RTG and complaints

[jetset]

I've just been reading the Meister's report on RTG attitudes toward complaints and disputes, and in particular the comment:

Quote: RTG is adamant that they can only act as the software provider now, and that they have to distance themselves from player issues. Any player problems need to go directly to the licensing agency. Um, well...many of their casinos operate without gaming licenses. And some of the ones that do - have absolutely horrible histories with players. The Crystal Palace group comes to mind - their servers are in Kahnawake Unquote

I think this is an unacceptable cop-out and a regressive return to RTG's bad old "hands off - none of our business what our licensees do" days.

With the bad records of so many of their licensees this is the last thing they should be doing if they value the business of the international player community.

RTG has now reportedly re-located to Costa Rica, and there were reports from former employees that they had been bought out by international interests based in Curacao.

In an industry where the majority of licensing jurisdictions are a joke, it is cynical in the extreme for RTG management to palm off the player with a problem to a licensing jurisdiction that will likely not even respond to his or her emails....and presumably when a casino goes under that, too, will be shrugged off.

Software providers have a duty to select their licensees carefully and police their activities for the safety of their players, and frankly this unilateral decision giving players the bird is BS imo.

The 'Meister also mentions Kahnawake in his report, and it is encouraging that they are apparently about to take a more active role in handling player disputes (about time - their past record was spotty to say the least)

With the right sort of people in place on the disputes side, and a genuine commitment by management to doing it right I think Kahnawake could do much to improve the way their jurisdiction is perceived by players and thus be made more effective for operators.

Some of the points I think they need to bear in mind:

1) Fast response to complaints - an immediate acknowledgement and then a fast attention to the issue followed by a decision. Most disputes should be capable of resolution within a few days.

2) Either employ an experienced person or train one up - perhaps in collaboration with the 'Meister.

3) Consistency - have a set of basic policies to cover principal areas of dispute that can be applied for speed and consistency.

4) Convenience - a well publicised online facility where players can lodge reports for fast attention.

5) Enforcement - make compliance with regulations and a responsive attitude to the Kahnawake disputes person a condition of a Kahnawake license. Operators must be required to communicate timeously with the dispute section in the event of a complaint.

6) Transparency - regular reports on dispute stats, and a preparedness to communicate with media and player advocates on serious issues (at one time the Kahnawakee would simply retreat into silence if contacted)

7) Kahnawake top management backing - a disputes person can only be as effective as the backing he or she receives from top management.

 

[Rusty]

The only thing I would add to that is Kahnawake may well take a more active roll now that there will be properly regulated Casinos in the UK come September.
The UK is where the action is as regards online gambling these days and they would be foolish if they did not consider the possibility of a migration away from their Casinos if the player considers they are not regulated in the same way as the UK ones will be.
It is all good news for the player and hopefully in the next few Years the rogue Casino will be a thing of the past.

 

[GrandMaster]

Rusty, what is the basis of your incredible optimism in UK regulation? People are playing at Costa Rican clip joints with well-documented history of ripping off people. There are enough people who will play at any casino as long as it offers some incredible signup bonus. 15% tax in the UK won't attract many casinos in my opinion.

 

[vinylweatherman]

The only thing I would add to that is Kahnawake may well take a more active roll now that there will be properly regulated Casinos in the UK come September.
The UK is where the action is as regards online gambling these days and they would be foolish if they did not consider the possibility of a migration away from their Casinos if the player considers they are not regulated in the same way as the UK ones will be.
It is all good news for the player and hopefully in the next few Years the rogue Casino will be a thing of the past.

Not a chance! They will just have to "Rogue Harder" with fewer potential victims. Just look at how many "Rogue Traders" are still doing the rounds here in the UK, they are adept at keeping one of two steps ahead of the Trading Standards, and know just how to scupper a county court order to make it worthless to the complainant.
Gordon has allowed greed to get in the way, a tax of 15% maybe too much to ask in return for being able to claim "regulated by the UK Gambling Commission". The tax may also make them less competitive in what they can offer in the way of promotions, although they are likely to benefit by attracting players who do not currently play due to the lack of redress currently available. Tax at 15% is fine for a Brick operation, but where the internet is concerned there is no need for the casino to be anywhere near the customer, they will look for a location that seems "trusted" yet levies less tax. It will be up to other regulating states to bring themselves up to an acceptable standard so they can be seen as almost as good as the UK in protecting players.

 

[Rusty]

Rusty, what is the basis of your incredible optimism in UK regulation? People are playing at Costa Rican clip joints with well-documented history of ripping off people. There are enough people who will play at any casino as long as it offers some incredible signup bonus. 15% tax in the UK won't attract many casinos in my opinion.

I guess I maybe being a little over optimistic but most people who did not research such things would assume one online Casino is as good or as bad as another.
Personally before I visted Casinomeister I had little idea which Casinos were rogue and which were not, I had never even heard of Kahnawake for example but they are one of the more trusted territories.
When people see there are UK regulated Casinos that are advertising in the uk (makes a huge difference) they will assume these are better regulated and hopefully the regulated Casinos will shout it loud and clear that they are regulated which will also help.
You are right though there will always be people prepared to take a risk for what seems a better deal I just feel that these will be to few to sustain the rogues.
By the way two of the major companies who have already signed up for licensed casinos are William Hill and Littlewoods and more will follow if the playing public migrate to these.

 

[Rusty]

Not a chance! They will just have to "Rogue Harder" with fewer potential victims. Just look at how many "Rogue Traders" are still doing the rounds here in the UK, they are adept at keeping one of two steps ahead of the Trading Standards, and know just how to scupper a county court order to make it worthless to the complainant.
Gordon has allowed greed to get in the way, a tax of 15% maybe too much to ask in return for being able to claim "regulated by the UK Gambling Commission". The tax may also make them less competitive in what they can offer in the way of promotions, although they are likely to benefit by attracting players who do not currently play due to the lack of redress currently available. Tax at 15% is fine for a Brick operation, but where the internet is concerned there is no need for the casino to be anywhere near the customer, they will look for a location that seems "trusted" yet levies less tax. It will be up to other regulating states to bring themselves up to an acceptable standard so they can be seen as almost as good as the UK in protecting players.

Are you sure it is 15% for remote Casinos, I thought it was less.
Again you may be right as regards the rogue Casinos, only time will tell.
I agree with your point that theoretically tax might actually reduce payout percentages but at least they will have to publish what these payout percentages are and as competition increases so will the payout percentages. I hope this is how the regulated Casinos will eventually promote their Casinos rather than with bonuses but I may be being a little optimistic there to, it depends on how bonuses themselves are regulated.
In any event I would rather play at a properly regulated Casino that I know has a payout of 95% than an unregulated one that claims 98% and I think most players will eventually come to this conclusion.
As you say at the end it is upto other egulating states such as Kahnawake to raise there game and as I have said this can only be good news for the player.

 

[jetset]

Will Hill and Littlewoods likely have their eyes mainly on their land gambling activities....and on the need to keep UK investors happy. The list of applicants remains disappointingly low in relation to the market potential and I think GM and VWM have assessed the UK situation correctly on the current status quo.

They are also correct on the base 15 percent tax - I think this is the main reason why the UK regulation thing has gone off the boil for the many remote gaming companies that were genuinely interested. Either the future UK prime minister wanted to screw it up, or he underestimates the impact of regional jurisdictions like Alderney, Gibraltar, Malta and the Isle of Man.

And it's not just the 15 percent, I'm told - other UK corporate taxes and operating levies could push it higher than that.

It's a pity, because a UK license is a desirable and prestigious thing to have and that would be good for the players.

Mr. Brown does not seem the sort of man who is easily persuaded to change his mind, however....

I don't think I would put Kahnawake in the same reputation league as some of the European jurisdictions already mentioned here, but their credibility rests in their own hands and could be dramatically improved with the right sort of commitment to doing it right.

They've been around long enough to know what it takes - it's up to them to get it together and make it happen.

 

[Casinomeister]

...
I don't think I would put Kahnawake in the same reputation league as some of the European jurisdictions already mentioned here, but their credibility rests in their own hands and could be dramatically improved with the right sort of commitment to doing it right.

They've been around long enough to know what it takes - it's up to them to get it together and make it happen.

Thanks guy, I couldn't have said it better. I'll be forwarding them the suggestions you made earlier with hope that they will be implemented in some shape or form.