Three Royals in a week nets player $736,407.00

[umberto]

I really have fun fooling around with live chat representatives trying to make them tell something i want or trying to learn some other things. I know, I m a bad person ... Although this live chat wasn't as constructive as I wanted it to be, I really enjoyed the last line of the live chat. After several questions about the winner, the live chat representative just congratulated the winner in my live chat session....!

 

[nafanny29]

Just think if they had handled it the right way they could have had adverts of a smiling winner holding a cheque for 3/4 of million dollars placed all over the london underground and in every mens toilet above the urinals.

Would have made them millions I tell ya.

 

[caruso]

They didn't because Party Poker / iGM don't give a f**k either way. Party makes them $200,000,000 a year. They'll stop short of getting their asses dragged through the courts - which is why they paid the $8000 fella month or so back, and presumably why they paid this big winner - but that's about it. Beyond avoiding dangerous lawsuits, they do anything they want because they don't give a f**k.

These are the "representatives" of the online gambling industry.

These are the people with one of the biggest profiles of all the gambling representatives on the UK stock market.

These are the people who attend all the exhibitions with their glitzy stands and marketing BS.

These are the people whose televised poker tournaments smack me in the face every time I put satellite TV on.

These are the people who only pay their customrs if they present them with a serious lawsuit. We now have double proof of this.

Welcome to online gambling.

 

[spearmaster]

These are only some of the representatives of the online gambling industry. Your penchant for exaggeration is getting a little tiring.

These are the people who only pay their customrs if they present them with a serious lawsuit. We now have double proof of this.

Provide some proof of lawsuits etc - else retract this statement.

The rest of your post I don't have a problem with - but please recognize the fact that the online gambling industry has a LOT more than just one particular company and do not tar everyone else with the same brush.

 

[caruso]

These are only some of the representatives of the online gambling industry.

They are the TOP RANK representives. Televised poker, UK AIM. These people are the top, along with CON.

You know as well as I do that the $8000 roulette player threatened to sue Party Gaming - he stated as much. I daresay there was a lawsuit in the offing here too.

We have proof that it can take threat of a lawsuit to get Party Gaming to pay. That is 100%, corroborated FACT.

 

[spearmaster]

Your statement as posted above does not say "threat of suit". It says "presented with suit" - which means "served with a lawsuit", which means there IS a lawsuit.

Please get it right in the future. And "representatives" does not have anything to do with "rank" - either you are a representative or you are not. You seem to have left out a few words.

 

[dirk_dangerous]

In any event the player in this case was in fact playing Video Poker at $500.00 per hand.

After the first Royal was hit he had an account balance of a quarter of a million dollars which from that point provided him the wherewithall to proceed with hitting two more Royals. All three Royals occurring within a weeks time.

What is the Royal payout? Is it the standard 4000 coins? If so, shouldn't the first Royal have paid $400,000 rather than $250,000?

Or am I misunderstanding something?

Thanks

 

[spearmaster]

!!!

I just went to see the payout tables for VP at Starluck. The only thing I can imagine is that he was playing one of the variations which pays 500-1 per coin, assuming $100 coins x5...

Amazingly, he was not playing one of the ones which pays 1000-1 per coin!

Now I don't know what you guys think... but I have this very strange feeling they are still not dealing random video poker... which makes this achievement even more spectacular... just imagine if he had hit natural RFs on a normal machine paying 800-1 per coin (4000 for the royal) ... three times...

 

[caruso]

Your statement as posted above does not say "threat of suit". It says "presented with suit" - which means "served with a lawsuit", which means there IS a lawsuit.

Well, no offence here, but I think it's safe to say I don't need any lessons in the English language from you, thanks all the same.

If I send you an email saying "pay me or I'm going to sue your ass" - which is pretty much what Dubi (the poster) would have said - I call that presenting / threatening / declaring whatever etc ad inf a lawsuit. But hey, let's play semantics.

 

[spearmaster]

You are probably the only person on Earth who reads "present them with a serious lawsuit" the way you just described.

If you wanted to say "threaten them with a serious lawsuit", then you should have said just that.

Enough of this BS. Your command of English should not be any worse than mine - and I'll just ignore your comment about lessons.

 

[nektar4d]

Dear Carouso and dear Spearmaster,

I have read and enjoyed and been informed from your posts many times in this great forum. I believe many other readers enjoy your participation here.
My english are just enough for basic communication.
So when I read, I try to get the meaning and the feeling behind any specific words. I am not a layer or teacher to analyse or estimate specific words.

Caruso's post, may was too much but the general meaning is at least interesting and we need such reactions. Spearmaster's answer is very logical and most probably correct. But there is no need for you to continue a word-examination.
We get the picture and I thank you both for that.

 

[caruso]

Your command of English should not be any worse than mine - and I'll just ignore your comment about lessons.

LOL, not quite what I meant, but I'll respect nectar4d's input and request above.

The point, at the end of the day, was that legal action was mooted. That it wasn't practically instigated is not an issue in regard to my point. It was in the offing. End of story.

 

[bb1webs]

Hi all

Caruso: are all baseball players guilty of taking steroids because one of their premier players has admitted to doing so?

The closest thing I can think of that all online casinos have in common .... is the fact that they are online and that they offer gambling. That truly is where it ends when comparing best to worst. In an industry which has such a gap (of overall quality) between what are the worst of the lot to what are the best ... how you can lump them all into one group is beyond me.

that said however: after hearing it who the casino in question was - that it sounds pretty familar

My first experience with them as an aff where I'd earned a whopping $70, it took them over 6 months to pay me and that was of course only after I'd sent some emails ranging from "did you forget to pay me?" to finally stating I wouldn't take the treatment lying down.

I guess they figured for $70 it was cheaper to pay than whatever bad publicity I was prepared to bring them. Anyway the point is that they ignored me until I raised a stink and then they paid me. Sound familiar?

Somebody mentioned 200 million .... and they want to risk all that over being greedy about a lousy 3/4 million? (I say lousy in respect to the size of their overall income and not trying to sound like I make those kind of numbers - I'd eat the south end of a north bound skunk for that kind of dough )

But it is a relatively small amount when you consider that this is not like its a daily happening. Its a freak storm which they can easily afford to weather .... and in fact ... well in my mind I'm thinking if the guy was playing hands at stakes of $500 a shot: it wouldn't take all that long before the casino would make back a good portion of that loss ...

or I mean I'd be thinking that there was a good chance someone who plays at those high of stakes .... after having just taken down a small fortune ... is going to play big and quite possibly dumb ... and in the end give it back.

the smart play all the way around was to go ahead and pay the person ... but that is SO NOT what IG has proven to choose to do ... in many instances in its past.

But their choices have no effect on how other casinos (using other software) will do business.

There are plenty of reputable online casinos that pay out much larger amounts than 3/4 million on a regular basis (by that I mean regular as in when the odds say so .... sigh. for those of you following along and apparently playing the technical "he said" game)

 

[greedygirl]

But it is a relatively small amount when you consider that this is not like its a daily happening. Its a freak storm which they can easily afford to weather ....

Yep...

Had the casino paid this out without hassles, they could have run this through the P.R. mill and made the money back by eager gambling hopefuls. Instead, it probably cost them twice as much, due to all the bad press. They should know better--it's not as if they haven't had plenty of bad press previously.

 

[gfkostas]

Just think if they had handled it the right way they could have had adverts of a smiling winner holding a cheque for 3/4 of million dollars placed all over the london underground and in every mens toilet above the urinals.

Would have made them millions I tell ya.

Exactly, especially now that uk laws permit casinos to advertise. You don't need to be Einstein to think of that but a mind which is focused on how to make more money and not on how to serve people cannot,would not see this idea.
By the way isn't starluck part of the stanley casinos group?

 

[HateMG]

This is from Starluck winners webpage:


24-Jan-06 Darrell CA, US SuperJoker $731,022.03



I think this is the guy.

 

[cipher]

This is from Starluck winners webpage:


24-Jan-06 Darrell CA, US SuperJoker $731,022.03



I think this is the guy.

Hi HateMG:

NO, THAT'S NOT THE GUY.

Have a good one.

 

[Casinomeister]

Finally beginning to catch up from my absence.

Rogue section has been somewhat updated...I didn't have the time to do a write up, so all I could think of was one word to sum this up - "incompetence".

 

[caruso]

Nice one.

If you need a write-up, I can do you a fantastic one.

 

[kreome]

I saw that Starluck is in the Rogue list.

Why would they care ?

Star luck is a small operation and it is part of a much bigger operation which is Partygaming.com. Also the same owners of Starluck operate Planetluck and Aceclub and even more casinos.

Correct me if I am wrong.


Why not to sue them for the money ?


If Partygaming will be at the Rogue list I bet they pay him.

 

[AceMan76]

They did pay him eventually . . . you have to read the entire thread.

And you are right, Starluck is part of the same group as Planetluck, Ace Club, and Party Casino. The CSRs are the same people at SL, PL, and AC.

I would hope Party Gaming would not want any of its subsidiaries on the rogue list. This thread is a little scary because I don't think anyone expected this type of behavior from the Party Gaming group.

 

[caruso]

BTW, what reason was given for withholding the three quarter million dollar payment in the first place? We never learned that.

 

[cipher]

BTW, what reason was given for withholding the three quarter million dollar payment in the first place? We never learned that.

Hi Caruso:

It was the "I" word i.e. "your account has been placed under investigation due to the high frequency of Royal Flushes".

Have a good one.