Tons is confiscated by Europa casino and Tropez

Casinomeister said:
Why don't I just rogue the whole bunch and say the hell with it? For several reasons. One is the complexity of the different groups Playtech is dealing with. Some groups are worse than others, but by looking at the information that I have available to me, there seems to be only three or four casino groups that have some serious issues. I would rather focus on these casino groups and try to convince them on how players ought to be treated (indeed if they are being mistreated), instead of tossing the whole bunch into the rogue pit. This is a much more productive way to handle these issues. If the entire software provider is placed in the "evil" section - then many bridges will be burnt unnecessarily. Some of these bridges are needed to assist players that have problems.

As for boycotting? That is strictly an individual's choice, I won't have any part of it nor will I condone it. My job is to present information and to assist players in making their own choices. I can warn you when there are potential problems, and try to steer you - and casino operators - into the right direction. I know by experience that players will do whatever they want. Most are loyal to the bonus offerings, and that's about it. Talk of making some boycott is usually just that - talk. It's not a realistic option.

I would rather see that the good operators are given credit for doing a good job and not being penalized for the mismanagement of other casino properties that they have nothing to do with. This is how it should be done IMO and not so knee-jerkish and rash.
I think an all out on patronage and advertising for a rogue software group was in order under certain circumstances, aside a proven unfair game. I was under the impression you did too. I agreed with you not Cindy.

WORD FROM THE MEISTER

The GPWA
I'm no longer a member of the Gambling Portal Webmaster's Association. I quit the organization mainly because many of the active members have a different philosophy and attitude concerning the online casino industry that doesn't mix with mine too well.

What has really turned me off is this phenomena that is rampant in this industry called "affiliate greed", and it seems to be widespread in the GPWA.

I guess the catalyst for this was the uproar most everyone from the GPWA had over the scheduling of the Gator speaker at the Affiliate Conference that's scheduled (still) next month. The GPWA has been very vocal against the use of "scumware" (which I whole heartily support), but they all jumped on this bandwagon screaming "boycott-boycott!!" Fine and dandy, boycott the event.

But what really pisses me off, is that I suggested that these webmasters ought to boycott advertising for a software provider that condones unscrupulous and at times criminal activities – it was pooh-poohed. Hey, but when traffic and profits are threatened, they cry foul!

Cindy Carley - ex GPWA head honcho.
When he (casinomeister) came back 2-3 weeks ago to try to impose his RTG ban on us (gpwa), we didn't agree with that either. Now, I made it *very* clear to him that I agreed with 99% of his blacklisted RTG casinos, but I would never agree to a blanket ban of all RTG casinos as he was trying to get us to do - but that was only my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Spearmaster said:
A consumer watchdog site is meant to educate the public in a responsible manner. It was not, and will never be, here to advocate actions which damage honest and fair operations no matter what the cause.
Thanks Spear. My sentiments exactly.

Suited72 said:
It is a group because they share the same T&Cs and support staff who enforce them.
Negative. Sorry, but you're wrong here. Mainstreet group has their own support and banking.

amandajm said:
I think an all out on patronage and advertising for a rogue software group was in order under certain circumstances, aside a proven unfair game. I was under the impression you did too.

That was about four years ago and under completely different circumstances. And as we age, we get wiser. I think most people would concur with this.

I agree with Spear, players should vote with their feet - it's a simple concept and a pretty easy thing to do.
 
Dirk Diggler said:
Now how do I know that other groups (Main Street, Kiwi, Acropolis etc) aren't going to go down that route?

I can't speak for Main Street, but Kiwi and Acropolis are both backed by land-based casino operations of excellent standing in their respective locations, and the online business is but a small part of their income. They will certainly not risk their reputation in this manner.

Then again, operations like William Hill don't give a shit... but we could see that right from the start.

In any case - if you haven't learned to have a little faith in our judgement as to which casinos are safe and honest and which aren't - you'll never learn :) Casinomeister didn't get this popular by recommending rogue casinos, after all...
 
One can change their mind Bryan. Not necissarily for the better over time in all cases. Maybe this change of mind of yours is for the better. As you note - time may tell. ;)
Evil Software Providers
There are certain software providers that either have funky software that cheats, or they have a "hands off" approach to their licensees, allowing the casino to do whatever they please.
I think Caruso got his nuts busted for saying his minds eye tells him the Playtech resolution thing is nion hands off and maybe they should be booted untill they fix up, but he is resisting that notion for better or worse. Pretty much he agrees with you guys in this instance in real terms..

I frankly don't agree with any of you re Playtech.

Boycotts happen all over the world re many things. It is a moot, non arguement to aside those that believe a boycott can effect change for the better of all as irresponsible.
 
spearmaster said:
You don't justify innocent players over innocent casinos - both are innocent and do not deserve to be wrongly treated.

That's your priviledge. It's not mine.

Don't bother trying to play the "innocent" angle here - you know as well as I do that no innocent party should be injured, AND that there are better ways to deal with this than what you are proposing - throwing dynamite in a pond and hoping to collect all the fish is not productive.

People around me know me well enough to know I don't "play" anything, so I think I can safely leave that one unanswered in the interests of the general peace.

I don't see too many other proposals on the table right now. As I recall, way back when we were arguing about eCOGRA at WOL, Jetset - and possibly yourself - were on at me to offer "alternatives" to that which I was so critical of. Looks like the boot's on the other foot now.

Bryan said:
I agree with Spear, players should vote with their feet - it's a simple concept and a pretty easy thing to do.

Then we all agree. The difference is who receives the vote.
 
Some thoughts on PlayTech...

***


While both software providers carry their fair share of dodgy casinos, I have a very hard time believing that RTG is ahead of PlayTech in regards as to which provider carries more legitimate (player friendly) casinos. One would have to think that BlackWidow is often regarded as the worst PlayTech casino out there, but for every (singular) (PT) BlackWidow, there's (a trifecta of casinos like) a Connect-to-Casino, a Destination Poker, and a Prism Casino (that rival it).


For what it's worth, I wish that PlayTech (as a whole) would do a better job reviewing and cleaning-up their ridiculous T&C's, speed up their payout process, and do a better job of resolving player issues. I happen to really like PlayTech software, and I've had tons more luck with PlayTech than any of the other software providers. Having played at literally every casino listed at both Casinomeister.com and BonusRating.com (a site whose ratings I take with a grain-of-salt), my most memorable and positive experiences have come at the hands of various PlayTech casinos.


Side note: Not sure if it means anything to anyone here, but I've yet to exceed the $2,000 (USD) barrier at any MG casino. :confused: And I've deposited a large chunk of coin into MG casinos over the years. My "guesstimation", is that I've surpassed that barrier probably about 60-70 times at various PlayTech casinos since I first started playing online a few years ago. :notworthy And for the record, I generally deposit anywhere from $20 (moreso with PlayTech) to $100 at a time. And amazingly, I was fortunate enough to have been paid when I did cash-out (although it would generally take 1-2 weeks). More recently though, I've noticed that their payout time-frames (some... certainly not a large portion of them) are similar to most MG casinos (and Bet365 is one of the fastest... overall... on the net).


Their are some great PlayTech casinos out there, that are just as good as the cream-of-the-crop that use Cryptologic and MG. I know some (if not MANY) who visit the forum may not believe that, and it's not difficult to understand why they may elect to avoid all PlayTech's like the plague. But there are. It's just a shame to PlayTech does carry a fair number of "dogs" that ruin it for everyone else (everyone else being the more player friendly PT casinos). So at the end of the day, for those who whip though threads like this one, they will (more than likely) always have serious doubts at depositing at said casino, even when the casino is as great as KIWI Casino. I happen to think that KIWI Casino is a Top-10 online casino. And as far as I'm concerned, the best of the PlayTech's would have to be considered some of the most underrated operations out there.


I think that if people want to boycott all of the casinos under a specific software provider's umbrella, that's their choice. I've avoided RTG's as a whole (in the past) for quite some time, based on their questionable fax-back form regulation, but moreso about what I've read from various posters (and webmasters) who contribute at this forum (amongst a few other forums). Yet, there are a (small) handful of solid RTG's (like a Sci-Fi) out there, so in some ways, it would be a mistake to avoid them all if I've had positive experiences there. I happen to think that while PlayTech and RTG need to address and continue to clean-up their ways (and filter-out the bad of course), not everything is always so perfect in the land of MG and Cryptologic casinos either.


While I certainly wouldn't endorse PlayTech as a whole, it would be an oversight by those detractors to paint all PlayTech's using the same color of pessimism.


Steed


***
 
Last edited:
I think there is already a very viable alternative on the table that is also fair, and it has been suggested here by most of those opposed to the indiscriminate nature of a boycott:

Deny the rogues your individual business and judge casino ownership groups on merit. Warn others about offending casinos.

It's easy to apply, requires no organisation, leaders or publicity and doesn't involve distasteful excuses for injuring the innocent like "for the greater good!"

Dirk, I would like to examine this comment: "The problem is we have had many good and reputable Playtech groups turn to rogue behaviour recently, so how do you know others wont follow? At Crypto and MG you know this isn't going to happen and even RTG to a lesser extent, but with Playtech you know it could easily and the software provider wouldn't care less."

Are we going to make judgements against good Playtech operations on the basis of what they might do in the future? Sorry, I don't see that as fair or reasonable, or justification for inflicting damage on some outfit that doesn't deserve it.

Changes in behaviour by specific casinos or casino groups is a good reason why the flexible and individual approach is more effective....an independent judgement call by an informed consumer.

The individual player decides where to place his or her business at any particular time, free of the influence or interference of others. And the information for that decision is, as it has always been, available on even-handed and responsible portals such as Casinomeister, and through reliable warning posts on the message boards.

I would like to ask a few practical questions about this proposal:

1) Who decides which entities to boycott now and in the future? Does past conduct "qualify" a group or software for boycotting? If there's a vote how is it organised and who qualifies to vote?

2) How many players on the message boards do you honestly think would support such a move having read all the arguments for and against? Do you consider this a large enough number to have a serious impact (Iris Toledano's reported comments to Caruso notwithstanding), given that there are those who will not like the taste of indiscriminate boycotts over their individual judgement in the matter of their personal business.

3) What do you do about those who will not join your boycott or break ranks for one reason or another? And how do you know who is or isn't supporting the boycott?

4) How do you assess the real impact of the boycott, when Playtech hopefully calls "Uncle"? Have you tried to make an educated assessment of how long that may take?

5) Have you considered the possibility that Playtech may single out for legal action those it feels are organising a boycott? This is a company that has shown by past conduct that it is prepared to use this intimidatory tactic.

6) How will you publicise your boycott and maintain wide levels of awareness over a possibly extended timeframe?
 
jetset said:
3) What do you do about those who will not join your boycott or break ranks for one reason or another? And how do you know who is or isn't supporting the boycott?
The problem with a boycott, surely, is that the majority of knowledgeable casino players who might support it are bonus hunters - and therefore it would save the casinos in question money :rolleyes:
 
Boycott or no boycott, the main thing is for new players to know that before they deposit money into a Playtech casino (or RTG also for that matter), they should be warned that there is a good chance they could run into problems trying to get their money out. Especially if they took a bonus.
 
Paul, you have zero'd in on one of the major aspects of the crooked casino problem right there - these bad eggs can make profits as long as they can keep pulling in *new blood* newbie gamblers who have not yet learned to research and become members of sites like this to protect themselves.

If we could find more ways of reaching the newbie just before he or she ventures online, or as soon as possible thereafter we would be well on the road to creating real and very powerful consumer awareness and influence.
 
jetset said:
If we could find more ways of reaching the newbie just before he or she ventures online, or as soon as possible thereafter we would be well on the road to creating real and very powerful consumer awareness and influence.

There is plenty of "consumer awareness and influence" right here, as you intimated in your suggestion that Playtech will start to get litigious - which somewhat contradicts your suggestion that the "forum ten percent" really doesn't cut. On the one hand, warn people; on the other hand, bear in mind that Playtech will sue you if you tell the truth. Bit of a non-starter, wouldn't you say?

What happens if I post a bunch of threads along the lines of "Warning: do not play at Swiss Casino" - how long you figure they'll stand?

The way you get the message out, Jetset, is to warn people at WOL, Meister and so on, what's happening; to tell people that these Playtech casinos are stealing (yes, "stealing", spelt s-t-e-a-l-i-n-g, I'm so sorry if that offends anyone) players' money and that action, radical action, should be taken agains Playtech, in WHATEVER form, and encapsulated along the lines of: STAY AWAY FROM PLAYTECH CASINOS.

THEN Playtech might start to tow the line!

But of course, we know this isn't going to happen, becasuse we mustn't upset the handful of "honest" Playtech casinos, and we can't say "stealing" when they're stealing or call them "crooks" when they're "crooks", because we can't risk upsetting Playtech.

So we just talk about it like civilised people and let these uncivilised **oops, I nearly said "crooks" again, sorry chaps** get away with it.

Fine solution.

Playtech, Long May You Prosper.

Jetset, you've called me to task about providing other options given my disagreements with eCOGRA. So what are you options here? Given our extraordinary limitations - we apparently cannot boycott them or in fact say or do anything that might upset them - what are your options?
 
How I see it:

Good Casinos:

Sunny Group

Mapau
Casino fortune
Miami Beach
Gold Gate

Mainstreet

Las Vegas USA
Vegas Casino Online
Sun Palace
Twin Aces
slots.com
Diamond Deal

Kiwi Group

Kiwi
fast win

Gaming Pro

City Club
Race Track

Independent

Brandy
Action Online
Bet Casino
SIA
Mega Sport
tote sport
bet 365
bet fred

Bad Casinos:

Black Widow Group

Black Widow
Grand Banks
Sterling House

Casino Partners

Casino Tropez
Vegas Red
Europa
hammers
Del Rio

ICC

USA Casino
New York Casinos

Empire Online

Joyland
Club Dice
monaco gold
Carnival

IOG

Casino King
Magic Box
Swiss
50 stars
Casino Las Vegas

Prestige Gaming

diamond club
prestige
playgate

Golden Palace Group

Golden Palace
Aspinalls
Grand Online
Flamingo Club
24 kt gold

First Grand

african palace
indio

Bet Rev

Royal Dice
giant vegas

Not Sure:

La isle Casino
Maxima
dafa 888
******
sky kings
acropolis
Baraka
amber coast

To say the good out weighs the bad is to ignore the obvious. If the good casino operators were truly good they would put pressure on Playtech to weed out the problems.
 
caruso said:
Great list, wrong thread. :)

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/playtech-the-nightmare-list.10836/

I also got some more information in my snail mail today, and was going to update that list anyway. I will juggle your post into it.

In fact, we are getting a bit general in a thread related to a specific issue.

I was just getting caught up in the first few pages of this thread and the Playtech roguing issue. I just wanted to bring to light that the majority of Playtech casino groups are rogue, and that an all out roguing is the only way to wake the minority "good" casinos into action.

Perhaps some of you have heard of a thing called Democracy, within that system often times the minority in such systems may have to suffer inorder to create the greatest amount of quality of life for the greatest number of people. If we look at this case in those terms I would say that in order to create the optimum scenario within the Playtech Casinos perhaps the minority will just have to suffer a little while for the good of the majority and deal with a Software Provider roguing.
 
Okay, I'm putting my foot - next time it's the iron fist:

caruso said:
But of course, we know this isn't going to happen, becasuse we mustn't upset the handful of "honest" Playtech casinos, and we can't say "stealing" when they're stealing or call them "crooks" when they're "crooks", because we can't risk upsetting Playtech.

The next time I need to step in to tell people to mellow out, I'm locking this thread and giving whomever an extended holiday.

We've been through this before, rule 1.6 - read this carefully:

1.6 - No "Libelous" Posts. Do not make posts that could be considered libelous, defamatory, or posting merely to cause harm to another's business. Opinions are expected, but do not attack others with accusations of criminal activity unless this has been proven in a court of law.

Some of you need to think a bit more before you post. Thank you.
 
Jeez, Caruso - you are truly the most frustrating poster. I sometimes wonder if you even read other people's posts before thrashing your keyboard.

There are alternatives - you simply have not considered these over your own extreme views. I included them in my post a page back if you had bothered to read it before seizing on the well known litigious nature of Playtech to explode once again.

And I posed legitimate questions that should be thought through before anything as contentious and divisive as a boycott is proposed. And talking about going off topic, eCOGRA has stuff-all to do with the issue of Playtech being boycotted.

My comment about warning and protecting newbies stands, and is completely valid. It builds on your "10 percent" scenario and in no way diminishes that - what is your source for that oft-repeated statistic btw?

I am the last person to doubt the power of this forum, or I would not still be a member after several years here, but spreading the warning and education net further is going to make player protection more effective, and that's the main objective is it not?

Perhaps you should contribute in a practical sense too by starting your own portal and newsletter and publishing warnings on a sustained basis. Or you could even champion a boycott and get a true and exclusive feel for how many would support it and how effective it would really be.

It is plain commonsense that educating substantially more new entry players to research at places like Casinomeister and WOL before gambling is going to:

(a) seriously cut down on rip-off opportunities at those (Playtech) casinos prone to bad practice and

(b) help bring those *bad practice* casinos into line in order to survive in a more player-knowledgeable climate.

You are assuming that everyone here supports the idea of a sustained and indiscriminate boycott against all Playtech online operations. I would hope and expect that this forum has more balance than that.

The Smacker, you posted: "Perhaps some of you have heard of a thing called Democracy, within that system often times the minority in such systems may have to suffer inorder to create the greatest amount of quality of life for the greatest number of people."

I don't believe this is about democracy, because how can it be democratic to punish the good with the bad?

The phrase "for the greater good" used to justify something as indiscriminate as a boycott will always give me pause for thought - that's the sort of philosophy that too many despots have used to justify outrageously undemocratic acts in history.
 
Last edited:
Of course I read your post. It regarded spreading the word about bad outfits.

Equally of course, per se this is a valid option, tried and tested - I should know that as well as anybody: Angelciti? Cirrus? In the circumstances, it's value may be limited. You say that Playtech is litigious; doesn't surprise me at all but FTR I had no idea - I've not heard of Playtech threatening legal action against anyone. Add to that Bryan's concerns about contentious language, and my guess is that all you will achieve is a somewhat watered-down version of what really needs saying. That is of course better than nothing, but I doubt it will achieve the desired result. I certainly doubt it will put much pressure on Playtech. I am entitled to "doubt", and I am entitled to be "wrong"; you are also so entitled.

The point about eCOGRA - which I thought was clear enough - was that, back then, you called me to task to offer solutions, and I am now doing the same - our roles are reversed. I am AWARE that calling stiff outfits to task is a solution, but I'll repeat that I think it's value is limited in the circumstances. If that is the ONLY solution, fair enough. But this may not be the case - there may be a better one, a more proactive one.

Forum ten percent? Isn't it generally accepted that forum readership is somewhere between ten and fifteen percent of the overall playing public? That's the figure Bryan has always quoted; ask him, not me.

As to your reaction to Thesmacker's comment: are we the "despots" and Playtech the "innocent"? If we were, I could support the anaolgy. As it is, you cannot compare fair-minded online gamblers considering radical ways to pull an irresponsible software provider into line with whatever "greater good" the Nazis, Stalin or whoever may have used as justification for their acts.

Repeat again: I am not saying that calling evil operators to task publically is ineffective per se; I am saying that it MAY be ineffective in the circumstances, and that it may not be the only solution. Remember that, albeit a long time ago and in different circumstances, it was the "boycott" line that Bryan proposed against RTG. Therefore, these things have been considered as effective means against bad software providers. Circumstances and time notwithstanding, this is a fact. Bryan considered himself to be in the right back then; I am not at all convinced that it would be wrong now. Let's face it: RTG have pulled their socks up somewhat.
 
Remember that, albeit a long time ago and in different circumstances, it was the "boycott" line that Bryan proposed against RTG.
Okay, this is getting a bit whacked out of shape, and I think I need to clarify something because what I stated has been taken completely out of context.

This boycott statement was made on a private board at GPWA and this addressed my overwhelming concern and frustration over a crapload of serious player complaints coming from RTG casinos - one of these was Caruso's BTW. I suggested that webmasters should boycott promoting these casinos - it had nothing to do with players. This suggestion was out there for about fifteen minutes before it was shot down - and at that moment I reconsidered and agreed that it wasn't a good idea. So I stated that webmasters should not be promoting the casinos that were causing these problems - and left it at that. You know the rest of the story.
 
Isn't it generally accepted that forum readership is somewhere between ten and fifteen percent of the overall playing public? That's the figure Bryan has always quoted; ask him, not me.

As far as I know, he has never claimed this. We have always operated under the presumption that forum readership is no more than 1-1.5% of online gamblers.
 
Casinomeister said:
Okay, this is getting a bit whacked out of shape, and I think I need to clarify something because what I stated has been taken completely out of context.

This boycott statement was made on a private board at GPWA and this addressed my overwhelming concern and frustration over a crapload of serious player complaints coming from RTG casinos - one of these was Caruso's BTW. I suggested that webmasters should boycott promoting these casinos - it had nothing to do with players. This suggestion was out there for about fifteen minutes before it was shot down - and at that moment I reconsidered and agreed that it wasn't a good idea. So I stated that webmasters should not be promoting the casinos that were causing these problems - and left it at that. You know the rest of the story.
I never took you out of context on purpose.

Those
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
were up last I looked. That's enough for me.
 
Last edited:
spearmaster said:
As far as I know, he has never claimed this. We have always operated under the presumption that forum readership is no more than 1-1.5% of online gamblers.
I think I may have mentioned 7% or so. This is a basic guessimate since this has never been quantified - and if this would be attempted, how would it be done?

As administrator of this board, I am aware of its traffic and can do comparative analyzations with other popular boards - and I am aware of its readership as well.

That could be an interesting thread - and I'll leave it at that.
 
I suggested that webmasters should boycott promoting these casinos - it had nothing to do with players.

CM, that shouldn't even have to be classified as a boycott, that is just common sense. One of my biggest beefs for a couple of years now has always been unscrupulous and uninformed webmasters who promote shady establishments just to try and get some quick signups and maybe make some quick cash. This does nothing but hurt everyone in the long run. The webmaster ruins his reputation (if he/she ever had one), the player gets screwed...and inevitably a forum such as this one or WinnerOnline ends up with a shitload of complaints re: free bonuses or signup bonuses at one of these clip joints. It all starts with the webmasters. I couldn't agree more.
 
Oh yes...

jetset said:
Perhaps you should contribute in a practical sense too by starting your own portal and newsletter and publishing warnings on a sustained basis. Or you could even champion a boycott and get a true and exclusive feel for how many would support it and how effective it would really be.

Work In Progress. Slow, because I am hopeless at anything net-related which isn't either gambling or opining.

When it ceases to be Work In Progress, you will be a welcome visitor.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top