Shark Casino Owes Me $29,500

[bpb]

I'd like to distill my long winded arguments to a few brief points.

If I was a player who claimed a bonus with a cap, met the requirements, received a withdrawal, and had to wait a few weeks to get the remainder, my line of thinking would go thusly

1) Casinos like to make money
2) The casino will make money in the long term if I gamble with my remaining balance rather than wait for a withdrawal
3) Therefore, it's ok for me to gamble with my remaining balance

Shark doesn't agree with this line of thinking. Is it because

A) Shark doesn't like to make money
B) There is a way for the player to make positive expectation wagers on his balance.
c) Shark wants the player to gamble with his balance so they can freeroll off of him. If he wins, deny the winnings. If he loses, keep quiet and pay what's left (if anything)
D) ??????????????????????????//

I am 100% sure that A and B are false. I really want to believe that C isn't the case here. So can someone, anyone, please provide me with an answer D that makes sense?

 

[henryVIII]

Henry,
If you got of your high horse and joined the real world you would understand better, but I see you are one of those people who believes that the player is always right and the casino is the enemy. It is sad that there are still a few of your type out there that do ruin it for everyone else. Please explain to me what on line casino you gave CASH to? Please tell me which of your credit cards you use? Or do you pay off balances the DAY you charge?Tell me what bussiness you are in that they give away money and are not in it for a profit?
For as many players That I have hoped would gamble it away, there is equally the same that I have encouraged to cash out or stop playing. Until this post I always respond to you without attacking you, but when you post like that, than you are the joke.
So know go ahead and comment how the big bad casino called me a name and that was not nice, because we are players and we are always right, and casinos have no right to be in a players forum. The problem is Henry most intelligent players want to be informed and know it is a two way street.

To be honest (if you know that word), you can cheerfully call me all the names under the sun.

I dont care. You steal players money.

Cash ... via the internet ... well, I use moneybookers/neteller so thats the equivalent Id guess. Never used a credit card in my life (I dont have one).

So rearrange these words ...

Facts Right Get

Or rearrange these ones

Crook You Are.

But sure call me names and babble on about psychological Players Edge if you think it will deflect away from the truth.

You should spend less time on forums and more time paying your customers their money.

 

[henryVIII]

I'd like to distill my long winded arguments to a few brief points.

If I was a player who claimed a bonus with a cap, met the requirements, received a withdrawal, and had to wait a few weeks to get the remainder, my line of thinking would go thusly

1) Casinos like to make money
2) The casino will make money in the long term if I gamble with my remaining balance rather than wait for a withdrawal
3) Therefore, it's ok for me to gamble with my remaining balance

Shark doesn't agree with this line of thinking. Is it because

A) Shark doesn't like to make money
B) There is a way for the player to make positive expectation wagers on his balance.
c) Shark wants the player to gamble with his balance so they can freeroll off of him. If he wins, deny the winnings. If he loses, keep quiet and pay what's left (if anything)
D) ??????????????????????????//

I am 100% sure that A and B are false. I really want to believe that C isn't the case here. So can someone, anyone, please provide me with an answer D that makes sense?

Arent you forgetting something?

The players psychological Edge of course !!!!

Seriuosly, there is no other answer than C.

You know that.

I know that.

Shark Casino knows that.

"Shark wants the player to gamble with his balance so they can freeroll off of him. If he wins, deny the winnings. If he loses, keep quiet and pay what's left (if anything)"

 

[bpb]

I'm still hopeful that Shark got a little caught up in their own bonus terms, and has drawn the mistaken conclusion that they need to protect themselves by restricting play while a player is waiting on cashouts. When they think it through, I think they'll see that they should be encouraging players to play with any balance once all sticky bonuses and excess balance due to caps have been removed.

I've always considered shark to be one of the top tier RTGs, behind inetbet, bodog, vip and canbet, but ahead of the rest of the pack. I think they made a mistake here while trying to protect themselves from advantage players using bonuses. I hope they'll be able to see this, and correct the problem by paying this player his winnings.

 

[Marco85]

I made the bet/offer to him after he suggested that he will continue to pitch his complaints to everyone he could even after I would send him the 2500. That is why the 2500 was not sent, I was waiting for his reply, which came Wednesday, and he will be paid today.

first I would like to thanks all of you that helping me in this case.
I just want to tell you that I did not get the 2500$ mention above, 3 days after he told you (and me) in this thread, that I will get paid...

I was honest to tell him that I will still do whatever I need to gain my fair winnings, is this a reason to hold my money, only because you hold it???

any advise on this one?
Marco

 

[chuchu59]

Phyngster,

Just pay this player the $2500 and get this thing finished. Meanwhile bpb has a valid point which you may consider in future when there are some outstanding instalments pending. Maybe you could state in your Terms and Conditions that if players wish to reverse the instalments that are not paid yet, they should contact the casino for removing the cap ie max cashout limit. This benefits both the casino and the players alike.

 

[phynqster]

Brilliant words of wisdom ChuChu, I will look into that. I like the way you said it, as I said before it needs to be the casinos decesion at that point not the players on his own.
The player was paid today, I do apologize for the delay. I screwed up I approved his payment Friday, I did not realize we do not send out payments here everyday. I thought we sent everyday, but found out we do not send everyday and there are certain days only we send. Again my apologies to Marco for saying you were paid Friday.It is in your Neteller account now.

 

[bpb]

Chuchu's words are brilliant, but my posts merit no response? (beyond the psychological advantage one which makes no sense)

Do you really believe that the player doesn't deserve his additional $3,000+ of winnings?

 

[phynqster]

Bpb,
You catch my flies with honey than shit. I never said you did not have valid points. In fact I even agreed with much of what you are saying, but if I really did believe I owed it to him I would pay. In fact I was dragged into this thread because the casino had denied his 2500 withdrawal and his additional winning because he had played a banned game. I could have let it stand at that, but felt that since the player had completed wagering requirements that part did not matter, in fact I was going to pay him the additional win, till I was told that the player had a Maximum cash out. In fact the player was told that earlier when he originally won over the 10,000 he was told that those funds would be removed when he decided to cash out that the maximum we would send him without another deposit was 10,000. The player decided to play the additional money, the casino never encouraged play or wanted him to play.Had he lost the money hell yes I would be happy, so in fact it was a lose lose situation for the player, which is unfortunate, but he made the decesion. He understood the rules to deposit and win 10,000 with out questioning them, why did he not call to question this.

 

[Marco85]

let try to find a way of solve this story

Bpb,
You catch my flies with honey than shit. I never said you did not have valid points. In fact I even agreed with much of what you are saying, but if I really did believe I owed it to him I would pay. In fact I was dragged into this thread because the casino had denied his 2500 withdrawal and his additional winning because he had played a banned game. I could have let it stand at that, but felt that since the player had completed wagering requirements that part did not matter, in fact I was going to pay him the additional win, till I was told that the player had a Maximum cash out. In fact the player was told that earlier when he originally won over the 10,000 he was told that those funds would be removed when he decided to cash out that the maximum we would send him without another deposit was 10,000. The player decided to play the additional money, the casino never encouraged play or wanted him to play.Had he lost the money hell yes I would be happy, so in fact it was a lose lose situation for the player, which is unfortunate, but he made the decesion. He understood the rules to deposit and win 10,000 with out questioning them, why did he not call to question this.

first, I got the 2500$, thanks phynqster.

I would like comment on this post, lately I let bpb do my work, and he did it very good.

I said before that I am sure that if I would ask to casino to play with the remaining 2500$, you would probably agreed, like you said.
but I did not, the reason is that 3 months after got the bonus, I really do not remeber what did I get, what terms there are, and even if I did get a bonus.
all I know is that there is 2500$ in my account, which if I would cash it out, I will get it in a month or so, but I will.
so, I considered it as 1000% my money.
phynqster, believe me, no psychological advantage valid when I play on my money...
all I want is to make some fun with my money, and theoretical edge for you for let me play in your place.
all done very innocent, and I did not try to make advatnage on you in any way.

from the start, I was very fair to you, I update you in every move I made, I told you I will post this, and I did. I have a respect to you and your job in the casino.
I can say that you were polite to me too, but bottom line, not so fair.

as you said to bpb, there is a point in what I said (he said on my behalf ), and no harm done to the casino, I did not try to make advantage on it.
all I did was played with my money. but you keeping hold to your position, that I need to pay for my mistakes.

so, I have a deal to offer you, and I think it is a good one, that all will be happy with it.

maybe I made a mistake by not remember the very small print and did not ask your premission to play, maybe you hanging on a big tree without trying to getting towards the player (me). as you said to bpb, if B is the correct answer, then you can see that getting towards players will only benefits the casino in the long run.

I offer to give up on half of the winnings - 1500$, and get only half of it.
I think my small mistake is not worth 3000$.
you will give me only half of my winnings, and will call it even.
I will stop dealing with this after that. (this is what I am doing all day, and it is really bother me).

please let me know what do you think about my offer.

Marco

 

[bpb]

It's pretty clear that Shark is a casino only suitable for bonus whores, who are adept at avoiding traps like the one laid out here. It's also clear that the majority of users on this board are of the opinion that the casino is always right whenever a dispute involving bonuses arises, as evidenced by the startling lack of support for marco. I can't fathom why anyone would think that bonus restrictions still apply once bonuses have been removed from an account and withdrawals have been made. It goes against all reason and common sense, looking at it from the perspective of either the player OR the casino.

It's clear that shark is setting up players to freeroll off of them.

 

[bpb]

please let me know what do you think about my offer.

Marco

You aren't getting anything. You got fleeced, accept it and move on. Nobody with any pull is willing to help you.

You want my advice, go make some credit card deposits somewhere, and if you lose, do a chargeback. This will put the casino in a lose lose situation. Most people in this thread shouldn't have a problem with that. The casino should have read their merchant agreement with their credit card company, which clearly states that funds deposited aren't guaranteed.

 

[henryVIII]

You aren't getting anything. You got fleeced, accept it and move on. Nobody with any pull is willing to help you.

You want my advice, go make some credit card deposits somewhere, and if you lose, do a chargeback. This will put the casino in a lose lose situation. Most people in this thread shouldn't have a problem with that. The casino should have read their merchant agreement with their credit card company, which clearly states that funds deposited aren't guaranteed.

A quite brilliant analogy.

Exactly what would be the difference ... both are profiteering under the pretext of taking gamble.

As to the lack of support ... well, and its only my opinion, but I think this forum should be called the affiliate zone sometimes.

I would reckon the great majority of posters here are linked to casinos through affiliate schemes.

That makes it a bit like trying to argue environmental issues with a forum a petroleum reps. Who dont identify themselves as such.

It can lead you to scratch your head sometimes.

Personally, I think all affiliates should identify themselves as such. Just as a petroleum rep is still perfectly entitled to have and state an opinion on, say, the greenhouse effect but they are clearly not 100% independent bystanders.

 

[chuchu59]

You aren't getting anything. You got fleeced, accept it and move on. Nobody with any pull is willing to help you.

You want my advice, go make some credit card deposits somewhere, and if you lose, do a chargeback. This will put the casino in a lose lose situation. Most people in this thread shouldn't have a problem with that. The casino should have read their merchant agreement with their credit card company, which clearly states that funds deposited aren't guaranteed.

Great advice. In the long run, Marco 85 will benefit because he will be banned as a fraudster and he wont lose anymore at online casinos. The player, maybe unknowingly, placed himself into a lose-lose situation. Had he been more wary, this would not have happened. We must all be vigilant when playing at online casinos. We want to win and they want us to lose so if there is anything that places the casino in an advantageous position, they will use it.

HenryVIII,
In case you are wondering, I can tell you that at least I am not an affiliate, just a pathological gambler who likes to gamble on almost anything from horse racing to mahjong. Most affiliates like dominique and webscaz are reliable and will not simply defend the casinos' position but I also agree that affiliates should identify themselves as such controversial; issues arise.

 

[henryVIII]

Great advice. In the long run, Marco 85 will benefit because he will be banned as a fraudster and he wont lose anymore at online casinos. The player, maybe unknowingly, placed himself into a lose-lose situation. Had he been more wary, this would not have happened. We must all be vigilant when playing at online casinos. We want to win and they want us to lose so if there is anything that places the casino in an advantageous position, they will use it.

HenryVIII,
In case you are wondering, I can tell you that at least I am not an affiliate, just a pathological gambler who likes to gamble on almost anything from horse racing to mahjong. Most affiliates like dominique and webscaz are reliable and will not simply defend the casinos' position but I also agree that affiliates should identify themselves as such controversial; issues arise.

Its funny chuchu because sometimes I am totally agreeing with you and other times I am bewildered.

You know what you talk about and I totally believe you are sincere ... but issues like this I honestly cannot understand how anyone can think the casino isnt anything but shady.

Put it this way. You go into a pub to meet a friend and tell him about online gambling. Now, you can sense his scepticism ... "yeah, whats the catch?" etc etc. You know this conversation, we've all had it. That is, all online casinos are rip-offs.

Cant you see its places like Shark Casino that are the catch?

If this isnt a confidence trick then how would you define one??

Would intercasino, 32red, 888, etc do this?

Of course not.

Thats why shark casino are a scam in my book.

And, very genuinely, as much as i respect your integrity, I cannot for the life of me see any other conclusion.

Would you go onto, say, even judge judy (never mind a real court) and try and defend this action as anything other than illegally unfair to "the plaintiff".

Its just ridiculous!

 

[henryVIII]

oooh ... again... more bad rep from tennis balls ... quote "worst post ever" ...

Are you an affiliate tennis balls?

Thought so.

 

[chuchu59]

HenryVIII,

There is a difference between casinos like 32RED/Intercasino and Shark. The former bends backwards to accomodate reasonable requests because they have a reputation to defend and they also have the financial clout to do so. Shark, I believe, falls into the middle range where they will PAY if everything is done according to their terms and conditions but if anything goes astray, the player will not be given the benefit of the doubt simply because the power of the dollar is more important than reputation or anything else. You might take a cue from their instalment payments. If they had plenty of money in the kitty why would they pay $10,000 in instalments. The line they take may be deplorable at times but certainly understandable and is necessary to allow them to stay afloat. Look no further than Club Player for a bottom range candidate where they dont even have a reason for not paying. As for your reference to judge judy, the plaintiff will need to prove that there is, under the law of contract, an offer by the player to reverse some of his money for play without being bound by the $10000 max and the casino accepted it. The 'consideration' is the $2500 and there are no qualms about that. The burden of proof will be on the player and I honestly believe that if contested in court the player will lose because it is only his unilateral thinking that his reversal is not bound by the original terms of the bonus and where the withdrawal has not been fully cashed.

Nice to debate with you. Sometimes its rather good to agree to diasagree. I like to tackle all issues without branding myself with either siding with the player or the casino. Its fairer and makes us all better people.

 

[Marco85]

chuchu

chuchu.
you said that shark casino is care more about the money then it rep, I don't think so, cause no casino can last long without good reputation, and this kind of treatment to players do not help their's.
about the financial aspect, other casino that pay very fast do it not just for the sake of the good rep, it is because they did their homework and know what is their balance and how much they can pay. if Shark would have done the same then they should lowers thier limits, so players cannot win too much.
putting a note in the site that they can get only 2500$ every week (and pay even slower), is not an answer to thier probelm, it is just an act to prevent them from lose a lot in a certain period, and to be able to pay by the losers money "when they can"! and this is what they did here.

the correct answer is to limit the games, why did they let players play a 500$ a hand if they know they cant stand the hit?

it is like a story I once heard about portofino player who won more then 2 Millions, cause they raise him the limits, because they just wait for him to lose, this is not how things should work... (and this is what couse portofino to close their bussines).

phynqster, I still wait for an answer to my offer, I think it is quite rude that you did not comment on it! you can tell me "NO", I wont be offend, I will just keep on doing what I doing in order to get my money.
hope to get a reply soon.

Marco

 

[tennis_balls]

oooh ... again... more bad rep from tennis balls ... quote "worst post ever" ...

Are you an affiliate tennis balls?

Thought so.

Thought wrong! I'm a player.

 

[chuchu59]

chuchu.
you said that shark casino is care more about the money then it rep, I don't think so, cause no casino can last long without good reputation, and this kind of treatment to players do not help their's.
about the financial aspect, other casino that pay very fast do it not just for the sake of the good rep, it is because they did their homework and know what is their balance and how much they can pay. if Shark would have done the same then they should lowers thier limits, so players cannot win too much.
putting a note in the site that they can get only 2500$ every week (and pay even slower), is not an answer to thier probelm, it is just an act to prevent them from lose a lot in a certain period, and to be able to pay by the losers money "when they can"! and this is what they did here.

the correct answer is to limit the games, why did they let players play a 500$ a hand if they know they cant stand the hit?

it is like a story I once heard about portofino player who won more then 2 Millions, cause they raise him the limits, because they just wait for him to lose, this is not how things should work... (and this is what couse portofino to close their bussines).

phynqster, I still wait for an answer to my offer, I think it is quite rude that you did not comment on it! you can tell me "NO", I wont be offend, I will just keep on doing what I doing in order to get my money.
hope to get a reply soon.

Marco

I hope your prediction is true and that the scums wont last long but I still see the whereabouts of 1cnp and prism. As for portofino, I think its still there but probably under new management. I cannot answer for phynqster but I seriously doubt whether he will take up your offer. Casinos will gleefully rub their hands when players reverse their withdrawals as Simmo and many members here will attest to. In your case, its even worse as you are placed in a lose-even situation where you cannot win more but may lose the $2500 back. Be careful next time.

 

[henryVIII]

Thought wrong! I'm a player.

Hmmmm ...

 

[Tester]

What is Marco's point?

Marco,

You got a bonus.
Rules state you cannot withdraw over 10,000.
You wanted to get more than the max.

Who cares what stuff crosses your mind?
A clear rule. You cannot escape it.

I do not get it how one here can think the casino is wrong about THAT?
You can advice tell the casino that he will be wisher not having this rule, but this is missing the point.

This guy got a bonus with a clear max cashout. Why the hell should he get more than that?

 

[thetic]

I would like to side with the player here.

I understand that you need to be wary of the Terms & Conditions for the bonus but;

1. Nothing for the player to gain here - he is gambling in the proper spirit of the word rather than abusing any bonus. Treat him as a valued customer/gambler and you may well gain more than the $3,000 in the long run.

2. Had Shark held up their own end of the agreement and paid the $2,500 weekly as agreed, the player could then have chosen to return with his own funds. However the casino were still holding money that should rightfully have been in the players account weeks before. If the casino does not hold up their end of the agreement I would see that the money is still rightfully the players at the date it should have been paid as per the Ts & Cs. The fact that casino has not bothered to return it should not mean anything. (Although I am not naive enough to think that they will see this to be the case)

Do not hold out much hope for you here Marco, I think it is discgraceful and will not be going anywhere near Shark (not that they will be concerned) until they get house in order.

Come on Steve, pay the man!!!

 

[Tester]

1. I agree that sometimes terms should not be used against novice who have not managed to read paragraph 7.2.D.
This player however was welll aware to the 10K max.
He choose to play against the rule, based on his own implementation of the rule.
Rules are there to be used. Everyone agrees that his winning hsould not be paid according to the rules. Who cares about his intentions?

2. The fact that the casino did not pay exactly on schedule is against the casino.
I do not think that this makes the player eligible to break the rules and get winning thereof.

 

[thetic]

I'm with you to an extent Tester but it's an awful 1-sided agreement that you have no comeback if casino does not hold up it's end but the player is liable to lose if they stray even slightly from the Ts & Cs (not necessarily saying that on this occasion it is a slight stray!)

I know we are looking at Casinos here and morals don't really come into it but I would say;

1. Player is morally right
2. Casino is legally right

Let's call it a draw and pay the man half of it (my demands have dropped by 50% in a day!) in line with his previous offer. For the sake of $1,500 could have done the casino a lot of good in terms of the publicity and the new manager would have been seen to have made a statement that he was going to clean things up. However, I am also aware that Shark probably would have had thousands of similar claims if they paid this one though!

I still think the player has been very naive, I am now avoiding most RTG (& all Costa Rican based) casinos after I had to wait 3 weeks for a $2k payment from Coolcat - but reading other stories about there, Prism and Shark I was relatively lucky to get paid this quickly!!!