "took their ball home", and rather than let the casino continue to operate from it's usual domain, deleted it & put up a redirect to Manhattan Slots (without permission from CWC as it turns out).

This is an illustration of the "lies & deception", and the official statement DOES more closely reflect the TRUTH, in that Rival have NO ownership of the website, and therefore could NOT stop the operators from temporarily "sabotaging" the casino that they had handed back to Rival.

They don't REALLY "own & operate" the casino either, as the money situation is FAR more complicated than that, and makes it hard to figure out just WHO carries the can if things turn VERY sour.

It is possible that a white label could miscalculate a promotion so severely that it not only finishes them off, but saddles Rival with a liability to winning players so large that they may be unable to cover it without themselves having to find a way of using money from other, solvent, white labels to temporarily cover for the short term cashflow variance. It seems to offer limited risk to white labels, who can ring fence the white label casino from it's other operations, let it go bust, and hope Rival pays outstanding debts to players & affiliates.

There is clearly no OBLIGATION to do so on the part of Rival, since the closing statements from former white label operators often use words like "we HOPE that Rival will continue to honour............"


So did Vanguard come from Absolute dissolution too or just ended up ditching Rival at same time as Slot power? and why on earth would Rival keep opening new casinos as old ones fail without taking a moment to pause and regroup? illusions smoke and who can we blame now...... and why the heck are these possibly disgruntled operators and reps so closed mouth about the hole mess? do they have to sign something? have they been accounted for?seen them lately? are they all really just one small group playing many parts? It's just not human for someone not to be talking unless they're family? thanks all. :)
 

NASHVEGAS

Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Location
MERS
and why on earth would Rival keep opening new casinos as old ones fail without taking a moment to pause and regroup? illusions smoke and who can we blame now...... and why the heck are these possibly disgruntled operators and reps so closed mouth about the hole mess? do they have to sign something? have they been accounted for?seen them lately? are they all really just one small group playing many parts? It's just not human for someone not to be talking unless they're family? thanks all. :)
all good and applicable questions...........the fact you even ask these questions should create the doubt for you that has existed for awhile..........I assure you this white label charade is not what it appears to be.

Hint:long ago I found it quite strange the affiliate manager of TIV per se was also the casino manager of TIV....almost forgot, he was also the CM rep......who are these so called sublicensee's/partners?.....perhaps some are/were just employees of Rival-BC.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top