Ruby Royal does its bit for Haiti Victims, please join in!

Hi all,

The team at Ruby Royal would like to thank Casinomeister for their initiative in setting up the Haiti Relief fund. On behalf of Ruby Royal staff members, we donated $500 to help those victims in need. We would like to personally thank all those who also donated to the relief fund.

This Friday, 22nd of January, we are offering a $50 free chip for ALL players that deposit $50 or more. For every player that claims this bonus, we will donate $10 to the Casinomeister Haiti relief fund. The bonus will only be available this Friday so log into your Ruby Royal account and lookout for the bonus called $50 FREE HAITI RELIEF.

I will liaise directly with the team at CM and we will announce on Monday the final amount we managed to collect, we are offering this to all our customers, not just Casinomeister members so Im really hoping players will do their bit.

Please PM should you have any questions
Regards

Derek
Personally I find it quite boastful of anybody who feels they have to announce to the world how much they have donated to any charity.

In the case of Ruby Royal it was very short sighted of them to offer this promotion. When I first read this post, the first thing that came into my mind was that this is just a PR stunt. IMO the casino probably thought this could generate some good publicity for them.

Players who have 50 credits to purchase who are unsure where to play, will probably decide to deposit at Ruby because of the donation factor. Therefore the casino must of known this could generate further revenue from players.

Furthermore by posting this promotion on this thread they have advertised it, thus resulting in even more revenue from other players who may not have known about it.

It is hard to be critical of anybody who makes an offer of donations, because at least they are doing something. But profiting at the expense of others suffering is just not right.

Ebay does a similar thing, whereby you can donate a percentage of your sales to charity. However the big difference here is it is not a promotion, it is done all year round, Ebay do not profit from it, and the customer selects the percentage he would like to donate. The customer is not lured into making any donation either. It is a personal choice.

The customers should be telling the casino how much they wish to donate, not the other way round. All they have to do is have a charity box on their site so customers can donate when they want to, and how much they want to.

Naturally this might mean some players are donating from a positive bankroll, which means theres nothing in it for the casino. (As they won't have a chance of winning it back) Thats why you will never see this idea implemented!

Mike
 
Last edited:
So that 18k i won after my playthru of 1500.00 had been met and had to playout, is that considered profit made by the casino? I really dont understand all this , if money won and cant be withdrawn has to be played back down to a cashout point, is this money gained by the casino or lost............just a question and thought?

Its not considered profit by the casino. The profit for the casino is in the form of deposits while losses reflected with withdrawals..
 
You make it sound as if every single player that deposited $50 for this "promo" is going to cash out...
:lolup:

Ok....this whole max deposit thing really bugs me...
Surely it helps the casino when they make their rtp numbers public, since money like the amount laurie "won", is money "returned" to the players that the casino never ever pays out, and as such an "income"
The way I see it, it's utter bs, and players should never ever touch anything with a max payout attached to it, but that's just my ho
 
:lolup:

Ok....this whole max deposit thing really bugs me...
Surely it helps the casino when they make their rtp numbers public, since money like the amount laurie "won", is money "returned" to the players that the casino never ever pays out, and as such an "income"
The way I see it, it's utter bs, and players should never ever touch anything with a max payout attached to it, but that's just my ho

Just to expand on my statement earlier, we all know who the real winner is in this promo, and it sure isn't the Haitians.
 
...and I'm no marketing expert by any means (I've never had a marketing course in my life), but I guarantee that you would have gotten much better PR (and more future deposits) if you would have simply:

1: Announced that RR was going to donate money to the Haitian relief fund...with no mention of a bonus, etc.

2: Took out $10 from every deposit of $50 or more during this time frame.

3: Donated the money, and then came back on the forum and announced what you did and how much was donated.

Sure, you wouldn't have gotten the money right up front, but you guys weren't looking at the big picture, were you?
 
I don't know much about this casino, but it seems to me that you guys are being a bit hard on them.

I think they probably didn't think through their deposit 50, donate 10 offer. I am quite sure they were not trying to act like a rogue casino (refering to the 9/11 ad fiasco).

I also see no problem with them telling us they donated 500 up front to the fund.

It shouldn't be the big deal against them you are all making it, in my opinion.

:)
 
I don't know much about this casino, but it seems to me that you guys are being a bit hard on them.

I think they probably didn't think through their deposit 50, donate 10 offer. I am quite sure they were not trying to act like a rogue casino (refering to the 9/11 ad fiasco).

I also see no problem with them telling us they donated 500 up front to the fund.

It shouldn't be the big deal against them you are all making it, in my opinion.

:)

I agree with you here Jod, I also think that many don't quite understand the difference between "Gross Revenue" vs "Gross Profit" vs "Net Profit"

This $10 donation from each $50 deposit using that coupon also accounts for a 20% contribution that comes directly from "Gross Revenue". When you whittle any and all overhead costs from that, the percentage coming from their "Net Profit" could be as high as 50% - 85%.

So when you are speaking of profit margin percentages you certainly need to account for 'hard costs'.

I commend them for making any donation...are all companies doing this? Something for you guys to smoke over since I think you are focused on the wrong thing here and not looking at the much bigger picture...;)
____
____
 
Something for you guys to smoke over since I think you are focused on the wrong thing here and not looking at the much bigger picture...;)
____
____

You just have to be difficult don't you? :p

My point is that they shouldn't have SOLICITED donations, thus making themselves any profit at all. If they wanted to donate in this manner, Winbig had the perfect solution. Just take 20% of that day's deposits, and donate it...then come and tell us that they did it. Asking for deposits ahead of time amounts to solicitation, and that's wrong IMO.

How is this any different than when Virtual offered a bonus coupon commemorating 9/11, except for the fact that nothing went to any fund...except their own pockets of course. In this case, they donated a whopping $10 of every $50 deposited. But they were still ASKING for $50 deposits weren't they? They weren't donating $10 of their own money, they were donating $10 of each player's deposit who claimed that bonus.

I just don't think you should offer a promo that is directly riding on the back of a tragedy, and thus make a profit off of it. I don't care if the profit is 80%, 50% or 10%. No profit from tragedy and suffering.

Smoke that Seminar Man!! :D

EDIT: Hypothetical for you Rob. Say a famous author decides to write a book detailing the crimes of a prolific serial killer (including details of what the victims suffered, etc.). He makes a ton of money off that book, but decides to donate 20% of his profits to the victims families, or victims of crimes in general. Does that make him a moral person? Or does that make him a capitalist looking to profit from others suffering?
 
You just have to be difficult don't you? :p

My point is that they shouldn't have SOLICITED donations, thus making themselves any profit at all. If they wanted to donate in this manner, Winbig had the perfect solution. Just take 20% of that day's deposits, and donate it...then come and tell us that they did it. Asking for deposits ahead of time amounts to solicitation, and that's wrong IMO.

How is this any different than when Virtual offered a bonus coupon commemorating 9/11, except for the fact that nothing went to any fund...except their own pockets of course. In this case, they donated a whopping $10 of every $50 deposited. But they were still ASKING for $50 deposits weren't they? They weren't donating $10 of their own money, they were donating $10 of each player's deposit who claimed that bonus.

I just don't think you should offer a promo that is directly riding on the back of a tragedy, and thus make a profit off of it. I don't care if the profit is 80%, 50% or 10%. No profit from tragedy and suffering.

Smoke that Seminar Man!! :D

Pina, I think you and others are still missing the bigger picture here...and that is the simple fact that Ruby Royal were committed to making any donation at all, in the first place, is a good thing. Think about the other question I also asked in my previous post..."Are all companies even making a donation" ? Especially online casino companies?

They could have just ran the promotion anyway, under a different name and have donated nothing at all and they would not have received the stigma they have received in this thread...true?

EDIT: Hypothetical for you Rob. Say a famous author decides to write a book detailing the crimes of a prolific serial killer (including details of what the victims suffered, etc.). He makes a ton of money off that book, but decides to donate 20% of his profits to the victims families, or victims of crimes in general. Does that make him a moral person? Or does that make him a capitalist looking to profit from others suffering?

Hypothetically I see nothing wrong in him merely writing the book if all he is doing is as you said..."detailing the crimes of a prolific serial killer (including details of what the victims suffered, etc.)"

The fact that he decides to make a 20% donation to the victims families is a good gesture IMO as he would have been under no obligation to do that whether morally or otherwise.

He most likely would have written the book either way, and he could have kept all of the profit to himself.

My point being, that any donation to someone in need is a good donation. :)

Question back at cha: :D Robin hood allegedly stole from the rich and gave to the poor...did that make him morally challenged?
____
____
 
Hypothetically I see nothing wrong in him merely writing the book if all he is doing is as you said..."detailing the crimes of a prolific serial killer (including details of what the victims suffered, etc.)"

The fact that he decides to make a 20% donation to the victims families is a good gesture IMO as he would have been under no obligation to do that whether morally or otherwise.

He most likely would have written the book either way, and he could have kept all of the profit to himself.

My point being, that any donation to someone in need is a good donation. :)

Fair enough...but that pretty much highlights that we are very far apart in our thinking....on this particular type of subject anyway. I don't think he should write the book at all, but if he did...ALL the money should go to the victims.

Question back at cha: :D Robin hood allegedly stole from the rich and gave to the poor...did that make him morally challenged?
____
____

Makes him my hero. :laugh:

But then, I'm pretty much a communist at heart (in theory that is, not the way it's practiced in the real world). I see no reason why 5% of the world's population should control 80% of the world's wealth. I know my figures are probably off, but it's something like that right?

Maybe that helps ya understand my twisted mind a bit better? :D
 
Sorry Pina, but I gotta disagree with:

Fair enough...but that pretty much highlights that we are very far apart in our thinking....on this particular type of subject anyway. I don't think he should write the book at all, but if he did...ALL the money should go to the victims.

I think the writer should at least take enough out for his time and trouble. For instance, if it took him 1,000 hours to research and write the book and his time is worth a mere $100 an hour, (I'm sure most well-known writers are worth 10x more than that, at least) then of course he should be entitled to $100,000 out of his royalty checks. Anything above that should go to the victims.

Does the OJ case come to mind at all? Remember his book fiasco? :rolleyes:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
Sorry Pina, but I gotta disagree with:

I think the writer should at least take enough out for his time and trouble. For instance, if it took him 1,000 hours to research and write the book and his time is worth a mere $100 an hour, (I'm sure most well-known writers are worth 10x more than that, at least) then of course he should be entitled to $100,000 out of his royalty checks. Anything above that should go to the victims.

Does the OJ case come to mind at all? Remember his book fiasco? :rolleyes:

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

That's fair enough Win, and I'll agree with that. I actually almost put into my original post that he should be paid for his time spent writing (a reasonable "wage")....guess I should have. So yeah, I'll concede that...I wouldn't expect anyone to work for free. The biggest point I'm trying to make is the profit on suffering angle.
 
That's fair enough Win, and I'll agree with that. I actually almost put into my original post that he should be paid for his time spent writing (a reasonable "wage")....guess I should have. So yeah, I'll concede that...I wouldn't expect anyone to work for free. The biggest point I'm trying to make is the profit on suffering angle.

I just got to thinking - doesn't a writer/publisher have to get permission from the victim(s) or families of the victim(s) in order to even have the book published?

If so, then it is the family/victim's responsibility to iron out the framework so that they are compensated for what they've went through. If I were ever in that situation as a victim, I'd ask for at least 75% of all (net) royalties.
 
I'm willing to give Ruby Royal the benefit of the doubt on this one and give him credit as to the intent as in the donations. However I don't like solicitations such as this......but that's just my 2 cents. Maybe in hindsight if they had thought it would turn out like this, they would have thought better of it.......how about it Ruby Royal?
 
I'm willing to give Ruby Royal the benefit of the doubt on this one and give him credit as to the intent as in the donations. However I don't like solicitations such as this......but that's just my 2 cents. Maybe in hindsight if they had thought it would turn out like this, they would have thought better of it.......how about it Ruby Royal?

I honestly think they don't care, and think they're 100% in the right about this. They're 90% at most, imo. :)

This insight is based on their first, and only, response since this whole debate started:

Its not considered profit by the casino. The profit for the casino is in the form of deposits while losses reflected with withdrawals..
 
I'm always one to be open and honest here on the forums so here goes, this will be my last and only post on this matter as this entire thread was completely derailed..and turned out to be very unproductive IMO. We tried to do something good here but you just cant make everyone happy all of the time.. so be it!

The intention of this promo was never to try and see how much money we can make by exploiting other peeps misfortunes. The promo for the Haiti fund was a normal promo that we would offer any normal customers but was slightly different in that we decided that we would donate $10 to the Haiti relief fund for every person claiming the promo, win or lose... In fact, i looked at the numbers for this promo and we in fact lost money...if you refer to Robwins post earlier it will be clear to you, he was spot on.

So be it, it was not our objective to make money from this promo, we went about this promo wanting to give something back and wanted the help of the CM player community and our customers...
 
Here in the UK there have been many occasions where a serial killer has tried to publish a book. The usual public response is of absolute outrage. So much so that the government usually steps in to block any such publications. Even if a large percentage of the profits went to the victims families it would still be blocked, as it would be seen as being insensitive towards the victims families by glorifying their crimes.

So just like in the serial killers book analogy, the casino should expect its motivation questioned. It should also expect some backlash as a result.

Some have argued that it is better to donate 10 credits from a 50 deposit than nothing. So where do you draw the line here. What if a casino decides to donate 1 credit from 50? It would still be a donation. Who is the moral judge here who decides what is palatable and what is not.
However it is the method not the amount which is insensitive, bordering on offensive.

There are a million and one ways people can raise money for charity. But by combining it into an offer for a player as an incentive to deposit is beyond the pale. Also in the UK people are encouraged to only donate directly to a registered charity, ones who specialise in collecting and distributing donations.

If people really want to donate to the Haiti relief fund they will. They certainly do not need any casino to lure them into making one.
Gambling and charity do not really mix. Anybody who has 50 credits to spend on what is just an entertainment investment could afford to donate the entire 50 to Haiti. So rather than people flush their money down the toilet so Ruby gets 40 Haiti gets 10, simply donate the 50 directly yourself.

If I had an account at Ruby on a point of principle I would deposit 10 and donate 40 directly.

Mike
 
Last edited:
All I can say is RubyRoyal did a good deed on this.
They did not put a rope on anyone and drag them in to make players to make a deposit at the casino.
If you play already at RubyRoyal I look at it as just an added bonus offer in the promo area.
I also look at it this way too.
That day you wanted to deposit & play $50.00 anyways at one of the other Rival casino's least you knew about this one. and it helped people out.even if it was only $10 bucks.

Hey Ruby Royal how many new players did you get that day on this? and what is the donation amt.that you made to the fund.

Ok I say Ruby Royal should give everyone that sees this a 25 to 50 free chip with a low wr :lolup:
~T~
 
All I can say is RubyRoyal did a good deed on this.
They did not put a rope on anyone and drag them in to make players to make a deposit at the casino.
If you play already at RubyRoyal I look at it as just an added bonus offer in the promo area.
I also look at it this way too.
That day you wanted to deposit & play $50.00 anyways at one of the other Rival casino's least you knew about this one. and it helped people out.even if it was only $10 bucks.

Hey Ruby Royal how many new players did you get that day on this? and what is the donation amt.that you made to the fund.

Ok I say Ruby Royal should give everyone that sees this a 25 to 50 free chip with a low wr :lolup:
~T~

Least Bryan showed proof the funds went where he said they was going an didn't offer a pidly thing to get them help that is much needed Bryans request came from the Heart this casino's Greed

Cindy
 
Thanks for seeing my point of view, Rob. I really think the rest of you are missing the bigger picture here.

I also think some of you have too much free time to write these long winded posts!! :p

Anyway, I certainly can find a bunch of really awful things for you all to chew on instead of this minor issue, if you want! :D

JMO of course. ;)
 
All I can say is RubyRoyal did a good deed on this.
They did not put a rope on anyone and drag them in to make players to make a deposit at the casino.

The thread title is "Ruby Royal does its bit for Haiti Victims, please join in!"

So they are suggesting that this is a good way to help Haiti.

But actually you have to make a $50 deposit to Ruby Royal in order to get this $10 to go to Haiti.

This is problematic as it might appear that they are using the horrible death and destruction to attract players to their casino. Charitable acts really need to be more unambiguous than this.
 
Not gonna name names but seems that a few affilates that promote these casino's see nothing wrong here imagine that


Cindy:rolleyes:
 
I will stick with my earlier post and say that if RR wants to come clean state that if they profit from this promo they will glady donate all proceeds to this useful cause. At least show that you dont intend to gain from others' misery.
 
.and that is the simple fact that Ruby Royal were committed to making any donation at all, in the first place, is a good thing. Think about the other question I also asked in my previous post..."Are all companies even making a donation" ? Especially online casino companies?
____

I just think other casino's/companies just had the good sense not do do anything along these lines as it could be taken the wrong way, i think the way this thread has gone proves it.
Ruby Royal has proved he is a stand up person by the help he has given to players with problems so i dont think in doing this was meant in a bad way.

I just think that it wasnt thought through properly enough as to the way it could be taken.
Havent we all been there. i know i have :D
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top