Slotocash - Baptism by Fire

[Nifty29]

I have said all I have to say in the public forum. Perhaps "up and up" was not the best choice of words. I do not like they way the do business and I will not elaborate. I don't play at many of the "Accredited" casinos either.

Whether or not they become Accredited on this site is not up to me. It is up to Bryan, and the consensus. I will not post in this thread again.

It's your choice, but don't you think its unfair to membership and the casino?

Stating that you have issues with their business practices, and then refusing to say what your issues are, leaves readers thinking "Whoa if Slotocash did something so bad to this guy that he won't talk about it. I'm gonna give these guys a wide berth". It may not be deliberate on your part, but that's the kind of atmosphere this creates. If their behavior really IS that bad, then don't you think the membership should be warned? I would certainly want to know. Of course, it might be something quite trivial, but the way you present it suggests they are up to no good somehow.


It's unfair to the casino too, as they can't address, respond to or explain anything regarding your issues (which are bad enough to stop you playing) because you aren't giving them an opportunity to do so. Actually, considering they're up for accredtation, its pretty poor form IMO to make vague accusations and walk away.

You seem upset about bonus restrictions, so maybe it is all tied up with that? Maybe they denied a withdrawal? You can see how these questions and many more will be in members minds after reading your posts.

It's not a personal attack pmutts. I just think you're being unreasonable.

 

[Casinomeister]

I was in contact with Miss Sloto this morning. Like many RTG casinos, their processing takes can take up to 72 hours; longer if a payment is requested on a Friday or over a weekend since the person who processes withdrawals is not there.

As for the bonus incentive for reversing a withdrawal, one of the managers took the initiative to try this, unbeknownst that it's a no-no. It probably won't happen again.

 

[giogio]

I was in contact with Miss Sloto this morning. Like many RTG casinos, their processing takes can take up to 72 hours; longer if a payment is requested on a Friday or over a weekend since the person who processes withdrawals is not there.

As for the bonus incentive for reversing a withdrawal, one of the managers took the initiative to try this, unbeknownst that it's a no-no. It probably won't happen again.

The following is the reply I've received to my inquiries :


Please note that wires may take up to 10 business days to arrive.

While over half of wires can arrive one day to the next, not all wires
arrive that quickly and therefore we prefer to state the 10 business day as
a safe time frame.

 

[Tirilej]

So if I understand correctly there is only one person working with processing all withdrawals, and that person only works monday to fridays?
That's really important to know. If we know all facts then we should have no use for complaining later if we still chose to play there.

 

[Casinomeister]

I think that one thing people are having a hard time understanding is that once the funds leave the casino, it's up to a third party processor to get the funds to your happy little fingertips. The processing on the casino side may take from several hours to a day or two - maybe three if it's over a weekend - then it's in the hands of whatever third party you have chosen to have the funds delivered. That third party may take a day - it may take a week. It all depends on the circumstances. Neteller is pretty damn quick; a bank wire may take considerably longer.

Of course using bonuses can slow things up if your account needs to be reviewed to ensure that you have met all requirements. Declining bonuses and just having a go at the games is the smart way to go - just my opinion.

 

[giogio]

The thing is that, unfortunately for us in the USA, the only way to withdraw is via Wire Transfer with a minimum amount $350.00 wich makes it harder for small depositor (read "me")!!!

 

[Gremmyboy]

Careless of you Ms Sloto

You may be new to RTG, but this is one method to prove absolutely that any RTG casino is NOT using the standard 95% setting, but something else. Although we don't know which setting this double pears layout is on, when coupled with tales of "tight games", the assumption would be that it is the 91.5% setting, which leads players to think all the slots are on 91.5%

Whilst it could also be the 97.5% setting, this does not seem as likely given the current financial climate, and the state of the industry as it struggles to hang on to the profitable US market.

When it comes to playing time, the difference between 91.5% and 95% is VERY significant.

Given the experience of many players here, it is extremely unwise for an RTG casino to mess with the RTP settings, lest they get caught by not knowing about this "double pear" quirk, which was down to human error in designing the reel layouts for each of the three available settings.

Derail

Where do I find the double pears? Are they next to each other(ie. one pear on top of the other in view in the playing window) or are they somewhere else?

I looked for a while at various casinos but never could find what posters were on about!

Any pointers to finding them or an explanation of what exactly is happening with the double pears or the purpose of them(how having two pears can drop the RTP by six odd percent?) would be greatly appreciated!


Cheers
Gremmy


/Derail

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hold on a second.....before we go off half-cocked and keep throwing accusations around....

1. The player who mentioned this said " I *thought* for sure"....THOUGHT...not certain or sure at all (no offence to bgermain btw just pointing out a fact). The player may not have noticed it earlier.

2. The two pears have not been confirmed as 91.5 or 97. Given that Bryan has stated that his information is that 91.5 is NOT for use in online versions, but only in kiosks. The 91.5 choice suits the conspiracy theorists, but since no evidence of any kind has been produced to contradict what Bryan has been told by RTG top brass, then the most likely reality is that the actual setting is 97 which is HIGHER than normal.

3. Nobody has produced any evidence of any kind that the two pears were a programming error. It's an opinion, not a fact.

4. Posting something like " Careless of you Ms Sloto" is disrespectful to the rep. Again, no evidence that Ms Sloto has done ANYTHING let alone anything careless.

5. "Tales of tight games" aren't worth the paper their written on (not literally of course) when it comes to determining RTP. I'll wager that if anyone here was presented with 10 slots with ranges between 90-100 and given 1000 spins on each wouldn't get even half of them correct when asked to match each game to its RTP.

6. The state of the industry or the economy is not a reason by itself to lower payouts. Less players mean less money, and lower payouts mean less players.

1) It doesn't matter when it was implemented - it was spotted, and is easy to spot.

2) The only thing we know is that it is not 95%, so which ever one it is, it is NOT how the software comes, so it was tweaked to one of the other settings, probably at the time the licence was obtained.

3) Dogboy confirmed it was an error in designing the reelstrips. It caused stops 1 and 40 to both be a pear, so when the reel stops at one of these, a stacked pair of pears is visible. Further, when launched, RTG slots display at stop 1, therefore when this setting is in use, the stacked pears are immediately obvious, no play is required.

4) It is careless given that the subject of RTG settings has been a hot topic, and something that makes players suspect is only in the software to allow operators to be devious when marketing offers that appear to be better than those from other RTG casinos. The fact that RTP has been changed from the well known 95% setting is enough to make players think they are getting screwed, even if it IS the 97.5% setting. The fact that most information about these settings is clamped down in secrecy by RTG and operators only serves to fuel speculation that it is something bad for players, for if it were a good thing, surely openness would be a great marketing tool.

5) A tight session is not proof, but has players looking for a reason other than bad luck, so when they see evidence that the RTP has been altered from the usual 95%, this becomes a reason for their bad session. If players kept reporting a better payout when playing at Sloto than at any other RTG casino, the feeling would then be that the stacked pears meant that the setting was 97.5%.

6) There is no reason for many of the things done by online casino operators, yet they still do it all the same.

 

[Nifty29]

1) It doesn't matter when it was implemented - it was spotted, and is easy to spot.

Fair enough

2) The only thing we know is that it is not 95%, so which ever one it is, it is NOT how the software comes, so it was tweaked to one of the other settings, probably at the time the licence was obtained.

How do you know when it was "tweaked"? I could have been at any time, and it isn't relevant anyway. Bryan stated that operators have to request the change via RTG so they would probably have received the standard version at licence time and applied thereafter. The theory is as sound as yours.

3) Dogboy confirmed it was an error in designing the reelstrips. It caused stops 1 and 40 to both be a pear, so when the reel stops at one of these, a stacked pair of pears is visible. Further, when launched, RTG slots display at stop 1, therefore when this setting is in use, the stacked pears are immediately obvious, no play is required.

I don't remember reading it was an "error". Do you have a link?

4) It is careless given that the subject of RTG settings has been a hot topic, and something that makes players suspect is only in the software to allow operators to be devious when marketing offers that appear to be better than those from other RTG casinos. The fact that RTP has been changed from the well known 95% setting is enough to make players think they are getting screwed, even if it IS the 97.5% setting. The fact that most information about these settings is clamped down in secrecy by RTG and operators only serves to fuel speculation that it is something bad for players, for if it were a good thing, surely openness would be a great marketing tool.

Players "think" a lot of things. What they "think" and what the fact is are often miles apart. If the RTP information is "clamped down in secrecy by RTG" then how come Bryan knows and was allowed to post about it, along with other RTG operators like CW who have publicly confirmed their settings. A lot of players always think they're getting screwed....even if you made the RTP 99.9% those same people would be whining every time they didn't win 2 deposits in a row, even though it would be more than possible for it to happen.

5) A tight session is not proof, but has players looking for a reason other than bad luck, so when they see evidence that the RTP has been altered from the usual 95%, this becomes a reason for their bad session. If players kept reporting a better payout when playing at Sloto than at any other RTG casino, the feeling would then be that the stacked pears meant that the setting was 97.5%.

A 2.5% higher RTP would NOT result in a sudden surge of winning players posting about their new-found fortune. We are talking about a 2.5% difference over millions of spins, which may well be attained by more frequent small payouts which would not necessarily mean a whole swag of players walking away with cash every other deposit. Every player will experience different payouts regardless of the game RTP. As I said earlier, if you were given 10 slots all set at different RTPs and you were given 1000 spins on each, you would NOT be able to accurately state them in RTP order from worst to best. In fact, you probably couldn't do it with 10,000 spins. So, when players say "oh this casino has definitely got a lower RTP setting" I just take it with a grain of salt. Remember, you never hear complaints about a casino paying out too much do you?

In other words....feeling schmeeling. Nobody, me included, could state whether a slots theoretical RTP is 95% or 97.5% based on our own play, or even several other people's play.

I'll also say again.....RTG and Bryan state that the 91.5% RTP setting is NOT used in the online version of the software. So, if it isn't 95, it must be 97. Unless you think its all a load of crap, in which case RTG and Bryan are lying and must be a part of some grand conspiracy to drive customers away by causing them to win less ....AND, if one DOES think it's all a big lie, then continuing to play there would be the act of a fool surely? There are very very few members here over the years who have actually stopped playing RTG due to this issue, so the rest who complain regularly are obviously just looking for an excuse for their losses as they would surely not be foolish enough to keep giving their money to crooks would they? Surely not. No. Not a chance.

6) There is no reason for many of the things done by online casino operators, yet they still do it all the same.

Everything is done for a reason in business and casinos are no different. I was challenging your assumption that they have lowered the RTP and done so due to the economic climate...neither of which are supported with any evidence at all. You didn't actually address my comment, you just pretty much washed your hands of it and said "yeah well casinos do all sorts of things for no reason"...I was talking about something specific.


It just bothers me how many people (who I thought knew differently) get on the "all casinos cheat" bandwagon without getting any kind of evidential basis to support their opinion. It is frustrating, because it just encourages the conspiracy theorists and sore losers to splash accusations around and damage the reputation of decent operators. Give it to the rogues...absolutely no argument there...but don't start question the integrity of proven decent operators for no good reason.

It's a good example of why a lot of reps don't participate any more, and I know this for a fact.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Everything is done for a reason in business and casinos are no different. I was challenging your assumption that they have lowered the RTP and done so due to the economic climate...neither of which are supported with any evidence at all. You didn't actually address my comment, you just pretty much washed your hands of it and said "yeah well casinos do all sorts of things for no reason"...I was talking about something specific.


It just bothers me how many people (who I thought knew differently) get on the "all casinos cheat" bandwagon without getting any kind of evidential basis to support their opinion. It is frustrating, because it just encourages the conspiracy theorists and sore losers to splash accusations around and damage the reputation of decent operators. Give it to the rogues...absolutely no argument there...but don't start question the integrity of proven decent operators for no good reason.

It's a good example of why a lot of reps don't participate any more, and I know this for a fact.

They have not been with RTG for anything like 6 months, so the ONLY time they could have had the setting moved from the default was at the time the software was supplied. If they DID make the change later, it proves RTG have lied about operators having to wait 6 months before submitting the request to RTG.

This kind of thing isn't cheating, more like "sharp practice". This is something we might expect from run-of-the-mill casinos, but NOT the kind of thing expected from an accredited casino. IF it is the 91.5% setting, it would show that RTG lied about this setting only being used for "booths", but if it is the 97.5% setting, it would be quite a big surprise, and a good one at that, so why keep such a marketing coup secret. Advertising that all the games have been set to the highest available setting would do wonders, and would have RTG fans flocking to try them out, surely good for business.

Although not easy, it is possible to calculate the RTP for a simple slot (not Fruit Frenzy), and it has been done for quite a few Microgaming slots, and has shown that they are all pretty close to 95%. Such a calculation needs only the reelstrips and the paytable, and not a sample of millions of spins.

A simple slot also includes those that have fixed rules regarding the bonus round, with nothing being determined by probability tables that are not published as part of the rules. A slot that awards a fixed number of free spins at a fixed multiplier can have it's theoretical RTP calculated to several decimal places.

The problem with this industry is that so many operators hide away in jurisdictions that either look the other way, or can be "bribed" to see all complaints from the operator's point of view, that we have a regular stream of players that got screwed and have nowhere to turn. This has meant that operators are not going to be trusted, no matter how good a reputation they seem to have. Small negative signs will make players think that there could be worse to come, and in some cases, failing to heed such signs and give the benefit of the doubt has been an expensive mistake for players. A recent example is Rushmore, once accredited, but who have had a string of mishaps and negative signs followed by apologies and empty promises, only for things to go wrong again and again. Some die hard loyal players have stuck with them, but for some it has been an expensive mistake.

RTG casinos in particular have no regulators. CDS will mediate, but they have no power to enforce their decision, and no means to punish operators that flout the rules.

There are quite a few casinos that have the view "all players that use our bonuses are up to no good", yet they still offer them, and CS even speak to you like there is something wrong with you if you turn down their generous offers and say you want to play just with your deposit.

 

[wewewewewe]

Just give me some information concerning a withdrawal....my thoughts

I think that one thing people are having a hard time understanding is that once the funds leave the casino, it's up to a third party processor to get the funds to your happy little fingertips.

One cannot see in a RTG casino when this first step has been taken. So from the player side, the absence of information is frustrating.

for example my withdrawal of 28/2/2012 @ SLOTO. It still stands there, no status update whatsoever. Even not an reply from CS, after my second mail (with other concerns). This is the third business day.....

I am beginning to wonder if they have all affairs in order. For example, my first withdrawal was approved within the hour. (i send my ID and it was approved, got it on my Ewallet)

AFTER the approval, half a day later, they send me an email with requests for further ID information, they asked for an old Fax form with credit card info? I never deposited with a credit card. Why is that info needed?

I replied and stated that this already was done. The email gave me the idea that my withdrawal accidentally was approved. That this actually was a mistake. This idea is also backupped by the fact that my second withdrawal takes so long to be processed. Further reading in this thread about things also give me the idea that they are not there, were they supposed to be.

Please read, this is my personal opinion, just want it to share with you people.

 

[giogio]

for example my withdrawal of 28/2/2012 @ SLOTO. It still stands there, no status update whatsoever. Even not an reply from CS, after my second mail (with other concerns). This is the third business day.....



I'm sure you meant a different date.

 

[wewewewewe]

Date is 24/2/2012..

for example my withdrawal of 28/2/2012 @ SLOTO. It still stands there, no status update whatsoever. Even not an reply from CS, after my second mail (with other concerns). This is the third business day.....



I'm sure you meant a different date.

Youre Right, that must be 24/2/2012

Thanx! and Sorry.

 

[bgermain1985]

Hold on a second.....before we go off half-cocked and keep throwing accusations around....

1. The player who mentioned this said " I *thought* for sure"....THOUGHT...not certain or sure at all (no offence to bgermain btw just pointing out a fact). The player may not have noticed it earlier.

Nothing is certain in life - however I did edit that I play this game the majority of the time for a couple days and had not noticed it once. I pride myself for my attention to detail and again state that I am pretty sure this was a recent change. No offences taken.

 

[giogio]

You are not alone.
i'm also waiting for a wire requested on the 18 and approved on the 22.
I know I will be paid but I was used (spoiled I might say) to get it in 24 hour or less!!

......as of now ...still waiting. beginning to get very disappointed

 

[labeled]

Sloto never stopped offering Rival. I was told existing players could still log in to the Rival casino and play - even in the US.
I believe the same applies to ALL Rival casinos.

KK

Unfortunately, "sort of." With Sloto and Desert Nights you could keep the casino download and play from there, but other Rivals locked us out, and Sloto's Rivals were no longer offered on the web, only the standalone version.

 

[Sloto]

PM me your username if your withdrawal has not been processed with 72 hours and I will check for you.

Ms Sloto

 

[deucebag]

2. The two pears have not been confirmed as 91.5 or 97. Given that Bryan has stated that his information is that 91.5 is NOT for use in online versions, but only in kiosks. The 91.5 choice suits the conspiracy theorists, but since no evidence of any kind has been produced to contradict what Bryan has been told by RTG top brass, then the most likely reality is that the actual setting is 97 which is HIGHER than normal.

Dogboy confirmed on the forum that the two pears were indeed for the 91% setting (there is no 91.5%).

You sure like ridiculing people, but you're the one who is wrong.

And I agree with pmutts that a $6.50 max bet is a bad sign. It indicates an underfunded operation. But at least they're being honest and don't accepts bets were they can't pay off the win.

 

[Nifty29]

Dogboy confirmed on the forum that the two pears were indeed for the 91% setting (there is no 91.5%).

You sure like ridiculing people, but you're the one who is wrong.

And I agree with pmutts that a $6.50 max bet is a bad sign. It indicates an underfunded operation. But at least they're being honest and don't accepts bets were they can't pay off the win.

Oops my bad.... I'll concede the .5%

Do you have the link for that? My understanding is that he was not allowed to say which one it was, and hence did not do so. I'll stick with that unless you have something contrary.

Thanks for the wonderful personal feedback once again.....lovely and very meaningful to receive it from such an intelligent and respected person.

The $6.50 max bet means underfunded? Ummm....yeah. Absolutely. It's not to deter....you know......advantage players or professional bonus hunters or anything. I guess that's why 32Red have the rule in their SUB as they just don't have the money.

 

[KasinoKing]

Dogboy confirmed on the forum that the two pears were indeed for the 91% setting (there is no 91.5%).

You sure like ridiculing people, but you're the one who is wrong.

And I agree with pmutts that a $6.50 max bet is a bad sign. It indicates an underfunded operation. But at least they're being honest and don't accepts bets were they can't pay off the win.

I don't always agree with everything Nifty says, or the way he says it, but MY reply to your post will probably be very similar to his...
(Edit: He posted while I was still typing!)

Please provide the link to the post in which DogBoy said 2 Pears = 91%.
(FYI the data sheet I saw for Fruit Frenzy only has 95% and 97.5% options)

Sloto'Cash limiting the bets to $6.50 has absolutely nothing to do with how well they are funded.
The rule is there purely to thwart certain "advantage play" strategies.

KK

 

[Pinababy69]

I haven't reread the whole thread in question where Dogboy discussed the double pear symbols on Fruit Frenzy, but I did read his original post...and from what I gather, he never did say which setting the double pear symbols signified. On the contrary, he seemed to state that he COULDN'T say which setting it was.

Link to thread for anyone who is interested:

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/fruit-frenzy-layout-at-doyles-hmmm.33284/

Dogboy's original post is #6 in the thread. Sorry for any derail.

 

[deucebag]

Oops my bad.... I'll concede the .5%

Do you have the link for that? My understanding is that he was not allowed to say which one it was, and hence did not do so. I'll stick with that unless you have something contrary.

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/rtg-software-backend-issues-rtp-etc.41825/

The $6.50 max bet means underfunded? Ummm....yeah. Absolutely. It's not to deter....you know......advantage players or professional bonus hunters or anything. I guess that's why 32Red have the rule in their SUB as they just don't have the money.

32red only have it for their sign up bonus, which is relatively small. Virtually no other casinos out there have this restriction (the ones that restrict bet size have a percentage rectriction). The only other reason for having this rule is even worse than being underfunded: it's a "gotcha" term that is there to create traps for players and win-win situations for casinos. Offer a very large bonus to attract high rolling players, and take their money if the didn't read the rules carefully enough and bet too high. There's nothing inherently nefarious or about betting more than $6.50, lots of players do that, especially ones that deposit 4 figures.

It's a bad rule, and reflects poorly on the casino. That's my opinion, you're entitled to yours.

I don't always agree with everything Nifty says, or the way he says it, but MY reply to your post will probably be very similar to his...
(Edit: He posted while I was still typing!)

Please provide the link to the post in which DogBoy said 2 Pears = 91%.
(FYI the data sheet I saw for Fruit Frenzy only has 95% and 97.5% options)

What were you smoking on 8 October 2011?

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/questions-about-rtp.46494/

 

[giogio]

PM me your username if your withdrawal has not been processed with 72 hours and I will check for you.

Ms Sloto

So ,we have to be prepared/accept that 72 hours pending (possibly reversal) period is within the norm for a casino asking for accreditation? Just asking, nothing else than that.

 

[Gremmyboy]

Your argument that having RTP variables (of a limited nature) is inherently untrustworthy does not hold water.
That argument would see every pub, club and casino in most lands thrown into the pit.

You need to address these facts:

1) In the B&M industry, which is heavily regulated and players regard as totally above board, RTP variants exist, and are used across the board.

2) In most jurisdictions across the developed world, B&M RTP is not displayed to the player.

3) In the B&M industry, operators are under no obligation (in practically every jurisdiction) to notify players when an RTP setting is altered.

4) The RTP settings available on RTG products are all higher than most B&M jurisdictions.

5) By your own notation, only "some" of the RTG operators make use of RTP variants, many do not. And yet these operators, some of whom advertise that they only run 95% RTP games, are rubbished by your assertions that RTG as a system, by allowing RTP variants, is somehow not above board.

6) Use of a variable RTP setting WILL be part of any on-line regulatory system introduced by US authorities. If it's part of their B&M regulatory system, which it is, it WILL be replicated.

Your highlighting of Fruit Frenzy is not a case of a 95% RTP game being switched to a 60% RTP setting. It is an operator electing to change from a 95% RTP setting to a 91% RTP setting, which is a business decision they are entitled to make, and is a double-edged sword.

Can players still win on that setting? Absolutely.
Most pubs and clubs here in Australia vary between 85%, 87% and 89%, and yes, people still win (and intranet is now legal here, at least for one operator (Voyager), and we supply them).

And in the end, if players perceive that playtime is decreased in a particular casino (which it will likely be in a 91% setting versus 95%, volatility aside), on-line it is far easier to move than in the B&M world.

But getting back to regulation...all these calls for regulation, and then you'll what?

- Say that you can never trust any software that is allowed to have variable RTP settings, despite the fact that there is only a few % difference between the top and the bottom setting?
- Not trust the information that operators put out when they claim that they use a particular setting?
- Claim the authorities that do bring in regulation are rogue for allowing operators to use several RTP settings, without notification as to which is in use?

Regulation will bring oversight, but it will also institute the use of variable RTP settings (within a limited band), just as it has in the B&M industry ad infinitum.

Woooof

Cheers
Gremmy

 

[Pinababy69]

Thanks Deucebag and Gremmyboy for highlighting that post by Dogboy. I had either completely missed it first time around, or forgotten about it.