On Probation The Virtual Casino Group and Ace Revenue

[ChillBill]

If you can read past the fluffing, VWM makes some very valid points imo.

Virtual have managed to get away with their rogue behaviour for all these years, because online casinos and eGaming on a whole, has taken steps to fly under the radar. But things have changed now. Governments have cottoned to the industry being a very lucrative tax sack stuffer. And, in the not too distant future, it will be another acceptable main-stream form of online entertainment.

While VCG maybe RTG's best performing operator, I believe they're not blind to the current changes afoot. Meaning, it seems they are trying to clean up their act. Thing is though, it's going to take a lot of genuine work and more than just mouth-piece credence, from well known industry figureheads, to turn this ship around.

Under the circumstances and given Virtual has a long and seedy past, anything less than, a completely unbiased 3'rd party audit, conducted by a respected firm, to determine which players have claim to rightful winnings (not paid) etc etc, would, imo, be one perquisite cornerstone, which would demonstrate their sincerity to fix their past wrongs.

The threads on page 45 and to date, I haven't seen anything posted which defines this type of commitment from Virtual Casino Group.

With all due respect to you GreedyGirl and others, if this backfires in your face; it's possible given past empty/broken promises by VCG, it's not your money or winnings being lost. As always, it's the punters, who lose out again!

 

[albrco123]

I will be back tomorrow to discuss further issues, including what seems to be the biggest, hot-button topic: Withdrawal times.

I know this thread has taken a slight detour and i admit to not having read every post since but don't recall seeing a post from Tawni on the above?

Al

 

[Nifty29]

If you can read past the fluffing, VWM makes some very valid points imo.

You might be right. I can't be bothered wading through the fluff all the time, so I'll take your word for it.

Virtual have managed to get away with their rogue behaviour for all these years, because online casinos and eGaming on a whole, has taken steps to fly under the radar. But things have changed now. Governments have cottoned to the industry being a very lucrative tax sack stuffer. And, in the not too distant future, it will be another acceptable main-stream form of online entertainment.

While VCG maybe RTG's best performing operator, I believe they're not blind to the current changes afoot. Meaning, it seems they are trying to clean up their act. Thing is though, it's going to take a lot of genuine work and more than just mouth-piece credence, from well known industry figureheads, to turn this ship around.

Agree, and I haven't seen much to convince me the helmsman and crew have changed thus far.

Under the circumstances and given Virtual has a long and seedy past, anything less than, a completely unbiased 3'rd party audit, conducted by a respected firm, to determine which players have claim to rightful winnings (not paid) etc etc, would, imo, be one perquisite cornerstone, which would demonstrate their sincerity to fix their past wrongs.

The threads on page 45 and to date, I haven't seen anything posted which defines this type of commitment from Virtual Casino Group.

I thought there was a dispute process i.e. email and contact name setup via this thread to address such matters? Maybe I misread that. I agree that it is an absolute prerequisite....remembering of course that not EVERY claim will be valid, and that some payouts may have been denied for legitimate reasons e.g. multiple accounts, gnoming, etc.

With all due respect to you GreedyGirl and others, if this backfires in your face; it's possible given past empty/broken promises by VCG, it's not your money or winnings being lost. As always, it's the punters, who lose out again!

I'm not sure who the "others" are you refer to? Bryan maybe? I don't see anyone else who has really put themselves on the line.

The whole thing might well backfire. Who knows? If history is any guide, I am not hopeful of a positive outcome. I believe Greedygirl is doing this for the right reasons...for the players and the industry as a whole.

The outcome of the bsilva issue will be an interesting pointer as to where they're really at IMO.

 

[anniemac]

We have kicked this thread around until there is nothing but a moldy old corpse left.

Bottom line, doesn't matter one whit what is said here or not said here. If CM deems Virtual righteous, then they will be removed from the pit.

Then you have the option of playing there or not playing there. They may turn out to be the next greatest casino or they may be the same old same old.

Gamble, don't gamble. Up to you.

I'm not going to touch them but that's just me. I don't have the patience or the inclination to mess with them.

 

[Googobucs]

And guess what I got from [email protected] in my in box when I got home today.
subject line: A Free Chip to Come Back Home
I snipped out the e-mail to post, but still cannot upload any pics here. I'll post it later if needed.

They know damn well that the last thing I used was a free chip, and I am not eligible for this and it was not that long ago. Right before or around the time I joined this forum.

it is addressed directly to me with MY user name. it's not some generic mailer to the whole world.

 

[TawniVirtualAce]

You signed a contract with a bad company and your job is to give them back their reputation.

If I would have this job I would show presence 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Your statement is blablabla.

Please show some facts. But I am sure your company can imitate any facts (like mails and accounts).

I was hired just a very short time ago by a company that has substantial issues. It is not a simple or quick process to learn the issues involving Ace and Virtual. With each question raised, it shows another knot to be untangled in an already very tangled ball. It is critical for me to have a solid understanding of each and every issue. With volumes to learn with all this, issuing snap responses would only be irresponsible.

Because of the timing of my arrival occurring in the midst of the holidays, it’s difficult to have ready-access to those involved on my side of things. Following the first of the year it should not be so difficult. As I type this, I’m sure several members will find fault with this. I can only apologize and ask for a small amount of patience.

They know damn well that the last thing I used was a free chip, and I am not eligible for this and it was not that long ago. Right before or around the time I joined this forum.

Without seeing your player history, along with the email you’ve received, I cannot speak on this. I will assume (based upon other posts in this thread) that what you are stating is accurate and you would not be eligible. Based upon this assumption, this is something that needs to be addressed and corrected immediately, going forward. For players who for whatever reason are ineligible, we should not be sending out such promotional mailings. I have already spoken with our CMO and he is in full agreement with me and will be looking for solutions to this problem.

There used to be a term at this group that if the lifetime amount of bonuses you'd taken was more than you'd ever deposited, you wouldn't be allowed to cash out. Someone from here got caught with that rule years ago but I can't remember who it was....?

Say for instance you used a $100 free chip, then deposited $20 and won, you couldn't cash out.

I just took a quick look at the terms and rules on one of the casino sites and didn't see it anywhere, if Tawni could please confirm whether this rule is still there or not?

I'll have to check on this and I'll comment on this, before the end of the week.

I want to discuss withdrawals, but because much of this explanation has to do with U.S. processing, I have PM’d Bryan and Max to ask whether to have this discussion within this thread or within the America The Beautiful section. I’ll defer to them on this and will give the full explanation, wherever they deem most appropriate.

Once again, I’d just like to ask for patience. I’m not going anywhere, I’m not trying to avoid anything and I do want to be able to answer all questions properly and thoroughly. As most of you, I will be enjoying the next couple days with my family for Christmas, but I will be back Thursday to finally address the withdrawal issue (provided I’ve heard from Bryan or Max) and also to answer other questions.

 

[bsilva028]

I was hired just a very short time ago by a company that has substantial issues. It is not a simple or quick process to learn the issues involving Ace and Virtual. With each question raised, it shows another knot to be untangled in an already very tangled ball. It is critical for me to have a solid understanding of each and every issue. With volumes to learn with all this, issuing snap responses would only be irresponsible.

Because of the timing of my arrival occurring in the midst of the holidays, it’s difficult to have ready-access to those involved on my side of things. Following the first of the year it should not be so difficult. As I type this, I’m sure several members will find fault with this. I can only apologize and ask for a small amount of patience.



Without seeing your player history, along with the email you’ve received, I cannot speak on this. I will assume (based upon other posts in this thread) that what you are stating is accurate and you would not be eligible. Based upon this assumption, this is something that needs to be addressed and corrected immediately, going forward. For players who for whatever reason are ineligible, we should not be sending out such promotional mailings. I have already spoken with our CMO and he is in full agreement with me and will be looking for solutions to this problem.



I'll have to check on this and I'll comment on this, before the end of the week.

I want to discuss withdrawals, but because much of this explanation has to do with U.S. processing, I have PM’d Bryan and Max to ask whether to have this discussion within this thread or within the America The Beautiful section. I’ll defer to them on this and will give the full explanation, wherever they deem most appropriate.

Once again, I’d just like to ask for patience. I’m not going anywhere, I’m not trying to avoid anything and I do want to be able to answer all questions properly and thoroughly. As most of you, I will be enjoying the next couple days with my family for Christmas, but I will be back Thursday to finally address the withdrawal issue (provided I’ve heard from Bryan or Max) and also to answer other questions.

abcd

 

[vinylweatherman]

VIP program - fake?

Going through my spam folder, it seems I have been made a "Centurion VIP" at Silver Oak. The problem is that I have NEVER DEPOSITED there, and my ONLY transaction was a free chip, for which the winnings were confiscated for vague breaches of the terms. It was my ONLY free chip, so wasn't down to the 2 in a row problem.

This makes me feel this is a fake VIP program, i.e, EVERYBODY is one, yet it is represented as something special for selected valued customers. It clearly came from them as it quoted my username there. Almost at the same time, and email arrives with some juicy bonus offers.

The one positive thing is that the rule about not claiming 2 free chips in a row is now clearly stated as part of the email offer invite, rather than something only found deep in the terms and conditions.


Not tempted of course

 

[Cleveland]

I won't cross post as that is illegal on the forums but in case the information isn't some how moved here I feel it necessary to point this out:

A post has been made by Virtual in regards to withdrawal times in the America The Beautiful Section. All interested parties should go there to read. Sorry for putting it this way but it just feels like hiding to me, when that information needs to be known to all when it comes to deciding if Virtual has indeed changed at all. I know many don't visit that section of the forums and might miss the post.

I've some what "stuck" up for Virtual a "bit" in terms of being given a fair go in this process despite their past (mainly out of respect for those who somewhat started the process). This just doesn't seem right to me in terms of posting needed information.

 

[Jericoton]

Yeah i had also a free chip offer yesterday i knew i had only used free chips before... So after wagering tried to cash out and live chat told me right away that my winnings were voided because i used multiple free chips in a row

Even if they would get off from pit i would never deposit here or anywhere in theyre casinos. I knew this time i could not win but even if that would have been my own money i swear they would have come with something else thats just what they do.

 

[LaurieJim]

Hell has frozen over !

Am I still at Casinomeister ? Hath hell frozen over ?

So this is the same casino group that has taken money from players , lied to players and have had some of the most hurtful promos like the 9 /11 infamous ones. Marty made right several years ago and got some or most of us payed and he left , I am sorry but the day they become accredited , I will give up gaming as they screwed me enough years ago that its still hard for me to sit , I will not bend over again !

Laurie

ps This is Bryans site and I respect him and value his info but Bryan have you been sky diving or anything that you may have hit your poor head, do you feel lightheaded.............................Come back to the light Bryan...................PLEASE

 

[chayton]

It's not about becoming accredited, they're so far away from that it's not even being suggested. They're just trying to get out of the rogue pit and possibly get into the 'not recommended' section.

 

[bigjohn]

I really don't think anybody from here is playing at these casinos or at least not depositing. This thread goes 2 or 3 weeks with no posts, same as the other related thread in the other section.

This is more like a Baptism by Silence.

 

[LaurieJim]

It's not about becoming accredited, they're so far away from that it's not even being suggested. They're just trying to get out of the rogue pit and possibly get into the 'not recommended' section.

Even on Probation , that is a shocker for those of us who have lost money to these leeches , this was the first time I saw this and yes it was a shocker no matter how its done !

Laurie

 

[Bower50]

Wasn't sure where to post this.Sorry if in wrong thread.My question is."Isn't VIP LOUNGE a part of the Virtual Group?"

 

[me_and_ed]

Wasn't sure where to post this.Sorry if in wrong thread.My question is."Isn't VIP LOUNGE a part of the Virtual Group?"

There is a VIP Lounge that is part of the Virtual group and there is a VIP Lounge that is a Microgaming casino that is owned by Jackpot factory and is by invite.

 

[Tirilej]

Wasn't sure where to post this.Sorry if in wrong thread.My question is."Isn't VIP LOUNGE a part of the Virtual Group?"

Vip Lounge changed their name a while back. They are now Ruby Slots.

 

[Bower50]

Thanks.Good to know that.

 

[KasinoKing]

Yeah i had also a free chip offer yesterday i knew i had only used free chips before... So after wagering tried to cash out and live chat told me right away that my winnings were voided because i used multiple free chips in a row

If you're not allowed to use multiple free-chips - WHY DO THEY LET YOU CLAIM THEM???

If they honestly want to clean up their act, they can start by putting an end to this sort of shit.

KK

 

[Googobucs]

Free chip crap

Back on 1/5 I forwarded an e-mail free chip offer to Tawni at her request to see an example of what I am getting. I am not eligible for this, I last used a free chip here.
To my amazement, I received the same offer again today. Directly from [email protected]. WTF ???
I have a feeling I am going to regret having made any effort to help at all.

 

[bigjohn]

Back on 1/5 I forwarded an e-mail free chip offer to Tawni at her request to see an example of what I am getting. I am not eligible for this, I last used a free chip here.
To my amazement, I received the same offer again today. Directly from [email protected]. WTF ???
I have a feeling I am going to regret having made any effort to help at all.
View attachment 44616

Thats a nice term at the end there too! Only good for exactly $100. What is the minimum you can withdraw using their banking methods?

This whole experiment looks like an exercise in futility, their 'business model' is the root of their problems and they are not going to change it because, as they claim, it's so successful.

After reading through their past 3 attempts at redeeming themselves here I must say, as acidic as this thread is the people at CM seem much nicer than they were back then.

 

[dionysus]

'common throw us a bone'?
who writes these? internet-speak tweens?

 

[bigjohn]

'common throw us a bone'?
who writes these? internet-speak tweens?

That's funny with the picture you have now for your avatar!

 

[chayton]

it should be C'mon not common'

Lol yeah John, dionysus' avatar is cute huh? He needs to make a calendar, I'd buy one!

 

[rockycatt]

i think they mean over 100 gets washed away under 100 doesn't qualify ==my .02 cents

 

[greedygirl]

I really don't think anybody from here is playing at these casinos or at least not depositing. This thread goes 2 or 3 weeks with no posts, same as the other related thread in the other section.

This is more like a Baptism by Silence.

I've just posted in the ATB thread regarding something that was stated that was untrue and now I find I have to do this here, as well. Yes, this thread has been quiet until today, but the ATB thread has been active, only quiet until 5 days ago--hardly two to three weeks with no posts. Today, it became active again.

Just an FYI--Tawni has been hit pretty badly with the flu, so this is the only reason I'm stepping in on this particular thread, today. I stepped into the other thread only because I was involved in the situation Vinylweatherman was speaking of and I wanted to set the record straight.

Back on 1/5 I forwarded an e-mail free chip offer to Tawni at her request to see an example of what I am getting. I am not eligible for this, I last used a free chip here.
To my amazement, I received the same offer again today. Directly from [email protected]. WTF ???
I have a feeling I am going to regret having made any effort to help at all.

Googo--I'll speak with management tomorrow to see what happened and why you've received that email.

 

[Nifty29]

Just as an aside...and perhaps to answer Googos question...

It is quite common for promotional campaign databases to be prepared months in advance, or at least a week or two. Hence, it is usually not possible to just stop emails right then and there. If you are removed from the promotions database, it could take a week or two to filter through to the latest batch.

I'm not saying that's exactly what's happening here...just that it's a common issue, and a common misunderstanding.

 

[maphesto]

Gamblingwages also have bingosites according to their homepage. One of the bingosites
(Bingo Knights) is connected to the one maxd has issued a warning for, 123bingoonline.

Bingo Knights:

xxhttp://www.gamblingwages.com/bingo_affiliate_program.aspx
xxhttp://www.bingo-knights.com/contact-us/

1-877-234-9283

123bingoonline:

https://www.casinomeister.com/forum...odgy-practices-and-mishandled-winnings.51467/
xxhttp://www.123bingoonline.com/bingo-site-contact.php

1-877-234-9283

When I checked with maxd about these warnings about 123bingoonline as late as nov 7, the warning about 123bingoonline was still active.

I wonder what Gamblingwages are going to do about this?

 

[maxd]

... When I checked with maxd about these warnings about 123bingoonline as late as nov 7, the warning about 123bingoonline was still active.

I wonder what Gamblingwages are going to do about this?

Please see the recent update to the 123Bingo Warning, here.

 

[ChillBill]

A couple of observations...

• Sunset Slots gets kicked from BBF because of questionable marketing.
• VCG/Ace condones spam, conducts questionable marketing, owes players winnings and subscribes to others scallywag practices.

If this was any other casino group they'd be hung out to dry. Yet here we're feed excuses, justifications and what not. All it seems in hope, that members will forgive and forget. Sorry but the motivation to get these rogues, un-rogued, seems very strange indeed.

 

[dionysus]

Sorry, but I don't see that Bryan has any motivation at all. He isn't actively working to help them get un-rogued. That's on the group to do. And in the end, up to the players to decide.
And you're comparing apples to oranges. Sunset failed accreditation. The other has never even been suggested for accreditation - they aren't going through the BoF.

 

[ChillBill]

Sorry, but I don't see that Bryan has any motivation at all. He isn't actively working to help them get un-rogued. That's on the group to do. And in the end, up to the players to decide.
And you're comparing apples to oranges. Sunset failed accreditation. The other has never even been suggested for accreditation - they aren't going through the BoF.

Did I mention Bryan in my post? No I did not. Assumptions like yours cloud the issue.

Apples and oranges or bananas and mangoes , it makes no difference. My comparison ties back to the foundations of this site's philosophy. That is, to try and educate players where it's safe to play and where it is not. If Sunset Slots crossed the line with dubious marketing and is struck from list. Then VCG/Ace should be held to an identical set of guidelines.

I see a lot of excuses, justifications and promises, amounting to a lot of white noise but no action or commitment to change. Where is the line in the sand drawn here. When does it become clear, this group, has no more intention of cleaning up their act, than most CM members have of ever gambling at these casino again.

 

[maphesto]

If Sunset Slots crossed the line with dubious marketing and is struck from list. Then VCG/Ace should be held to an identical set of guidelines.

To be removed from the Rogue list can't ever be compared with being accredited here. To be removed from the Rogue list means that they no longer are considered crooks. To be accredited means that a casino is considered to meet standards that are WAY up there compared to most "regular" casinos.

During BBF periods many casinos are learning and are listening to players to be better, often when it comes to T&C:s. GamblingWages have already mentioned that they never will be that kind of casno that will meet those standards. Here are the standards Bryan has set up:

Standards for Accredited Casinos

Player and Responsible Gaming Focused
Must forbid underage play.
Must have a clean history of fairness towards their customers.
Must be able to take care of any player issue swiftly and professionally.
Must display information about responsible gambling, with links to relevant organizations.
Must offer and enforce spending limits in addition to both temporary and permanent self exclusion options.
Marketing Standards
Must not use false, misleading or deceptive advertising.
Must not spam, and must take appropriate actions against any affiliates or any third parties who do spam.
Must not cross promote to other properties without giving proper credit to affiliates and/or their advertisers.
Operational Standards
Must pay winnings in a timely manner.*
Must not disqualify any player from a payout if terms & conditions are met, except for situations of fraud (multiple-accounts, bogus ID documents, chargebacks, etc.,).
Must not confiscate winnings for vague & unclear reasons, such as "irregular playing patterns" or "bonus abuse", without specific T&C violations.
Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player.
No player shall be involuntarily placed into a situation which breaches the terms and conditions during the course of play.
Must pay out progressive jackpot wins in full or in reasonable chunks, regardless of any terms and conditions limiting payouts.**
Must remove any bonus and associated playthrough requirements at the request of the player if play has not commenced.
Will not entice players to reverse cash withdrawals with bonuses or other incentives.
Will not use outsourced support. Player support must be in-house.
Industry and Player Assurances
RNG and/or software must be audited by a third party.
Must have a representative (who can walk and chew gum at the same time) listed in Casinomeister's forum. This representative must be directly involved with customer/player service, or who can make decisions involving player issues.
They must be licensed in a jurisdiction that offers gambling licenses.***
* US PLAYERS: Please be advised that some casinos that accept US bets have difficulties in sending payments to the US. Play at your own risk.
** Excluding IGT casinos - this is noted within their listing.
***Under special circumstances, I will endorse casinos located in Costa Rica. This endorsement is based mainly on the casino's history of professionalism and player satisfaction.

GWages or Ace will never be close tho meet these standards, they know it and we know it. That's not what they want, they want to be removed from the Rogue pit. They don't want to be considered crooks.


BTW, what is happening at 123bingo?

Tawni?

 

[KasinoKing]

A couple of observations...

Sunset Slots gets kicked from BBF because of questionable marketing.
VCG/Ace condones spam, conducts questionable marketing, owes players winnings and subscribes to others scallywag practises.

I agree with you about Sunset. OK so it looks like they brought in someone new who made a big mistake - but that mistake had absolutely no impact on the players, only on affiliates. There are some accredited casinos who are worse in this respect IMHO because they spam players through "illegally" obtained e-mail lists and totally fake casino websites. (Looking at you, Palace Group).

Don't agree with you about Virtual/Ace: Though I would never play at or promote any of their brands myself, getting them out of the pit so that players can make PABs against them can only be a good thing. Even if this process brings small improvements in their operating practises it will help the countless players who got duped into joining one of their places.

KK

 

[LaurieJim]

I agree with you about Sunset. OK so it looks like they brought in someone new who made a big mistake - but that mistake had absolutely no impact on the players, only on affiliates. There are some accredited casinos who are worse in this respect IMHO because they spam players through "illegally" obtained e-mail lists and totally fake casino websites. (Looking at you, Palace Group).

Don't agree with you about Virtual/Ace: Though I would never play at or promote any of their brands myself, getting them out of the pit so that players can make PABs against them can only be a good thing. Even if this process brings small improvements in their operating practises it will help the countless players who got duped into joining one of their places.

KK

What about the thousands of players who have been duped by this group whom have never heard of CM or any of the other forums out there that protect players and promote fair play ?

So if they get out of the pit and PAB's are opened up , can you imagine the workload on Max for the many folks who have heard and belong to CM who want their complaints taken care of , this I can understand but how many times does this same old leaf have to turn over before some people come to grips that they will only change when it suits them , then they go back to the same ole same ole method of practice.

They prey upon the uninformed and less educated gamers , sending out spam mail and freebies to thousands. I feel for those players and that is my concern is for those who do not know better.

Laurie

 

[ChillBill]

To be removed from the Rogue list can't ever be compared with being accredited here.

You too have clearly misunderstood my post/s. I'll break it down for you.

The ethical principles of this site (CM) are built on a number of guidelines. They fundamentally establish a line in the sand to what is acceptable and what is not. Under the wing of these rules, lies the entire gambit of operational expectations. From member behaviour all the way through to Accreditation.

While accreditation is a long, long way from the rogue pit. It's the founding principles based on this site's ethics, which keeps everything in check. To claim a selective difference on these fundamental principles (or if you like core values), is like building a house on sand and then wondering why it falls down.

Sorry to say, but it's not me who has their apples and oranges confused here.

 

[dionysus]

Yet here we are.
Noone is saying this group will claw their way out of the pit. They're being given the chance to claw their way out, that's it. They can fall, fail and remain there. That's the beauty of the site. We all openly get to watch the process. And when they don't rise to meet those standards, everyone sees why, and in the pit they remain. Further, Bryan in this case, is even letting the members decide. So when it comes time to vote, simple vote 'no' if they fail to meet the standards you've come to expect.

 

[dionysus]

Did I mention Bryan in my post? No I did not. Assumptions like yours cloud the issue.
Comparing the rouge pit to the BoF process or accreditation as you're doing clouds the issue. You can call it whichever fruits strike your fancy.

Apples and oranges or bananas and mangoes , it makes no difference. My comparison ties back to the foundations of this site's philosophy. That is, to try and educate players where it's safe to play and where it is not. If Sunset Slots crossed the line with dubious marketing and is struck from list. Then VCG/Ace should be held to an identical set of guidelines.
And player's are getting educated. They can read every single members' input in the thread. And no, they aren't the same guidelines, because we aren't talking about the same process here. If they were, I should think Bryan himself would know best in that regard and not have given them this opportunity...nothing more, nothing less. And why, yes, you did not mention Bryan. I am. You know, seeing as CM is fundamentally Bryan.

I see a lot of excuses, justifications and promises, amounting to a lot of white noise but no action or commitment to change. Where is the line in the sand drawn here. When does it become clear, this group, has no more intention of cleaning up their act, than most CM members have of ever gambling at these casino again.
A line has been drawn. They have criteria they must meet and a timeframe in which to meet it. They're still IN the rouge pit. They haven't been pulled

At the very least, every new player can come in, as yet, unfamiliar with this group. And see both sides of this. And frankly, give the negative player reviews, it's nowhere near an endorsement of the group.

 

[Diane]

any recent updates on how things are going with this probationary group?

Diane

 

[dunover]

I agree with you about Sunset. OK so it looks like they brought in someone new who made a big mistake - but that mistake had absolutely no impact on the players, only on affiliates. There are some accredited casinos who are worse in this respect IMHO because they spam players through "illegally" obtained e-mail lists and totally fake casino websites. (Looking at you, Palace Group).

Don't agree with you about Virtual/Ace: Though I would never play at or promote any of their brands myself, getting them out of the pit so that players can make PABs against them can only be a good thing. Even if this process brings small improvements in their operating practises it will help the countless players who got duped into joining one of their places.

KK

Maybe, but if that is the sole premise for even giving them a toehold to climb out, then that's a pretty damning indictment of them as a whole.

 

[cheetahwind]

any recent updates on how things are going with this probationary group?

Diane

Other than people bringing up old subjects, that really honestly have no merit. Mainly because no one will step forward with a valid complaint, nor resubmit there complaint to try to prove that things haven't changed. Not really.
As far as I can see, from what I have summarized. People are complaining because players had issues being paid in the past. People aren't happy with the time frames not really being improved per se.
When really I have seen some improvements. From what I can see, some of the site terms have been changed. At least the time frames are adjusted, to correctly announce when your cash out will at least be processed.
Plus if you are willing to e-mail Tawni. As I have found out she'll even review your account for the possibilities of multiple accounts. Get the extra ones closed and ensure you'll get paid. Versus the old we don't care if you get paid or not ordeal, because you had multiple accounts.
Not saying 10 business days is cream of the crop for pay out, but at least there honest. Plus at least between Tawni, Greedy Girl, Max, and Bryan. This has been the most responsive and honest discussion we've had about Virtual and Ace Revenue in a while. So as far as I can see that's a step in the right direction.
So really I feel the conversation has been clouded with emotion more than facts, then again I'm more of the type of guy who wants to deal with the facts versus emotion.

 

[KasinoKing]

What about the thousands of players who have been duped by this group whom have never heard of CM or any of the other forums out there that protect players and promote fair play ?

Players who have never heard of CM and similar sites, by definition do not know this group is rogue to start with.
So whether they are in the pit here or anywhere else is irrelevant for THOSE players.

So if they get out of the pit and PABs are opened up , can you imagine the workload on Max for the many folks who have heard and belong to CM who want their complaints taken care of , this I can understand but how many times does this same old leaf have to turn over before some people come to grips that they will only change when it suits them , then they go back to the same old method of practise.

I for one also believe this is just the latest in their series of "PR stunts" to try to increase their credibility a tiny bit so they can fleece more players, and I would be very pleasantly surprised if they did change for the better, long term.
But what is better: for them to carry on conning, scamming and using their long withdrawal tactics on players, with no independent and influential 3rd party mediator to help them, or for those players to be able to come to CM and possibly get some decent help to resolve their problems?
My vote goes for the latter.

KK

 

[jimb123]

SilverOak (AceRevenue)

Other than people bringing up old subjects, that really honestly have no merit. Mainly because no one will step forward with a valid complaint, nor resubmit there complaint to try to prove that things haven't changed. Not really.
As far as I can see, from what I have summarized. People are complaining because players had issues being paid in the past. People aren't happy with the time frames not really being improved per se.
When really I have seen some improvements. From what I can see, some of the site terms have been changed. At least the time frames are adjusted, to correctly announce when your cash out will at least be processed.
Plus if you are willing to e-mail Tawni. As I have found out she'll even review your account for the possibilities of multiple accounts. Get the extra ones closed and ensure you'll get paid. Versus the old we don't care if you get paid or not ordeal, because you had multiple accounts.
Not saying 10 business days is cream of the crop for pay out, but at least there honest. Plus at least between Tawni, Greedy Girl, Max, and Bryan. This has been the most responsive and honest discussion we've had about Virtual and Ace Revenue in a while. So as far as I can see that's a step in the right direction.
So really I feel the conversation has been clouded with emotion more than facts, then again I'm more of the type of guy who wants to deal with the facts versus emotion.

Thought I'd add my 2cents.... recently started playing RoyalAce and SilverOak and was promoted to VIP per my request and history with RTG casinos. Have had a very good experience so far with rapid responses to questions/concerns via Joe (VIP host mgr) and I've talked to him via phone as well. I really like the attention I'm getting and I've had some very big $x,xxx wins already -- cashed out last weekend was approved after 3 days and I'm told its on its way to me now... so I'll post back when I get it.... I'm very hard on casinos giving a true VIP experience so I don't post often about VIP treatment being "good" (although it was very good at ClubWorld the last few yrs) .... so my vote would be to give these guys a chance to win back your trust. They told me they are working to hire more processors/cashiers/support reps and hope to continue to improve the e2e experience this year. The VIP program has some interesting twists with zero wager coupons / no max cashout for VIPs and also contests to win sizeable prizes like ipad, electronics... pretty neat.

I'm not saying go deposit blindly there but consider their VIP program and try a small cashout if you hit something and report back here to see how it goes for you. So far -- looks very promising to me. ps... be sure to ask for JOE if u make VIP. can't believe its 2014 already -- seems just the other day I was writing 1987 on my papers and trying to convince people I knew to buy MSFT shares lol

 

[vinylweatherman]

Thought I'd add my 2cents.... recently started playing RoyalAce and SilverOak and was promoted to VIP per my request and history with RTG casinos. Have had a very good experience so far with rapid responses to questions/concerns via Joe (VIP host mgr) and I've talked to him via phone as well. I really like the attention I'm getting and I've had some very big $x,xxx wins already -- cashed out last weekend was approved after 3 days and I'm told its on its way to me now... so I'll post back when I get it.... I'm very hard on casinos giving a true VIP experience so I don't post often about VIP treatment being "good" (although it was very good at ClubWorld the last few yrs) .... so my vote would be to give these guys a chance to win back your trust. They told me they are working to hire more processors/cashiers/support reps and hope to continue to improve the e2e experience this year. The VIP program has some interesting twists with zero wager coupons / no max cashout for VIPs and also contests to win sizeable prizes like ipad, electronics... pretty neat.

I'm not saying go deposit blindly there but consider their VIP program and try a small cashout if you hit something and report back here to see how it goes for you. So far -- looks very promising to me. ps... be sure to ask for JOE if u make VIP. can't believe its 2014 already -- seems just the other day I was writing 1987 on my papers and trying to convince people I knew to buy MSFT shares lol

What

Anyone see the problem here?


It seems that Virtual/Ace have such a high profile with RTG that they can get a players' history from a COMPETITOR RTG casino in a form that enables them to personally identify the player, and thus offer them VIP status.

Either that, or "Joe" is talking bollocks, and just makes anyone VIP who appears to have the money to blow so that Virtual can be the ones winning it off of them.

We KNOW that RTG themselves have access to such data on all players, but they should NOT be sharing such data with their licensees in this manner.

If Virtual have not changed, then I think this is just another case of "talking bollocks" from one of their hosts to convince a player to deposit by telling them what they want to hear. If Virtual HAVE changed, and "Joe" is telling the truth, then the whole of RTG should be in the pit for unethical business practices.

Did Joe say this over the phone, with nothing in writing?

 

[Nifty29]

What

Anyone see the problem here?


It seems that Virtual/Ace have such a high profile with RTG that they can get a players' history from a COMPETITOR RTG casino in a form that enables them to personally identify the player, and thus offer them VIP status.

Either that, or "Joe" is talking bollocks, and just makes anyone VIP who appears to have the money to blow so that Virtual can be the ones winning it off of them.

We KNOW that RTG themselves have access to such data on all players, but they should NOT be sharing such data with their licensees in this manner.

If Virtual have not changed, then I think this is just another case of "talking bollocks" from one of their hosts to convince a player to deposit by telling them what they want to hear. If Virtual HAVE changed, and "Joe" is telling the truth, then the whole of RTG should be in the pit for unethical business practices.

Did Joe say this over the phone, with nothing in writing?

Either one of two things are true here:

1. Virtual....and, by extension, perhaps all RTGs....have access to player records at other RTGs.

Or

2. Joe is deliberately lying to mislead players.

Neither of them are acceptable IMO.

I think Tawni should address this one.

Jimb123....where you got the idea that these places are "worth trying" I don't know. Personally, I think recommending we "give them a chance" just because you got paid smacks of....well it reminds me of times when operators have givenVIP perks and quick payouts in return for favorable forum posts.

Did you happen to mention your CM membership?

 

[chuchu59]

Maybe it was a slip of the pen and Jimb123 merely meant he was elevated to VIP due to his playing history at other Virtual casinos. However, the post itself did not particularly sit in well with me as it seemed to promote Virtual needlessly and shower them with unwarranted publicity. VIP treatment should normally be reserved for players who have shown extreme loyalty. The elevation to VIP status was made on shaky grounds and if they could do it at a whim it isn't VIP status. I would rather have been invited after say a reaching a depositing milestone or $XXXXX in wagering. Should Virtual be sincere in the VIP program thing they should state explicitly what it takes to reach this status. This all looks too fishy to me.

 

[Jasminebed]

Nearly 400 posts into this thread, and this is my first contribution.

To the best of my knowledge, I've never joined any casino under the Virtual Group, although I did join a couple of Ace Revenue properties. I receive some spam, but nothing major from them or their affiliates. If by any chance I did sign up with Virtual, it was prior to me even owing a cell phone.

But tonight I got a call on my cell phone about my Virtual account. When a casino asks for a cell number, I either leave it blank, or put in my home number. I know I gave my cell number to Jackpot City at one point, but I've unsubscribed from their texts. They did not answer how they got my number when I asked, and I told them I did not want to be called again.

They did manage to tell me they had placed $40 in my account. On the off chance I opened an account long ago, it would have been to use a free chip, and I know I've never deposited with them, so even had I played, I would not be paid.

I don't think they even take Canadian players do they?

I certainly don't recall playing RTG until several months after I joined CM, and it certainly wasn't at Virtual Casino.

I will get in touch with Tawni and see when this account was opened, and if there are any other accounts in my name with the group.

Makes me wonder about BSilva and if he did indeed open 40 accounts on his own.

I'll report back next week with her findings.

 

[Nifty29]

Nearly 400 posts into this thread, and this is my first contribution.

To the best of my knowledge, I've never joined any casino under the Virtual Group, although I did join a couple of Ace Revenue properties. I receive some spam, but nothing major from them or their affiliates. If by any chance I did sign up with Virtual, it was prior to me even owing a cell phone.

But tonight I got a call on my cell phone about my Virtual account. When a casino asks for a cell number, I either leave it blank, or put in my home number. I know I gave my cell number to Jackpot City at one point, but I've unsubscribed from their texts. They did not answer how they got my number when I asked, and I told them I did not want to be called again.

They did manage to tell me they had placed $40 in my account. On the off chance I opened an account long ago, it would have been to use a free chip, and I know I've never deposited with them, so even had I played, I would not be paid.

I don't think they even take Canadian players do they?

I certainly don't recall playing RTG until several months after I joined CM, and it certainly wasn't at Virtual Casino.

I will get in touch with Tawni and see when this account was opened, and if there are any other accounts in my name with the group.

Makes me wonder about BSilva and if he did indeed open 40 accounts on his own.

I'll report back next week with her findings.

Do you think that Bryan would ban bsilva if they had not done what they were accused of, or if the evidence provided was in any way suspect? I sincerely doubt it. If they wanted to fudge figures, they only needed about 10 to convince everyone....why bother making up 40 accounts?

Also, up until recently, bsilva hadn't appealed the decision to Bryan....if I had been unjustly accused, I wouldn't stop until my name was cleared, and neither would most, I suspect.

 

[chuchu59]

Nifty,

Jasminebed's concerns are justified and I don't really see her blaming Bryan or Max. Its rather the integrity of Virtual that is in question.

I, like a host of others, would be eager to learn of Jazzy's findings.

 

[Googobucs]

Tawni might want to tell Willie from Planet 7 that when he leaves a spam voice mail on my phone he probably should not be using the NFL theme music. I think that is copy right infringement and the NFL is real aggressive about this sort of activity.