Royal Plaza - Beware

[henryVIII]

I love the line "the casino cannot be held responsible for any action taken".

Erm ... so they are saying they cannot be held responsible for any action they take.

It would be funny if it wasnt like watching someone being mugged in the street.

Are they seriously an accredited casino?

I think we have all learnt something here then.

 

[thelawnet]

Dear All,

I am writing to inform all persons that have contributed to this thread, that Ketzz was given a full refund of his original deposits which were processed to his neteller account on wednesday evening (UK Time).

Ketzz has been notified by the Casino and by me via private message.

resolved????

he won and you decided not to pay him.

funny definition of resolved.

If there's more to this than meets the eye (player lives in australia, you don't offer au$, so he quite reasonably assumed it was ok to use euros, he won, you invoke the 'sorry sucker, read the small print' clause, not because he'd set out to be dishonest, but as an excuse to avoid paying someone who won fair and square), do explain, because this is making your casino look pretty sleazy - there might be a reasonable explanation, but you hvent given one.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Rules are Rules

resolved????

he won and you decided not to pay him.

funny definition of resolved.

If there's more to this than meets the eye (player lives in australia, you don't offer au$, so he quite reasonably assumed it was ok to use euros, he won, you invoke the 'sorry sucker, read the small print' clause, not because he'd set out to be dishonest, but as an excuse to avoid paying someone who won fair and square), do explain, because this is making your casino look pretty sleazy - there might be a reasonable explanation, but you hvent given one.

It seems the explanation is "Rules are Rules" regardless of circumstances.
I will expect this same attitude to be evident when a player takes a bonus, follows the rules to the letter, and withdraws with winnings.

I don't find it unreasonable to play in the same currency as your funding source, it is common sense as considerable losses are incurred just for using currency exhange. Neteller would not have allowed the player to have another account in the correct currency for the casino.

Yet another example of a casino making the most of it's rules to make the best profits, rather than treating each player as an individual.
Behave like a faceless, uncaring, big corporation and expect to be treated as such by the criminally minded community, who will consider you "fair game" for pulling a fast one back.

It would be interesting to have some research done as to which casinos fall victim to fraud the most, and whether there is any correlation between rates of fraud and their percieved image in the larger player & fraudster community.

For example, does 32Red fall victim to more/less fraud per head than the likes of Grand Prive?

Shafting players prepared to risk 5000 Euro and not be interested in bonuses does not seem to be a good business decision as the casino can not lose as they can with bonus players. If treated well, the player may have come back with another 5000 Euro the next month.
Now, many players will be afraid to deposit in case they make some tiny mistake, and intending high rollers will be discouraged the most as they have more to lose.
This group already seem to be in trouble over non-payment issues with players who accepted a bonus and DID follow the rules. Clearly the casino wants it both ways!

 

[bpb]

Bleh, the player was playing without a bonus, so the casino was going to win all his money in the long run anyway. So they actually did him a favor by cancelling his winnings, since he would have lost them all in addition to his deposit. This way, he at least gets his deposit back.

I don't see the issue here. If the casino had a term that people named Fred can't play, and Fred Dunkelweissen was allowed to signup and win a few thousand before having his winnings voided, it's pretty clear that it's Fred's fault. He didn't read the terms and conditions, so he deserves what he gets.

You people seem to automatically always side with the player. You just don't understand the casino business. It's very clear that the casino shouldn't pay this player, and if you don't understand that, well, then it really can't be explained to you.

Nothing to see here, move along.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Issue was deposit, not just winnings.

The original issue was more that the casino would keep the deposit, not just void winnings.
The terms IS now present at the head of the T & C page, however it does NOT state that the deposit is voided, just that the account will be locked.

Worse still, not only would Neteller charge conversion fees, but the casino seems to want to as well as it is "changing it's processor".

On the other hand, it is happy to take a deposit in the "Instacash" form and pay the 8.9% itself!

Clearly, they only want players in the US Dollar generally, but have an exception for the UK and Europe who can play in their own currency.

Theoretically, UK players can use the Euro by the letter of their terms, as we are in the EU, even though we do not use the Euro.

Players who are believed to be committing fraud, it seems, WILL have their deposits returned, but all winnings voided and accounts locked.

This player should have had the deposit returned straight away, this should have never reached the state where a complaint was needed.

Any player who is not from the EU or UK, and does not have a dollar denominated deposit source, should avoid this lot simply because they will not get value for money due to losses of several percent before they even place a single wager!

This player has their deposit back, but the terms need to make it clear that the deposit is likely to be lost, not just some woolly turn of phrase about the casino not being responsible for what may happen.

 

[Flizzin]

Rules are Rules and the player got his deposit back so that about settles it wouldn't you say ?

Seems like an acceptable outcome to me..

 

[thelawnet]

Bleh, the player was playing without a bonus, so the casino was going to win all his money in the long run anyway. So they actually did him a favor by cancelling his winnings, since he would have lost them all in addition to his deposit. This way, he at least gets his deposit back.

I don't see the issue here. If the casino had a term that people named Fred can't play, and Fred Dunkelweissen was allowed to signup and win a few thousand before having his winnings voided, it's pretty clear that it's Fred's fault. He didn't read the terms and conditions, so he deserves what he gets.

You people seem to automatically always side with the player. You just don't understand the casino business. It's very clear that the casino shouldn't pay this player, and if you don't understand that, well, then it really can't be explained to you.

Nothing to see here, move along.

What a load of crap frankly.

They did him a favour by not paying his winnings?????

Because in the long run he would lose all the money if he kept playing there

Wow, that's just the worse argument I've ever heard.

Next time someone wins, it's a good one.

Dear customer,

We know you think you won the $3 million progressive, but we feel it is in your best interests that we don't pay you anything, because if we do, you will only lose it all in the long run.


HA HA HA.

Great argument, next please.

Frankly, if they did have a term that 'Fred Erdinger' couldn't play or whatever, then no, I would not expect them to enforce it, because it's unreasonable, and they could easily exclude such players with two lines of code.

I can guarantee that at a reputable, properly regulated casino you would not be treated like this.

It goes against natural justice that a player who honestly deposits and wins can have his winnings voided on a technicality.

I could see if he had another account and was claiming the bonus again but he wasn't.

Casinos have a long list of rules, but they don't enforce all of them all the time, because frankly if they did, they could confiscate everyone's money every time they play.

It is not appropriate or reasonable to invoke a 'we seize your winnings' clause on a player who has honest intentions.

In fact, by playing in Euros, given that he didn't claim any bonus, he was actually benefitting the casino, as US$ are worth less, and without a bonus the casino expects to make a profit.

it's not even as if they are just enforcing the letter of the rules.

It says

"Please note * All accounts opened not according to our Account Currency Policy (i.e. Euro accounts opened from a non-EU country) will be locked: should you have made a deposit before the account is locked, the Casino cannot be held responsible for any action taken afterwards."

It doesn't say

"If you play in the wrong currency we will seize your winnings"

It says "we cannot be held responsible"

This is the most BS term ever, of course they can be held responsible, they are making a choice out of free will. You can say "If you jump into the lions' cage, we can't be held responsible for you being eaten", or "if you choose to go on this extreme sports holiday, we can't be held responsible for you hurting yourself."

In this case they clearly can be held responsible, because they are choosing their course of action, and depsite the fact that the player's choice of actions were on average actually beneficial to the casino, they chose to "not be held responsible" for stealing thousands of euros.

 

[thelawnet]

It seems the explanation is "Rules are Rules" regardless of circumstances.
I will expect this same attitude to be evident when a player takes a bonus, follows the rules to the letter, and withdraws with winnings.

Except that the rules don't actually say they will do this. They just say they will "not be held responsible" .

It says they will lock the account, which is fair enough, but they have got nothing in their terms to say they will not pay people who win (and obviously keep their money if they lose).

The irony is that the other casinos in this group have bonuses, but this one doesn't even have one...

 

[henryVIII]

Yes, lawnet, you do kind of wonder the motives for some posters here.

Why would someone take such a plainly severe view of an innocent mistake where there isnt actually any consequences stated anyway.

I'm smelling another affiliate here.

 

[bpb]

What a load of crap frankly.

They did him a favour by not paying his winnings?????

I guess I should have enclosed my post with

<sarcasm>

</sarcasm>

 

[henryVIII]

I guess I should have enclosed my post with

<sarcasm>

</sarcasm>

Ahhhh .... now that makes sense.

 

[Sodax77]

Just checked, if they have corrected some few year old issues... but no.

News Section

Newsletter > "Coming soon" (same text 2-3 years)

Newsletter Registration > "If you want to see the current edition of our newsletter, please click here." > "Coming soon"

Jackpots > "Error 500"

Winners >
GAMES OF THE WEEK WINNERS > "Error 500"
LAST WEEK WINNERS > "Error 500"
PROGRESSIVE JACKPOT WINNERS > "Error 500"

Payouts > Latest: "July 2006 Special Report"?!?! >
Link -

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Also check out payout percentages:

July 2006:
All Games: 85.80%
Slot Games: 85.86%
Table Games: 80.70%
Poker Games: 98.76%

 

[vinylweatherman]

WTF!!

Just checked, if they have corrected some few year old issues... but no.

News Section

Newsletter > "Coming soon" (same text 2-3 years)

Newsletter Registration > "If you want to see the current edition of our newsletter, please click here." > "Coming soon"

Jackpots > "Error 500"

Winners >
GAMES OF THE WEEK WINNERS > "Error 500"
LAST WEEK WINNERS > "Error 500"
PROGRESSIVE JACKPOT WINNERS > "Error 500"

Payouts > Latest: "July 2006 Special Report"?!?! >
Link -

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Also check out payout percentages:

July 2006:
All Games: 85.80%
Slot Games: 85.86%
Table Games: 80.70%
Poker Games: 98.76%

85%!!!!!
These are indeed posted as the official PWC certificate.
Both slots AND table games at 85%, this looks very odd indeed!
Either something fishy is going on, or they have a very small number of players, and they are crap table players as well.
The slots figures would be OK for a small number of players, but I would expect there also to be considerable variance month by month as well, such that the average MG payout is attained in the long term.
I have noticed a few other casinos with unusually low slots payouts last month, around 92%. If this is reflected over ALL MG casinos then something needs to be looked at as players were also posting of bad slot experiences.
Low % figures shoots down the "you were just unlucky" excuse as EVERYBODY can't ALL be "just unlucky".

We have this urban myth about casinos milking all they can from the dying US market, and a myth it remained, till a few Crypto casinos made it fact by refusing to pay bonuses ALREADY EARNED to US players on the 1st before they withdrew bonuses and wagering. Not only have they proved the myth (why pay if the market is not wanted any longer), but they have shown what the bonus really is, a BRIBE for continued play, not a REWARD for past loyalty.

Royal Plaza does not appear to have bonuses, so I wonder about another reason for the very low figures, perhaps the 95% of other casinos includes more than the base payouts, but accounts for bonuses awarded as if they were payouts too - if only we were allowed to see the PWC workings out as well as the answers.

 

[GrandMaster]

85%!!!!!
These are indeed posted as the official PWC certificate.
Both slots AND table games at 85%, this looks very odd indeed!
Either something fishy is going on, or they have a very small number of players, and they are crap table players as well.

Table games are actually at 80%. To get 80% return on table games you need to do something like doubling down on all hard hands in blackjack or its equivalent in other games. This casino must have hit the motherlode and found the stupidest players in the universe. The only other explanation is that the confiscation of players' money for opening an account in the "wrong" currency is classified as a table game.

 

[thelawnet]

Table games are actually at 80%. To get 80% return on table games you need to do something like doubling down on all hard hands in blackjack or its equivalent in other games. This casino must have hit the motherlode and found the stupidest players in the universe. The only other explanation is that the confiscation of players' money for opening an account in the "wrong" currency is classified as a table game.

I do not believe those numbers are accurate.

I suspect the seal is false.

In many games it is not possible to play that badly even if you try:

"Three popular bad strategies encountered at the blackjack table are never bust, mimic the dealer, and always assume the dealer has a ten in the hole. All three of these are very bad strategies. Following are my specific comments on each of them, including the house edge under Atlantic City rules (dealer stands on soft 17, split up to 4 hands, double after split, double any two cards) of 0.43%.

Never bust: For my analysis of this strategy I assumed the player would never hit a hard 12 or more and based all other decisions on maximizing expected value under this assumption. This results in a house edge of 3.91%.

Mimic the dealer: For my analysis of this strategy I assumed the player would always hit 16 or less and stand on 17 or more. The player as well as dealer stood on soft 17. The player never doubled or split, since the dealer is not allowed to do so. This results in a house edge of 5.48%.

Assume ten in the hole: For this strategy I first figured out the optimal basic strategy under this assumption. If the dealer had an ace up I reverted to the proper basic strategy assumption of assuming the dealer did not have a ten. Then I went back and used this strategy under regular playing conditions. This results in a house edge of 10.03%."

 

[Sodax77]

Mini Vegas Group/Vegas Affiliates/VegasVIP Lounge - eCOGRA News:

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.

www.vegasjoker.com

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.

Outdated URL (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.

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.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

This Group don't have any kind of control... Referring (some) sites, systems, etc... those are dead.

Old Samurai:

Winners

UNDER CONSTRUCTION AMOUNT (US$) NAMES GAMES 
Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server error '80040e37' 
Invalid object name 'tblColowinners'. 

/news/winners_detail.asp, line 283

Newsletter: "Coming soon" - since 2003-2004
Webmaster "Coming soon"

Did i contacted to the Royal Plaza or old Samurai (ever).

Yes

2 Years ago i asked from Old Samurai Casino, about promos, etc
No reply within past 800 days (i resent couple times)

1 Year ago i sent email to Royal Plaza, they promize to fix those errors asap.
No action within 1 year.

But i'm glad that they have eCogra "play it safe" seal

EDIT:
One more thing:

Check their PWC stats (especially slots)

PWC - May 2006 Special Report

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Slot Games 64.01% !!!

 

[Sodax77]

Great, Mini Vegas Group/Vegas Affiliates/VegasVIP Lounge whatever you are, you will use Casinomeister reputation, and you will continue your False/misleading/messy marketing/advertising + plus your ERROR sites, And same time you will add eCogra logo to your site.... but so far, you don't even reply to questions and/or do any correction.

 

[eeeee]

Cryptkeeper warning - old thread.

This miniVegas roguing was a long time in the making. Most sites would disallow the 'wrong' currency for bonuses. Some sites disallowed the wrong currency anytime (CaptCook group) but would then help you set up a new account. The notion of 'not being responsible for what happens' is bizzare and beyond reason. Good riddance.

 

[VegasVIP Lounge]

A Statement From The Royal Plaza Casino

The Royal Plaza Casino has issued the following statement:

The Royal Plaza Casino would like to express its sincerest regret over a recent dispute that has arisen between the Casino and a number of players that are known to have been partaking in what can only be described as exploitative and abusive playing activities.

Following an in-depth investigation of this case, the Royal Plaza Casino initially took the decision to lock the offending player's accounts and refund their initial deposits.
Although the Royal Plaza Casino knows that this was the correct and just response to the actions of the players in question, criticism from the wider gaming community has prompted it to reappraise its recent actions. In turn the Royal Plaza Casino has decided to pay the offending players their winnings. The Royal Plaza Casino would like to emphasise that the circumstances relating to this case are quite different from any other that it has encountered before. The casino group cannot release full details relating to this case due to the implications it holds for its partners and for the wider security of the Casino.

The players involved in these illegitimate playing activities have been both highly organised and inventive in their methods. Therefore, although their accounts will be reopened and winnings paid, the Royal Plaza Casino reserves the right to take whatever actions it sees as necessary should these players display any further signs of engaging in exploitative playing activities.

Finally, the Royal Plaza Casino would like to once again emphasize that it pays millions of winners every year without delay or hassle. It is a fact that wherever the Casino Group has made a genuine error, it has always done all that it can to compensate the players in question.

 

[mucullus]

Wow, VegasVIPLounge! Have you ever read the thread before crossposting?

 

[vinylweatherman]

Thanks rep.

I would like to thank the rep for bumping this thread, perhaps they would like to explain this:-

EDIT:
One more thing:

Check their PWC stats (especially slots)

PWC - May 2006 Special Report Best Casino Gambling - Old Samurai Casino

Slot Games 64.01% !!!

This looks like the CASINO has been cheating!
This is unlike anything I have seen before, although I am used to seeing some variation in the PWC stats, this one should have rung alarm bells!
ECogra seems happy with these figures, and the seal has been granted.
Further analysis is needed, along with an explanation, as these are the figures from the AUDITOR, not some cock-up calculation at the casino.

Microgaming must comment if it is possible that such a sharp downward turn in payouts still reflects the requirements for the games to be both random in the long term, AND in the medium term (Ie - no long streaks).

 

[aka23]

Old Samurai is a small casino with little promotion and few players. The small number of players results in wild fluctuations in payouts. Even so, their average slot payout for the past year was about 80%, far below typical Microgaming. Their games list at

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

doesn't show the usual 5-reel video slots. They may be an old non-viper casino with 3-reel slots. I suspect that the slots that they do have, have an average payout near 80%, while the more popular 5-reel video slots at other casinos have an average payout near 95-96%.

EDIT: I checked the slot payout for 999 Casino, which only has old 3-reel games, to compare. The average payout over the past 12 visible months (Jun and July 2006 are not visible) was about 88%... half way between Old Samurai and the usual for newer MG viper casinos. It is not clear to me why Old Samurai is lower.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Good Point

This illustrates the problem with these PWC figures then. They give no information as to player base, or size of sample, they just give a single figure. If they have a limited range of games, then the slots they have must be the really crappy ones, and shows just what a load of bull the marketing is when casinos trumpet their "we pay 98%" etc. They are using selective information to look better than the really are under the skin.
Unlike Lasseters, MG and other brands do not disclose the expected return on individual games, UNLESS it is good for marketing. They have certainly made a point of advertising payouts on the various 99%+ VP games they have released, but the figures are absent from the marketing for the new slots. Maybe these are being designed with somewhat lower payouts while we players still recite the mantra "slots pay 95% on average".

If the casino is so small, why not merge it with a bigger brand and make savings - other groups have done this as the market has contracted due to the US situation.

 

[wootchris]

The Royal Plaza Casino has issued the following statement:

The Royal Plaza Casino would like to express its sincerest regret over a recent dispute that has arisen between the Casino and a number of players that are known to have been partaking in what can only be described as exploitative and abusive playing activities.

Following an in-depth investigation of this case, the Royal Plaza Casino initially took the decision to lock the offending player's accounts and refund their initial deposits.
Although the Royal Plaza Casino knows that this was the correct and just response to the actions of the players in question, criticism from the wider gaming community has prompted it to reappraise its recent actions. In turn the Royal Plaza Casino has decided to pay the offending players their winnings. The Royal Plaza Casino would like to emphasise that the circumstances relating to this case are quite different from any other that it has encountered before. The casino group cannot release full details relating to this case due to the implications it holds for its partners and for the wider security of the Casino.

The players involved in these illegitimate playing activities have been both highly organised and inventive in their methods. Therefore, although their accounts will be reopened and winnings paid, the Royal Plaza Casino reserves the right to take whatever actions it sees as necessary should these players display any further signs of engaging in exploitative playing activities.

Finally, the Royal Plaza Casino would like to once again emphasize that it pays millions of winners every year without delay or hassle. It is a fact that wherever the Casino Group has made a genuine error, it has always done all that it can to compensate the players in question.

Great.

Were you going to pay me the $1500 or whatever it is that you stole from me? I PM'd you my details long ago.