@blacklabrador, separate screen pops up and fireworks goes off.
Ok, Nicolas. Guess I didn't make my self clear. So I will start over.
Yes, Dean told me that I couldn't take any promos over 400%. Yes, I went to chat to ask what was available. Yes, Sam just told me to go to the promo page. Guess this is where the break down is. There was nothing there available that would fit what I had been told. So anyway, I picked out one I thought I would try, went to the redeem coupon page and saw the message I posted. So what would you have liked for me to do? Go back to CS?
Maybe contact us? After you got that screen, first thing you did was come straight here and post it. As you have admitted, I've taken care of you, why not just contact me, I'm sure you know I would have made things right.
I don't mind constructive criticism, and you know that I will listen to you in private, so why make things public without even contacting us once?
I have never posted one untruth about what happened with my account during the 3 withdrawals I made. I have never posted one untruth about what I was told by you, your CS, or Dean.
Totally true, but as my dad always says, it isn't only what you say, but how you say it, when you say it and why you say it. You made this thread in such a way that you knew your friends (as I can see they are your friends in your profile) would come in here and start to make exaggerated allegations/innuendos based on your posts. You may not have done it intentionally, but this is the result. That is why I want to know what your intention of starting this thread was, and why didn't you even contact us first?
Your casino has labeled me a negative value player and I am suppose to make nice and not take that as a slap in the face.
It is your prerogative to take that as an offense. I'd personally take it as a compliment
You want to make Bet Phoenix better. Then the first thing is to keep the lines of communication open.
What are you talking about? You act like we don't reply.
With the exception of you, not one person answered an email that I sent.
Are you sure of this statement. You never got a reply from us? Then how come you continued to play after each withdrawal and each deposit?
Don't change requested payouts methods just because it's unhandy to send a withdrawal the way it was requested.
US payouts are not that simple. We work hard at providing a good service, sometimes we may ask a player if they want a payout via another method to get it to them faster. But we ask. You make it sound like we changed payout methods without your consent.
Don't change terms and conditions on withdrawals in mid-stream.
Which one of our terms and conditions did we change on a withdrawal mid-stream?
Don't return the player's withdrawal to their account without some kind of notification.
This has been changed, I apologize for this one.
Don't keep a player's account tied up after a withdrawal by not removing the overage.
Did you request a flush?
But above all, if you are going to cap withdrawals on bonuses, then pay the player quicker.
I've said we will be changing this. However we were clear about payout time, you knew it and accepted it, and furthermore it seemed you didn't mind the payout time, as you only started voicing your complaint AFTER we bonus restricted you.
You wanted to know what I had a problem with, well you now know. Each thing I posted happened to me during my 3 withdrawals. I don't post innuendos, I post facts with backup. I didn't want to get into all this with you but you seem to want to call me out on it.
I did not want to have this conversation in public, you were the one who chose to do so. This is your thread.
Apart from the debate about CS and what they did, or didn't, say. I am to understand that a RELIABLE calculation of whether a player is a "negative value player" can be done from a small sample of 10 deposits and 3 withdrawals. Given that the 3 withdrawals included some amazing LUCK (2 RJs), I can only conclude that the RJ wins contributed to the decision. This should NOT be the case, since they operate on a "random draw" basis, with each spin buying a chance of winning based on the amount staked.
It seems this determination of "negative value" is anything BUT transparent.
No security procedure is 'transparent'. We operate in a transparent way... but just like a bank, we can operate in a transparent way without having to publish the code to our safe. If a fault was made, we allow a trustworthy 3rd party like CasinoMeister to mediate and get access to the confidential information that allows us to stay in business. We aren't going to publish it on a public forum, to expect that is simply unreasonable. No casino will do that.
It seems almost random, with obvious "advantage players" escaping bonus bans, and genuine recreational players getting bonus banned soon after they start playing.
To you it may seem random, but it is anything but. However, you are right, it is not perfect. Still, we can't operate without it and it is very accurate, our margin of error is very, very small.
I can't see how an accurate prediction of the value of a SLOTS PLAYER can be calculated from such a small sample of play (10 deposits, 3 withdrawals, 2 RJs). This sample is simply too small to calculate a reliable statistic.
There is a lot more to it than deposits and withdrawals.
When players argue that a slot "isn't random", or is "set to 50%", they are told they need MILLIONS of spins to create a reliable statistic to back up the allegation. This does NOT seem to apply when casinos make calculations of the long term value of players.
You are assuming we simply look at deposits-cashouts. Not so.
What would help in understanding the concept is knowing what other factors come into play.
No can do, any casino that gives this info will go out of business fast.
annie does not seem to show the kind of statistic that would place her in that "small minority of players" that are deemed to be negative value to a casino. She is ahead by ONLY $1000, not at all an unusual short term result given the variance of slots.
Again, you are assuming there are few variables that are used.
It really does seem that she has been "picked on" for some other reason, as I can't believe that other players are slapped with bonus bans for this kind of short term positive result.
Picked on? Because we restricted anniemac to bonuses under 400%? Tell me which honest casinos even offer above 400% reload? I don't see them getting dragged through the mud because they aren't giving bonuses above 400%.
When it comes to PR, these cases cause problems for a casino because other players think that they too will get bonus banned simply for having similar short term figures.
By that logic all players don't sign up at any casino: every casino will bonus ban certain players. It is part of the business. This is the second time someone in this thread is seeming to implying that we should have simply let anniemac take large bonuses in fear of the player posting this thread. This will not work, we cannot allow players to strong arm us through forums. We will work with a player, we want to deliver satisfaction; but someone being part of a forum will never influence our decisions. To me, honestly, that would be unethical.
I for one would NOT join a casino if I knew that getting $1000 ahead off 10 deposits would be enough to have me restricted from many of the best offers there.
If you choose to believe that was why anniemac was bonus restricted, then you are free to your opinion.
annie could easily have NOT won 2 RJs this early, and continued depositing and losing money to the casino. She may well not have managed to make 2 of these 3 withdrawals.
What are her stats if the very lucky RJ wins are stripped out? Would these figures also have triggered "negative value player" status.
I'm sorry, but I can't discuss who we calculate what you are asking. But the fact that we bonus ban a very small percentage of our players, tells me that this isn't something your average player has to worry about.
I have experience of casinos that DO ban winning players from bonuses, even LOW bonuses, so this is not unique to BP.
Roxy Palace banned me from the weekly 30% reloads. I was ahead by £5000, and played mostly SLOTS with the bonuses. It seems they simply had a target of about £5000 ahead that got a player bonus banned, hardly a proper determination of long term value.
I can't speak for other casinos.
My own philosophy is to play at casinos I have LOST at more than those where I have WON. The basis for this is my experience that LOSING players get better offers for their loyalty than winning ones, therefore I stand more chance of winning back some of the losses where I have lost, than of winning more where I have won where there is a risk of an imminent bonus ban, or other removal of benefit.
Unfortunately, players have been lead to believe that in order to get restricted in some way, they have been doing something wrong. When a player gets told they are bonus banned, they take it as an accusation that they have done something they were not supposed to, such as "advantage play". Since they feel unjustly slighted
Unjustly slighted? That logic is based off the belief that players are entitled to something free.
If a player in a land based casino is told he/she can't get a comp room, they don't go to the casino floor telling all other players that 'this is what happens when you win'.
, and cannot get a rational explanation from the casino other than "management decision", they feel the need to "prove their innocence".
Funny you say that, Anniemac didn't contact me about this. Also, 'proved their innocence', makes it sound like we were the ones who published the bonus restrictions, when in reality it was the other way around. I'm the one here trying to prove OUR innocence.
It seems that annie feels she has transgressed some rule, crossed the line between recreational player and "bonus abuser", but is damn sure she has NOT, so believes this is all about her winning those RJs and having the cheek to withdraw, rather than giving it all back. This may not be good for the casino, BUT withdrawing from a decent win, rather than getting carried away and giving it back is known as RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING, which is NOT something players should be PUNISHED for by being downgraded.
No one is punishing anyone for responsible gambling. And just to put what you said in context 'punishment'= no bonuses ABOVE 400%. How many honest casinos even offer that kind of a reload?
Kind Regards,
Nicolas Johnson
Bet Phoenix Casino Affiliates Manager