Thoughts on Cashback?

[Simmo!]

Thinking more about bonuses and alternatives recently and thought I'd ask a question. How do you guys feel about "cashback incentives" and what % of cashback would appeal?

For example, if a casino dispensed with a bonuses but awarded say, 10-20% cashback on any losses you made in any given month, would that be offer a viable alternative?

One advantage for the player I can think of is that it needn't necessarily carry a WR of more than 1x, or a small WR at least. From a casino standpoint, it strikes me as a good way to encourage loyalty and additionally, if a player wins, the casino is thus not obligated to give out free money, so I can see an advantage to both sides.

Thinking aloud, it does almost instill a certain resignation to the fact that you will lose. On the other hand, if you do, you are guaranteed a bonus. Hmmm.

Anyway, it's an idea I wanted to run past some casinos I am meeting at ICE so a player perspective would be interesting. Personally, not being a bonus fan, it appeals to me.

Any thoughts?

Cheers

Simmo!

 

[Addisyn]

I do not play with bonuses for the most part. They are too restrictive. If you are saying the cash back would be free of WR or low WR I would be fine with it.

This would eliminate what I have heard referred to as a bonus abuser. That one I still haven't wrapped my head around.

Perhaps the player could opt-in to a cashback relationship foregoing any bonuses. Then you have an option for the casinos to continue their PR to those that respond to the bonuses and something for those of us that do not want the bonuses.

Today I asked a casino not to give me any bonuses when I deposit. It simply adds a minimal cash amount and puts in place WR on your deposit as well as the bonus. Why do they require you to wager your deposit a certain number of times anyway? If I deposit $100 and they tack on 15% because I used, for example, Neteller why should I have to wager my original deposit 20x?

It is an excellent idea Simmo!

 

[Slotster!]

Spin Palace do this a lot.

I can see the appeal but, like you say, I always think that I've got to lose in order to take advantage of it - which kind of defeats the object.

The biggest problem I've got full stop is the Microgaming bonus account system. Or any seperate bonus account system for that matter. I just can't be bothered with all the nonsense and extra thought it requires!!

Roxy Palace have it spot on with the fixed, regular percentage of deposits - followed by 32RED of course - with the unrivalled 'personal touch'.

I've given up thinking that any other casino will ever come close to 32RED in this regard, it just won't happen. I've played and lost a lot of money at a lot of places this year alone, and nothing more than 'standard' blah blah bonuses and incentives. Actually, maybe Betdirect might

I promise this is the last time I'll say this on this forum - but if just one casino takes notice - I'm happy...

"REWARD YOUR REGULAR LOYAL PLAYERS!!!!!" Give out the standard blah blah bonuses with their astronomical wagering requirements to all and sundry - but look after the people who've kept you afloat over the months and years. When a customer is coming to your casino and depositing on a regular basis, they aint going to suddenly turn round and try to do you in with a 'no strings' bonus - they are just going to feel loved - and keep coming back for more. Jeez, this is online casino's we're talking about... It's not like in the B&M's where you have to track registrations and see how many trips they make to the cashiers cage, and how much goes in the machines and all that nonsense... Fire up your auditing software - see who's making you money on a regular basis and LOOK AFTER THEM. STOP TAKING THEM FOR GRANTED.

I'm a bit ashamed to think of the amount I've lost at some places, even just in the last year. I'd be more ashamed however if I was the casino operator that let me slip through their fingers...

 

[KasinoKing]

This does not appeal to me in the slightest, for the reasons mentioned above - you have to lose first to get the 'bonus'.

If it was something like 50% with zero or very low WR (<x5), or if it was applied to losses even with a deposit+bonus as well, I might consider it.

But 10% back, even on a $100 loss, is not really worth the bother.

 

[AussieDave]

This reminds me of casinos that still only offer 1 point for every $10 wagered. 1000 points = $1. Casino Rewards uses this break down. On top of that they have a 30x play thru on these loyality points. They must really think players are suckers!

I'm sticking with Fortune Lounge, not only do they give me 20% on all deposits, but I get 1 point for $1 wagered. (becuase I'm a VIP I also get 25% extra points) FL loyality points carry no play thru. Can't beat that

 

[Chatmaster]

I am yet to notice a proper loyalty program in the industry to be honest. It seems everyone is focused on a rewards system. My personal opinion when confronted with a rewards system is that nothing is ever free... Somewhere someone is paying for it. This immediately puts me off and I would generally not feel lucky at that casino anymore. I prefer a solid loyalty program based on loyalty not on how bad a player I am...

 

[just play]

I promise this is the last time I'll say this on this forum - but if just one casino takes notice - I'm happy...

"REWARD YOUR REGULAR LOYAL PLAYERS!!!!!" Give out the standard blah blah bonuses with their astronomical wagering requirements to all and sundry - but look after the people who've kept you afloat over the months and years. When a customer is coming to your casino and depositing on a regular basis, they aint going to suddenly turn round and try to do you in with a 'no strings' bonus - they are just going to feel loved - and keep coming back for more. Jeez, this is online casino's we're talking about... LOOK AFTER THEM. STOP TAKING THEM FOR GRANTED

:notworthy

 

[just play]

followed by 32RED of course - with the unrivalled 'personal touch'.

*add in crying profusely smilie here*



(from USA)

 

[tencardcharlie]

Thinking aloud, it does almost instill a certain resignation to the fact that you will lose.

One could also do it the other way aroung. Give an extra 10% on a players winnings for the month. I think such a promo could be more effective, since it has a more optimistic touch.

Of course progressive wins would have to be excluded though.

 

[Addisyn]

I don't think giving us cash back when we lose is being pessimistic. It is realistic IMHO. You are going to lose more often than you win at least in my experience. Why not receive loyalty rewards. I for one would make more from my losses than my winnings.

Yes I know there are some people out there that just live under a lucky star but that isn't me. For the rest of us loyalty rewards would be fine with me.

 

[EasyRhino]

I think Casino Extreme does insurance/cashback as their primary bonus mechanism.

Land-based casinos will also do insurance as a common incentive for high-rollers and whales.

It can be hustled, if you're willing to bet it all on one hand, and risk the busting out.

Personally, I think the deposit match bonus is more exciting, and also more profitable.

 

[1819]

well, as we know, loyalty at a b&m and online cant possibly be the same. cashback from b&m's is fantastic. at any given time i can go to vegas and or a.c. and grab 500 or so and simply walk away if i choose. spend it anyway i like. no restrictions. not to mention limo's, free rooms, trips, etc... as far as online goes i would love a good loyalty program. base it on what you play. seems simple. the programs out there now are an insult to say the least. spend thousands to get a few comp points worth very measly amounts of money then have playthroughs and max cashouts? insane. i did enjoy the weekend deposit bonus credit from roxy. that seemed like a nice attempt. cant play there though when im in my evil home in new york. lol. deposit bonus' as a whole insult me. the whole idea of an offer should be to entice me to play at casino x than casino y. give me a reason to spend my hard earned dough at your place. casino will win in the long run. simple marketing. if a casino has to put insane requirements on their "generosity" then i'd rather get nothing and just play with what i put it. the whole bonus abuse thing chaps me. if ya dont want to get "abused" then dont make the offer. the industry cannot possibly expect me to believe that the money lost to "bonus abusers" can somehow cut into their profit margin. insulting.

 

[spearmaster]

well, as we know, loyalty at a b&m and online cant possibly be the same. cashback from b&m's is fantastic. at any given time i can go to vegas and or a.c. and grab 500 or so and simply walk away if i choose. spend it anyway i like. no restrictions. not to mention limo's, free rooms, trips, etc... as far as online goes i would love a good loyalty program. base it on what you play. seems simple. the programs out there now are an insult to say the least. spend thousands to get a few comp points worth very measly amounts of money then have playthroughs and max cashouts? insane. i did enjoy the weekend deposit bonus credit from roxy. that seemed like a nice attempt. cant play there though when im in my evil home in new york. lol. deposit bonus' as a whole insult me. the whole idea of an offer should be to entice me to play at casino x than casino y. give me a reason to spend my hard earned dough at your place. casino will win in the long run. simple marketing. if a casino has to put insane requirements on their "generosity" then i'd rather get nothing and just play with what i put it. the whole bonus abuse thing chaps me. if ya dont want to get "abused" then dont make the offer. the industry cannot possibly expect me to believe that the money lost to "bonus abusers" can somehow cut into their profit margin. insulting.

Cashback at B&Ms in the US tend to run about 1%, so in order to "grab" $500 you have to wager through $50K

That being said, many casinos also offer double or sometimes triple points on slots, sometimes even on video poker. So in theory it might cost you only $16.6K... and if you've had a good run and broken even, it's nice to take that $500 and use it for dinner and maybe a show... on top of which at that amount of wagering, you've probably also earned room and some meals...

Online, there are far less overheads - so I personally think that cashback should start at least around 5%. But, as some people have pointed out, most online casinos give you 0.1% - in my opinion, close to useless. On top of that, you have to play it through at least 8x...

 

[1819]

Cashback at B&Ms in the US tend to run about 1%, so in order to "grab" $500 you have to wager through $50K

That being said, many casinos also offer double or sometimes triple points on slots, sometimes even on video poker. So in theory it might cost you only $16.6K... and if you've had a good run and broken even, it's nice to take that $500 and use it for dinner and maybe a show... on top of which at that amount of wagering, you've probably also earned room and some meals...

Online, there are far less overheads - so I personally think that cashback should start at least around 5%. But, as some people have pointed out, most online casinos give you 0.1% - in my opinion, close to useless. On top of that, you have to play it through at least 8x...

agreed.

 

[Simmo!]

Online, there are far less overheads - so I personally think that cashback should start at least around 5%. But, as some people have pointed out, most online casinos give you 0.1% - in my opinion, close to useless. On top of that, you have to play it through at least 8x...

My initial query is regarding Cashback on losses as opposed to the already standard loyalty cashback though Spear. Very different beasts

 

[spearmaster]

Cashback on losses... to be dead honest, I don't like this concept. I prefer proper loyalty cashback instead.

From a player perspective, some people may like this, considering it a second chance. Me, unless I'm getting like 50% cashback, I probably wouldn't be too bothered.

I think I should be rewarded for my loyalty, not for my losing... LOL...

 

[Slotster!]

I think I should be rewarded for my loyalty, not for my losing... LOL...

That's it, right there!

 

[tencardcharlie]

I don't think giving us cash back when we lose is being pessimistic. It is realistic IMHO.

realistic = pessimistic

 

[spearmaster]

Mind you, one of my favorite casinos always gives me back a percentage of my losses, and of course I'm happy to take it - but I do not play there with the intention of losing and I don't expect to get rewarded for losing... but all things considered, still better to get cash back on losses than nothing at all.

The whole problem with this is that the casino hurts themselves by giving cash back on losses. I have on many occasions turned that cash back into a win.

Yet, if I am a loyal player, play say 4 hours a day, and win, I still get cash back. Smaller amount, to be sure - but that enhances the overall feeling of fairness. If I continually lose... it always makes me wonder if something is not right...

Ultimately, the casino should be rewarding loyalty/playthrough because in the long run it still has the edge, and it wants you to feel happy and fairly treated so that you come back again.

Rewarding losing is almost - not necessarily, but almost - enticing a player to play recklessly.

 

[tencardcharlie]

The whole problem with this is that the casino hurts themselves by giving cash back on losses. I have on many occasions turned that cash back into a win.

I really don't see how this hurts the casino. I mean, the fact that you win now and then is what makes you play, thus a necessary part of the casinos business. It's like - even when you win... they win.

Unless you use the cashback for advantage playing of course, but that's another story.

 

[spearmaster]

I really don't see how this hurts the casino. I mean, the fact that you win now and then is what makes you play, thus a necessary part of the casinos business. It's like - even when you win... they win.

If this were to happen in a land-based casino, you cost the casino time and resources and potentially cash for them to give you a second crack. That seat could instead be occupied by another player.

Online - every bet has a cost. For example, the free $20 you just got for losing $100, let's say you manage to run it through 10x before losing it.

You've just cost the casino:

* Royalties to be paid to software manufacturer (except when provider allows bonuses to be removed from calculations, and as far as I know this is NOT the norm)
* Bandwidth (not every casino has fixed bandwidth charges)
* Potentially, fees associated with paying out your winnings
* Obviously, if you win, more money than they had planned on giving you
* If a player wins, he then goes to another casino because he knows he won't get cash back for the rest of the month, or until he loses money again. Instead, he reinvests in another casino, perhaps to claim a bonus, or maybe to get yet another cash back on loss possibility.

There are more costs than just those above - but suffice it to say that it costs the casino money to give you cash back just like that.

With loyalty, it's a fixed cost that they can manage - always 1% or 2% on Tuesdays and 3% on Wednesdays (or whatever). It still costs them the same as above - but the amount will be smaller, more spread out over time, and keeps both losers AND winners happy.

Except of course if the player wins, he doesn't take the money elsewhere - he knows he's being treated well at his favorite casino and he's much less inclined to go elsewhere.

I think that is the most important thing of all.

 

[aka23]

Cash back bonuses are better than nothing, but I'd much rather receive other types of bonuses such as the weekly Clearplay matches given by Grand Prive & Villento, the bonus on all deposits with Golden Riviera & Vegas Partner, or the cashable monthly match with Intercasino & 32 Red. I do not want a bonus that requires me to lose. Preferred bonus type relates to style of play:

Cash back bonuses work much better for high-variance players than low-variance players, as there is a greater chance of busting (and receiving bonus), and a greater chance of winning something useful with the bonus afte received.

 

[Simmo!]

Cash back bonuses work much better for high-variance players than low-variance players, as there is a greater chance of busting.

I agree. Speaking as a "high-variance" player, I'd take 20% cashback with 1x WR over a $500 monthly at 10x WR anyday, it would keep me loyal assuming other factors like speed of cashout etc were at least acceptable of course.

Now flip that on it's head and look at it from a casino standpoint. Losing "bonuses" removed a huge huge headache and security risk. Major. It is also arguably bringing in the sort of punter you want, plus you are only paying out if you "win". Additionally, with licence royalties (assumed) to the software provider gained on net profits, it may also have a benefit here.

So over time, you have effectively trimmed your CPA costs and generated a more loyal "higher variance" customer base while removing a major factor of disputes and fraud.

Kinda makes sense from that perspective.

 

[Yurned]

I prefer not to play with cashback I go for regular bonuses, but choosing between straight play and cashback, I choose straight play.

I have several reasons for this. For one, I dont trust any casino to give me incentives after I give them play. It would be too easy not to give a cashback, much easier than take away money already in my account. Secondly, I was once deemed a bonus abuser after busting my account, playing with insurance. This resulted in cashback not being given then or any bonuses ever after. This is ridiculous I just lost all the money in my account, where is abuse in that? I shouldve complained to CM, but I couldnt bother with it. Lastly, if I play with my own money, and I dont feel good about the games (losing), I can take whatever I have left, and cash out. Under insurance, I feel compelled to lose everything in my account to get some free money. So Id rather not have it at all.

 

[cheekymonkey]

Cashback.

I blow 1000.

Here have 30.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!

FO.