Resolved Tropica Casino not paying £7k

[just play]

Ok, one more post..(everyone sighs and says thank goodness, haha) I gotta get to bed...yaya sleeping is for pussies I know.


MrMark...yes, I'm curious by nature, it bugs the shit outta some people, I get told this by a few of my close friends everyday.


Nifty...

Well we had unpleasant exchanges in the past, but IMO you certainly have become more reasonable both personally and in regard to topics. Its been a pleasure reading your thoughts...until the last one I guess, but I think it was a case of misunderstanding so its done AFAIC.

I honestly thought that was a diss. AFAIC, it's over as well. I mainly like to have fun, have a chat with people I find fun or intersting, but then sometimes I like to question things that make me feel uncomfortable, so I post/question it.

I actually think there is another "angle" to why some (not you IDT) are making a major issue of me particularly being contacted for opinion/involved etc, which was pointed out by another member privately. Needless to say its private, but it does explain why it is mostly me being questioned etc.

I don't know what this means...IMO your being questioned because your name was brought up, not anyone elses. My only angle is...pretend Bryan didn't own this site and he was my best bud here...I still WOULDN'T want him talking with casinos about me, and whatever my problem was with them. It has nothing to do with you, I would think the same if it was my best bud. My business with casinos is just that, my business.

I could care less if people talk about me behind my back, I'm sure it happens a lot. Oh well, such is life...but when it comes to a casino, for me, it's different.

Its also I interesting to note that it is NOT only newer casinos who contact me from time to time. I've given feedback to several accredited casinos when asked, and some of it not complimentary. Obviously, they value my opinion. If that gets up some people's noses, then they should submit a complaint to Bryan, or just get over it. I feel that I have actually helped players over the years without them even knowing, so for me that's a positive as I believe in genuine players being treated with respect and fairness.

I think that's cool you have helped people, you get something possitive from being a member here.

And back to MrMark...

I'm going to have too agree with the others who are suggesting that we get back on topic.

I'm game.

 

[zanzibar]

I take exception to that statement. It spoiled an otherwise good post.

Sorry, I tried to phrase it diplomatically but obviously it has upset you. I didn't intend to offend.

I was trying to say succinctly that if I was a casino operator and I wanted to pick one member on this site who is well known and is far more willing to listen and be sympathetic to what I have to say, I would pick you. That is not to say that you aren't fair and/or reasonable, but you are orders of magnitude less "casino-hostile" than any other player on this forum. And my trust for casino operators, affiliate managers, and marketing guys is, given my experience, roughly equivalent to my trust for used car salesmen. So it's my honest to goodness gut feel, especially in this case with Tropica, that you are being deliberately used by the casino.

So, I expect justplay and others to be questioning now why a casino affiliate, who is pretty much just an advertiser working on profit share, is being given access to sensitive personal and account information. Given shock was expressed when it was suggested that other members might be given access to such, I would expect even greater shock now it is CONFIRMED that any affiliate....and in many cases players don't even KNOW who this is....can and is provided with personal information about players. I actually think that is a worse scenario, given that the affiliate has a vested interest in the issue and in the financial outcome. At least an impartial veteran members has no horse in the race.

Zanzibar has seen far more private information that I've ever seen.....which is the point I was making before I.e. you should feel twice as "icky" about some advertiser being privy to this than some reps having private discussions with members not involving any of that info

I can't vouch for others, and Zanzibar has admitted that he has been involved in such activity.

It seems that your offence at what I wrote has helped you to put 1 + 1 together and you got 3. You have obviously lumped me into the "dirty affiliate" bag without knowing anything about me. I agree that loads (most?) of affiliates don't care and are just after the dollar. Not all are.

As for the elaborate straw man that you have built up and started to pummel... where did I say that I got any personal information from anyone ever? No matter how many times you childishly put words in caps, that doesn't make it TRUE or CONFIRMED. I said...

Sometimes the casino sends me a long email full of "evidence" which is supposed to explain why the player is a "fraudster".

I have never once received a player's name, address or anything else that the player did not freely provide to me themselves. "Evidence" usually consists of a bunch of statements or purported transaction records (no credit card numbers or bank account numbers before you jump on me again) made by the casino management that I am supposed to take at face value. That's why it is "evidence". He said, she said. All of it could be real, or it could be fake. Same with whatever the casinos supply to Bryan or Max here. That's why I ask questions of both parties and in the end sometimes it really is virtually impossible to know who is telling the truth.

Tell me zanzibar....did you remove those casinos that sent you contradictory emails from your site immediately?

And here is where you're trying to suggest without saying it that I'll just continue to recommend people play somewhere as long as I get a commission. How original. I take a longer term view of these things than that kind of dumb short term thinking. If a casino is prepared to rip off the players that we refer, then they are quite prepared to do the same to us, and players who get ripped off won't come back to us if they are looking for information on whether a new casino they are considering playing at is good will they?

In the vast majority of complaint cases that I deal with the casino is not on our site (we are deliberately slow to add new casinos given the number that appear and fail within a year), or they are on our blacklist. We still try to help where we can. For the ones that are reviewed by us, like I said, 9/10 times all it takes is a simple email and the problem is solved. If there are recurring problems then we reduce our rating of the casino. For the worst cases there is the blacklist. So yes it happens.

As for do we "remove anyone from our site immediately", that depends on what you mean. If we blacklist a casino, it is shown as blacklisted and visitors can no longer click through to their site, so there is an immediate and total cessation of any traffic that might have been going to them. If you mean do we remove their review page, the answer is no. Ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away. If a casino is rogue and they rip people off then we print it on their review and give players that information. This is a far more effective way of stopping players from going to a rogue casino than simply printing a one page list of domain names as it is far more likely to be found by someone searching for the casino. There are far too few affiliates that do this, as the majority prefer to just not include the bad casinos on their site at all. I wouldn't care if we had 1000 casinos reviewed and we told people that 900 of them were bad - that is still better than listing only 100 "good" casinos and leaving people who are looking for info on the other 900 at the mercy of the search engines and the horde of "no care, no responsibility" affiliates.

I actually believe by this point that you owe me an apology. You have the red mist on and you're making silly statements based on wrong assumptions because you felt insulted about what I wrote. I'm sorry you feel that way but what you're doing is most definitely not cool. Send me a PM and then this thread can avoid further derailment and we can all go back to musing on what a pile of shit Tropica Casino is.


On topic, I have actually met Duwayne face to face but it was years ago when he was working for I think it was one of the Microgaming groups based in South Africa. He seemed like a decent guy, but I know very well that appearances can be very deceiving in this industry, and ultimately if he isn't the owner then he does what he is told or else he finds a new job.

 

[Nifty29]

Sorry, I tried to phrase it diplomatically but obviously it has upset you. I didn't intend to offend.

I was trying to say succinctly that if I was a casino operator and I wanted to pick one member on this site who is well known and is far more willing to listen and be sympathetic to what I have to say, I would pick you. That is not to say that you aren't fair and/or reasonable, but you are orders of magnitude less "casino-hostile" than any other player on this forum. And my trust for casino operators, affiliate managers, and marketing guys is, given my experience, roughly equivalent to my trust for used car salesmen. So it's my honest to goodness gut feel, especially in this case with Tropica, that you are being deliberately used by the casino.


You know what you said, so you don't need to apologise. Considering you just reiterated it, I don't see the point. You think what you think.


It seems that your offence at what I wrote has helped you to put 1 + 1 together and you got 3. You have obviously lumped me into the "dirty affiliate" bag without knowing anything about me. I agree that loads (most?) of affiliates don't care and are just after the dollar. Not all are.

As for the elaborate straw man that you have built up and started to pummel... where did I say that I got any personal information from anyone ever? No matter how many times you childishly put words in caps, that doesn't make it TRUE or CONFIRMED. I said...



I have never once received a player's name, address or anything else that the player did not freely provide to me themselves. "Evidence" usually consists of a bunch of statements or purported transaction records (no credit card numbers or bank account numbers before you jump on me again) made by the casino management that I am supposed to take at face value. That's why it is "evidence". He said, she said. All of it could be real, or it could be fake. Same with whatever the casinos supply to Bryan or Max here. That's why I ask questions of both parties and in the end sometimes it really is virtually impossible to know who is telling the truth.

Where did I say you were a "dirty affiliate". Now who is building straw men

Using occasional caps to stress words is CHILDISH? Well it looks like there are a hell of a lot of childish posters about the place....

You received "statements and transaction records"....far more than anything sent to me. It may not be strictly "personal", but it is LOT D) more information than provided to me or most others I would think. So my point remains.

And here is where you're trying to suggest without saying it that I'll just continue to recommend people play somewhere as long as I get a commission. How original. I take a longer term view of these things than that kind of dumb short term thinking. If a casino is prepared to rip off the players that we refer, then they are quite prepared to do the same to us, and players who get ripped off won't come back to us if they are looking for information on whether a new casino they are considering playing at is good will they?

Another "straw man" as you like to put it. Where did I say you will "continue to recommend people play as long as you get a commission"? It was a simple question only. It was actually YOU that said it as I highlight below

In the vast majority of complaint cases that I deal with the casino is not on our site (we are deliberately slow to add new casinos given the number that appear and fail within a year), or they are on our blacklist. We still try to help where we can. For the ones that are reviewed by us, like I said, 9/10 times all it takes is a simple email and the problem is solved. If there are recurring problems then we reduce our rating of the casino. For the worst cases there is the blacklist. So yes it happens.

As for do we "remove anyone from our site immediately", that depends on what you mean. If we blacklist a casino, it is shown as blacklisted and visitors can no longer click through to their site, so there is an immediate and total cessation of any traffic that might have been going to them. If you mean do we remove their review page, the answer is no. Ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away. If a casino is rogue and they rip people off then we print it on their review and give players that information. This is a far more effective way of stopping players from going to a rogue casino than simply printing a one page list of domain names as it is far more likely to be found by someone searching for the casino. There are far too few affiliates that do this, as the majority prefer to just not include the bad casinos on their site at all. I wouldn't care if we had 1000 casinos reviewed and we told people that 900 of them were bad - that is still better than listing only 100 "good" casinos and leaving people who are looking for info on the other 900 at the mercy of the search engines and the horde of "no care, no responsibility" affiliates.

I actually believe by this point that you owe me an apology. You have the red mist on and you're making silly statements based on wrong assumptions because you felt insulted about what I wrote. I'm sorry you feel that way but what you're doing is most definitely not cool. Send me a PM and then this thread can avoid further derailment and we can all go back to musing on what a pile of shit Tropica Casino is.

Owe you an APOLOGY? Really? You're dreaming. I said absolutely nothing insulting and stated nothing disparaging about you personally at all. You need to get over it, seriously.

I am to PM you after you have called me out in public to "avoid further derailment"....you mean like YOU just did? Right. No thanks.

Thankyou for confirming that if one of your promoted casinos rips a player off i.e. doesn't pay when they should etc, you don't stop telling your players to play there nor stop collecting commissions. You just "reduce their rating". Geez. Sorry, but I wouldn't trust anyone who promoted casinos that have ripped players off, lower rating or not. IMO it is pretty ordinary behaviour right there.



On topic, I have actually met Duwayne face to face but it was years ago when he was working for I think it was one of the Microgaming groups based in South Africa. He seemed like a decent guy, but I know very well that appearances can be very deceiving in this industry, and ultimately if he isn't the owner then he does what he is told or else he finds a new job.

Sorry guys but I'm not sitting back and copping this "I don't like you" crap.

 

[mrmark21]

Sorry guys but I'm not sitting back and copping this "I don't like you" crap.

No worries... :eat:

 

[KasinoKing]

I know that members to contact KK privately to get help....well I have before so I assume others have....so its not just because he offers it publicly. I also suspect his contacts have emailed him at some time to discuss different things. I'm sure KK can confirm that either way.

It seems some are suggesting it is a free-for-all behind the scenes with member's personal information. It is absolutely NOT the case. I'll reiterate again for those that missed it earlier.....NO personal information is disclosed to me by any casino and never has been.

Just a quickie to say that is spot on and to let members know that I have only just seen the last few days worth of posts in this thread after a busy weekend off-line - and I've not finished reading all the most recent yet, as I have to go off on the school run in literally 2 minutes & then will be working in our new house with no internet access all day!
So I'll try to catch up with the rest of it this evening, though I think Zanzibar pretty much summed it all up perfectly.

KK

 

[skiny]

I haven't read skinys entire post as I have him on ignore, but it appears he is suggesting that nobody should be allowed to talk to anyone privately about anything that involves anyone else, which is ludicrous imo. Its ridiculous and unenforceable, unless you want your pms moderated before they're sent. Whole groups exist here that privately discuss (in ALL respects) other members, so they would have to moderated or closed down too.

That's not even close to what I said. This must be the 1% of the time he's wrong.

I actually think there is another "angle" to why some (not you IDT) are making a major issue of me particularly being contacted for opinion/involved etc, which was pointed out by another member privately. Needless to say its private, but it does explain why it is mostly me being questioned etc.

Gossip.

If Nifty can't accept why he's being used for an example while it's being pointed out that it's about everyone in general that's not really my problem. I don't think members should be discussing other members with casinos in private without the player's consent. If players talk about other players I can just chalk it up to gossip and call them old hens. If casinos privately discuss players with other forum members that's a breach of privacy. I seriously doubt casinos are privately selecting forum members to ask their opinions on other forum members or their disputes. It's more than likely the other way around but that's just my logic creeping up again. Maybe it's just easier for some members to discuss other members in private. Maybe they don't like the responses when they do it in public.

 

[zanzibar]

Molehill > mountain.

Nifty, I've tried to be helpful and honestly answer a question from a fellow member here and I receive that kind of a response. I'm just shocked really. I offered you a sincere apology even though I did not intend to offend in the first place.

I have no personal issue with you (not before that tirade at least) as I don't know you at all, so please get the chip off your shoulder. What I do know is that I have helped out hundreds of players over the years so I feel I am in a far better position than you are to judge both the motives of casinos and their representatives, and their intentions when dealing with 3rd or even 4th parties in a case like this. And I am telling you that casinos don't involve someone like yourself unless they feel that they have something to gain from it. Again sook all you want, but this is not a question of your motives or ethics or character at all, it is a warning to you that there is a high chance that the casino is trying to play you. If they convince you that they are in the right and then you post it on CM then they have what they see as a significant PR victory. This is intended as helpful advice and indeed a possible answer to the question posed as to why a casino would want to involve a member of the public in a private matter between the casino and their customer. I know this because it has happened to me before, and is one of the several reasons for my deep-rooted distrust for almost all casino employees.

Where did I say you were a "dirty affiliate". Now who is building straw men

So you admit you used a straw man argument then (not that an admission was needed as it was such a simple attempt)? Sorry I couldn't resist giving you a taste of your own medicine. It is a cheap technique but doesn't really make you look clever I'll admit.

That was clearly implied. You called me, and I quote, "an advertiser working on profit share", that I "have a vested interest in the issue and in the financial outcome", "some advertiser" etc. These were disparaging remarks in the context in which they were used and I figure "dirty affiliate" was an accurate summation of what you were saying. I still do. As you well know from reading one of the many parts of my post that you ignored because they didn't suit your argument, I often don't have a vested interest in the player's outcome with their casino because as I explained to you, and again I quote: "In the vast majority of complaint cases that I deal with the casino is not on our site (we are deliberately slow to add new casinos given the number that appear and fail within a year), or they are on our blacklist." Vast. Majority. Furthermore if you took some time to think things through clearly, if I am helping a player that I referred to a casino get paid, then I am in fact negatively impacting my own commission. Most affiliate sites that I have seen take no interest in player issues. Maybe that is why?

You received "statements and transaction records"....far more than anything sent to me. It may not be strictly "personal", but it is LOT () more information than provided to me or most others I would think. So my point remains.

No. Just no. You stated outright that I had CONFIRMED that I was regularly in receipt of players' personally identifying information. You used a series of cheap, sensationalist, in-the-gutter statements in an attempt to drum up outrage from other readers of this thread, multiple times in multiple posts. You failed. If that is your best attempt at backing away from that you ought to try harder. Your point absolutely does not remain. It is completely and utterly bogus. You were wrong, you showed you have no idea what you are talking about in the context of this discussion, and you look like a fool for trying to stick with it. You most definitely owe me an apology for that. The question is are you man enough to offer it?

Another "straw man" as you like to put it. Where did I say you will "continue to recommend people play as long as you get a commission"? It was a simple question only. It was actually YOU that said it as I highlight below

Come on. A kindergarten kid could work out that if I said, "no I don't remove the casino" then your next move would be to say "aha look you would rather earn a commission than look after the player, you're sooo not trustworthy". The easiest thing for me to do would have been to answer "yes absolutely, every time". But I am not dishonest so I tried to paraphrase a complex process into a couple of sentences. And lo and behold you seize on half a sentence and again try to manufacture outrage.

Thankyou for confirming that if one of your promoted casinos rips a player off i.e. doesn't pay when they should etc, you don't stop telling your players to play there nor stop collecting commissions. You just "reduce their rating". Geez. Sorry, but I wouldn't trust anyone who promoted casinos that have ripped players off, lower rating or not. IMO it is pretty ordinary behaviour right there.

Geez, sorry indeed. You use every dishonest argument technique in the book. If it isn't misquoting, it's lying, or inventing "admissions", or non-sequiturs. Surely even you would realise that the world is not black and white. Let us say a casino takes a week or two to pay someone for a short period of time instead of the 48 hours they claim, but otherwise operates normally. Is that cause for a complete blacklisting? Of course not. Is it cause to lower their rating and put a warning on their review to let players know? Yes it is. Do you think I want to refer players to a casino with financial problems that could soon shut down? What do you think happens to an affiliate's commission when a casino goes bust? If a casino rips a player off outright and doesn't pay them, do we blacklist them immediately? Of course we do. It is in my and my readers' interest to refer players to safe and secure casinos that operate with a solid float and are not under-capitalised or dishonest. I really think that you probably know that is exactly the case but it didn't suit your attack.

It is no different to how this very site operates with its accredited and reservation sections and - oh my gosh - newly added ratings. Look at what happened here with the recent Betfred rigged games thing. Should they be in the rogue section here? If so, are you saying you don't trust CM because last I looked they aren't? I don't agree with everything the guy ever says, but he is one of a small handful of trustworthy affiliates that I look up to and respect (and when I say small handful I mean really small, like tiny, less than 2 or 3).

Owe you an APOLOGY? Really? You're dreaming. I said absolutely nothing insulting and stated nothing disparaging about you personally at all. You need to get over it, seriously.

You invented stuff and lied and have been called on it, yet you still try to weasel your way out of it. I am man enough to step up and offer my hand in apology for an unintended offence and you spit back in my face. Your actions and statements reveal a lot about your character and it isn't pretty.

I wish this had not devolved this way. I was really trying to be helpful. If you have any other relevant questions about what happens in a 3rd party dispute process I am happy to answer them. But please no more of this. Christ on a bike, I wish I had written that one sentence differently now.

 

[zanzibar]

It appears that when a casino goes "White Label", they become the property of Rival (via Bonne Chance). Rival would "buy" (or seize) them back and then keep the name and some of the operators in place. That seems to limit the operator's freedom greatly (in this case Tropica) and when the Boss (Rival) says that they shouldn't pay then they don't pay (see OP's case).

Now, a better question is why Tropica had to go White Label? The obvious answer is financial issues but I'd be curious to know the details...

A white label just means that the operator is more or less running a franchise casino where they pay a percentage of their profits back to Rival in exchange for the operational support, customer service etc. So the casino doesn't necessarily "go white label", as it always was a white label from when it opened.

As for the ones that were "repossessed" by Rival. The people running them found that they couldn't make a buck because it was all too hard for reasons mentioned in my earlier post, or they screwed things up completely. So Rival took them back in-house and relaunched them, some with new operators.

As far as I am aware Tropica is and always has been a Rival white label.

There are only a few Rivals that aren't either white labels or indirectly owned and run by Rival themselves - the Sloto'Cash one (whatever its called now) and maybe a couple others.

 

[Nifty29]

Just for clarity, only ONE of the 3 statements I made in regards to affiliates actually pertained to YOU personally. which is this one:

who is pretty much just an advertiser working on profit share

The word "just" probably wasn't needed but certainly wasn't put there for insult purposes.

However, the statement is totally correct. An affiliate IS an advertiser working on profit share. It's a fact. It might not be ALL they/you are, but what I said is totally accurate.

The other 2 statements:

any affiliate......the affiliate has a vested interest in the issue and in the financial outcome

You quoted (and read) out of context here. I said ANY affiliate, and then went on to say that affiliateS ("the" affiliate non-personalized) has a vested interest in such issues and their financial outcome. Again, absolutely true....having a vested interest is not always a bad thing, and the affiliate IS affected by the outcome...but they are nonetheless accurate. The statement was not about you personally.

some advertiser

Again, not referring to you personally in the context of the sentence. And, again, accurate.

I could go on for pages countering your flaming but the thread has already gone off track so I won't descend to such remarks as "in-the-gutter", "liar/lying", "cheap" and "weasel" amongst others. I refuse to lower myself to that kind of crap, so you will have to soldier on without me I'm afraid.

 

[chuchu59]

I take exception to that statement. It spoiled an otherwise good post.

I am very sympathetic to the TRUTH. I can smell player BS a mile away.....likewise casino BS.

I'm proud to say my first reaction is correct when it comes to fraudsters/dodgy players 99% of the time (at least). Almost all fraudsters etc have certain things in common when they post, particularly their first post. One is their prime motive is to drum up unwavering support from the "casinos are evil (but I still play them) Club"....which they succeed in doing most of the time because too many people believe everything they post, rather than actually taking a moment to think about it and realise that it really doesn't make sense. If dodgy players didn't KNOW they will get this reaction from some people, they wouldn't bother posting.

What members forget is that I am just as harsh when it comes to casino BS, and will support (and have supported) genuine players with genuine complaints. It's a matter of perception....because I am usually the first to question a complainant and/or call BS on their story, I am labelled as a "defender of the casinos"....the fact that I am most often right is forgotten, as it is no longer a "story".

I am a "defender of the truth". In my experience, it is far more likely to be the PLAYER lying and serving up BS to blackmail a casino and rousing up the membership in support than the casino. Hence, it looks like I am "always defending casinos". If you look back over my posts, you will see that it is NOT about "the casino is always right" but rather about "the facts are always right", and in most cases the facts support the casino. I understand where the perception comes from, but the facts don't support it......but then again there a many members who aren't that interested in facts.

Sorry for the derail, but your statement is inaccurate and questioning my integrity and character and I felt it necessary to state the way things really are.

Duwayne stated that he contacted me "because I am fair minded". Judging by what he said, I don't think for a moment he expected me to jump on the forums and defend Tropica and say how great they really are.....which I would do if I was such an avid "casino defender". It appears he believed I would give him a "fair hearing", as opposed to other members who might not....and I did.

It is also interesting to note that I receive more PM's from PLAYERS asking advice here than reps by a long shot. I'd have thought that would suggest I AM fair minded and able to see both sides of a coin. I don't see anyone asking me stuff if they think I'm "in bed with the casinos" as you and others have suggested.

Still, the members who know me in more than just a "quick glance at my posts" capacity...and there are several....know just how fair and reasonable I actually am.

So, perhaps before you make such statements, based on "what you have read here", you might want to try reading a little more carefully, and get your facts straight. Thankyou.

Nifty,

You shouldn't be too upset by Zanibar's comments. I was about to post the same except that I would add that if I were a player I would choose VWM as he seems to be willing to lend a more sympathetic ear to players. I believe there would be many members who brand you as pro-casino and VWM as pro-player. That does not mean you are unfair just that you are more willing to see things their way and the problems they face. Frankly, I do have a gut feeling Tropica may try to take advantage of you but then its not that easy is it?

 

[Nifty29]

Nifty,

You shouldn't be too upset by Zanibar's comments. I was about to post the same except that I would add that if I were a player I would choose VWM as he seems to be willing to lend a more sympathetic ear to players. I believe there would be many members who brand you as pro-casino and VWM as pro-player. That does not mean you are unfair just that you are more willing to see things their way and the problems they face. Frankly, I do have a gut feeling Tropica may try to take advantage of you but then its not that easy is it?

As I said, I am "pro-truth".

I can absolutely see some players contacting VWM first. He almost always assumes the casino is dodgy or doing something wrong, even then the information supplied would suggest otherwise....this kind of thing will always be popular with some players as they have a "casinos are the enemy" mentality. Most people don't want to hear how the poor guy who claimed he was innocent and ripped off was actually a fraudster etc...many players have no sympathy for casinos being ripped off. I'm sure if they had their own business and were being ripped off, they might feel differently, as a casino is really just a business at the end of the day.

It doesn't explain, though, why many players have contacted me for help and guidance over the years....maybe none of them could read, considering I am the last person anyone would go to for sympathy, right? Fair is fair. There is no kind of "biased fair".

Whether Tropica was trying to take advantage of me is irrelevant, because they haven't and they won't....and neither have nor will any other operator. If members here don't know by now that I am my own man then they haven't been paying attention.

 

[chuchu59]

Nifty,

It is pretty difficult to change people's perceptions so if some people think you are pro-casino just let it be.

 

[MisterBJ]

This thread is turning into FOX NEWS - Fair and Balance.

 

[MisterBJ]

Nifty,

It is pretty difficult to change people's perceptions so if some people think you are pro-casino just let it be.

Too be honest. If I was starting a new online casino. I would try and hire Nifty in a jiffy. Atleast I know it would be ran correctly. And no bullshitter would get by him.

 

[Marie2473]

Well de-railing can be interesting, however - how´s the status on the mail issue? Did he/she get paid?

 

[dunover]

Well de-railing can be interesting, however - how´s the status on the mail issue? Did he/she get paid?

Don't believe so. Tropica have rolled headfirst into the rogues list as far as I know.

Actually not yet it appears, I just seen them on the 'not recommended' list:

Tropica Casino Rival Curacao Support on crack

 

[towersoft]

Well de-railing can be interesting, however - how´s the status on the mail issue? Did he/she get paid?

Nothing has been paid last thing I heard from them was "Kindly note that your withdrawal has been voided and that no payment
will be made after taking all factors into consideration."

Not sure what else to do other than see what happens unless any of you have any ideas?

 

[maxd]

Whatever the merits of this thread I am getting complaints left, right and center about the various posters here getting up each other's snoots. Frankly I've got better things to do than baby-sit right now. Thread is on a 24 hour time-out. Perhaps when I bring it back on-air tomorrow we'll all have shed our grumpy pants and be in a more congenial mood.

 

[Mouche12]

Nothing has been paid last thing I heard from them was "Kindly note that your withdrawal has been voided and that no payment
will be made after taking all factors into consideration."

Not sure what else to do other than see what happens unless any of you have any ideas?

It may be worthwile to take legal action, although I am not certain if it would outweigh the costs. What have Max and/or Bryan have to say about this?

 

[Nifty29]

I wouldn't normally say this, but given their NCD status, you could try gambling grumbles. Sometimes they can get a response. I just want to see towersoft paid.


FTR......I have sent a personal apology to Zanzibar via pm. I would have done it here but it was long and I didn't want to derail further.

 

[chuchu59]

Ya probably right Nifty. At CM, they aren't the least concerned about their reputation as it would take quite of effort and finances to change our perception. At GG the players are of a slightly different breed and the casino might wish to just pay out to avoid neg publicity.

 

[towersoft]

I will give it a try! Thanks for all your help!

 

[Balthazar]

I will give it a try! Thanks for all your help!

I don't think White Label Tropica cares about its reputation but still, good luck!

 

[towersoft]

Just to let you know I have sent my issue in to Gambling grumbles and they have mailed Tropica, will post anything that happens.

 

[naththo]

Hope that sort of your idea works that way as you deserved to get paid for it. Good luck!

 

[Mouche12]

Hi towersoft, I really hope that you will get paid quickly - in full. Best of luck!

 

[towersoft]

Just an update to say that one of the new owners of Tropica has been in touch via pm. He is apparently looking into my issue with Duwayne, Rival & the old owners before making a decision. So maybe there is some light at the end of the tunnel.

He replied to the pm I sent when this all started so I have a copy of the missing pm I sent. (If you have read the thread from the start you will know what I mean) I have posted this below.

Hi,

I have an account with you and was lucky enough to win a decent ammount. I started the slow Rival withdrawal process and have recived £3000 from you. I recived an email stating the following:

Hi,

We have been informed by Rival Central Risk that you have a history of
abuse and multiple accounts at Rival casinos.

We also have an IP mismatch for your country of registration and IP
country.

Can you please explain to us what the reasons are for all of the
above?

Regards,
Tropica Security

I responded to this immediately but have heard nothing in return so I am trying this point of contact as your live chat and Phone support do not work. As I explained in my email I don't understand the accusation of abuse, this need explaining.

In regards to the multiple account, I always close my accounts and contact support before opening new ones. I would not have 2 accounts at one casino,

I have no IP mismatch, my ISP is Gurnsey based and has a pool of IP's for the Isle of man, I am assigned an IP accordingly. Not much I can do about it to be honest, as a dynamic IP customer.

I would really like to know whats going on, the only reason I chose to play at you site was because I saw you where active on this site and hoped that I would be safe.

Please advise.

Thanks for everyone's help!

 

[vinylweatherman]

Just an update to say that one of the new owners of Tropica has been in touch via pm. He is apparently looking into my issue with Duwayne, Rival & the old owners before making a decision. So maybe there is some light at the end of the tunnel.

He replied to the pm I sent when this all started so I have a copy of the missing pm I sent. (If you have read the thread from the start you will know what I mean) I have posted this below.



Thanks for everyone's help!

or some more bullshit.

Didn't these issues start cropping up AFTER Duwayne got "promoted sideways". Far from Duwayne and the "old owners" being the source of issues, it seems the post Duwayne era under new owners has brought about the rapid descent into roguedom.

Maybe this is a ruse to shift the blame back to the old owners so that if the original decision stands, the new owners are not tainted by it.

Relying on the information from a third party geolocation service to accuse, convict, and sentence someone for player fraud is bullshit of the highest order. Even outside of online gambling, inaccurate geolocation returns are causing all sorts of problems, including the UK state lottery and BBC websites falling over because of inaccurate returns. The responsibility lies with the website using a particular geolocation service, not the customers ISP who have no control over whether geolocation providers can be arsed to keep their databases fully up to date.

The staff making this up seem to equate the physical separation between the IOM and Guernsey as reflective of how separate the two are in cyberspace, judging that the physical distance rules out minor discrepancies in geolocation returns. In cyberspace though, the IOM and Guernsey are right next to each other, as there is not a large subscriber base in the Atlantic requiring both to run from entirely unconnected address pools. If they can make such a fundamental technical error, they could easily have screwed up over the supposed detection of multiple accounts too.

 

[towersoft]

OK well... Tropica has been in touch again but they are still waiting for "legacy data" from Rival as they can only see my balance and anything that has been paid already, not my pending withdrawals. However they have stated this:

From what I know, I believe there was some merit in the decision not to pay you. These reasons were communicated to you and you have not taken any responsibility for your actions on the forums. While I understand why you did not tell the truth, I feel you have given the casino a really bad name and have Tropica added to the rogue pit when in fact, you brought it upon yourself for refusing to comply with the request made by previous management. That said, I will make a decision on the £5000 once we all the facts.

To which I have responded:

Thanks for getting back to me. I understand that you need to get all of the data together before you can draw any conclusions. I do however request that you inform me of the lies that I have told on the forum, As with you, I need all the data before I can act correctly. If I have done something wrong then I need to know what it is so I can make a amends.

I have left parts out for now as I think I will pm Bryan before posting the entire conversation. Tropica assures me Bryan is getting all the pm's too.

 

[vinylweatherman]

OK well... Tropica has been in touch again but they are still waiting for "legacy data" from Rival as they can only see my balance and anything that has been paid already, not my pending withdrawals. However they have stated this:



To which I have responded:



I have left parts out for now as I think I will pm Bryan before posting the entire conversation. Tropica assures me Bryan is getting all the pm's too.

Odd how they "know" the reasoning behind the decision not to pay, can tell your lies from the truth, yet they do not yet have access to ANY of the "legacy data" covering this period.

Was this really the case that got them rogued? (CS passing around the crack pipe again).

 

[Balthazar]

I feel you have given the casino a really bad name and have Tropica added to the rogue pit when in fact, you brought it upon yourself for refusing to comply with the request made by previous management.

Request made by previous management? What is he referring to now?

Also, you aren't responsible for bringing them in the rogue pit, previous Rep was responsible for keeping them out of the rogue pit.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Request made by previous management? What is he referring to now?

Also, you aren't responsible for bringing them in the rogue pit, previous Rep was responsible for keeping them out of the rogue pit.

Right at the start.

On January 18th, the OP was asked to explain why a third party geolocation database had his IP down as Guernsey instead of the IOM, and why he was playing from another country. Explanation should not be needed as this should be bleedin' obvious to anyone who knows a bit about the ISP industry, as anyone using geolocation on their service should do. The OP explained this, but was then told they were awaiting Notarised documents, yet they had never asked for them in the first place.

They then gave the OP a mater of days to produce them, even though this can be an involved and lengthy process, and timescales are up to the lawyers involved, not the player. It's a different matter where the player merely has to take a few minutes preparing and sending documents he already has. They also seemed not to accept the explanation that his IP address shows as Guernsey because that's where the local IP pool his provider uses is registered.

They then brought up further "evidence", and accused the OP of withdrawing after winning - so what!!!

All this evidence was preceeded by "Rival told us........". So bloody what, this is YOUR casino Mr Rep, what "other Rivals", your competitors have to say is mere hearsay evidence.

They then pulled out a shocker, that they wouldn't pay because they didn't think they would stand a fair chance of winning it back. I believe this was the straw that broke the camel's back, and into the pit they tumbled.

Now the rep claims this was "under previous management" and they "can't access that data". This seems unlikely given that this complaint only started on Jan 18th, and came to the forum a month later on Feb 24th, a period during which the rep claims the old owners sold the business on to the current ones and archived such recent data out of immediate reach of the new owners.

So, these new owners take over, yet have no data before about end Jan - Early Feb 2013 on any of the players they inherited with the deal. This sounds very much like BS as it seems barely credible that the new owners could tailor promotions to players they know so little about. Getting promotions right is hardly Rival's strong point in any case, and is what brings many of them down.


I think we need to see notarised documents from the rep proving that on Jan 18th it was the old owners in charge that confiscated the OP's win, and that it is now new owners who are dealing with it. You have 3 days to comply from now because I have already been waiting for proof of change of ownership since this fact first came to light in one of the rep's replies

Did the crack pipe used by the old CS form part of the assets passed to the new owners

 

[hoff1985]

Without going into details about my case again, i really feel a flashback here. Back then with my case, there was still Duwayne involved. Duwayne tried to help me really hard, but every discussion we had about it was always like "I see, but RIVAL thinks and RIVAL told me"... I always had the feeling that RIVAL is so powerful in the background and what they say "can't be questioned".

 

[chuchu59]

OK well... Tropica has been in touch again but they are still waiting for "legacy data" from Rival as they can only see my balance and anything that has been paid already, not my pending withdrawals. However they have stated this:



To which I have responded:



I have left parts out for now as I think I will pm Bryan before posting the entire conversation. Tropica assures me Bryan is getting all the pm's too.

Well done. These rogues had the cheek to blame their being rogued due to you. Do they really think Bryan didn't consider all the facts before coming to a decision. Long may they remain there.

 

[Borgie]

Well done. These rogues had the cheek to blame their being rogued due to you. Do they really think Bryan didn't consider all the facts before coming to a decision. Long may they remain there.

They are only in the Not Recommended category at the moment - I foresee them ending in the Rogue pit very soon ! Nasty nasty !

 

[Zodiac]

What do you mean with old and new management ? Since when are there a new management ? I was also in touch with one of the owners and some for me sounds similiar what i got as answers.

They are upset because it is published in the forums and damaged their reputation and therefore they are stubborn. The answer from Tropica i got was clear enough: Casinomeister is an unfair community.

The problem of our german player will remain an unresolved issue, i believe. They offered me to credit the player with 500 Euro if i keep my mouth.

I answered that it has nothing to do what i say or write. It goes only around their terms and conditions on their website and how they interprete it. Their own strange interpretation regarding terms and conditions is a shame.

This is what they understand regarding fair play. I ask myself what kind of people or companys are lead a casino ?

The player don't made a mistake, he only made higher bets, which casino don't like. If they don't like those customers then they should pay them in full and close their accounts after paying.

And always the same statement that one couldn't know whether the player lose his balance or not and there was no cashout. (player has also a shady history at rival)

I gave them the chance to decide and resolve but the owner only referred regarding the bad communication between customer service and me and of course posting in forum which would not the correct way.

I hate this to post all these details but they let me no choice.

And what a surprise, they have changed their general bonus terms and conditions!

3 passages are suddenly removed how the balance from the players account.

removed:

• Under review, a withdrawal may be voided if a customer is found to be using a betting pattern or system such as the Martingale System for example.

• When playing with a bonus, you cannot wager more than 30% of the required wagering on a single game. You will also need to place bets on at least 10 games if the promotion allows it.

• If necessary, management reserves the right to apply the Max Cashout of your last promotion. For example: you win 1000 on a promotion where 1000 was the Max Cashout. You now withdraw 5 x 200 and then those increments of 200 to take up additional bonuses. If management deems it necessary, they will apply the Max 1000 Cashout of the winning promotion. Kindly note that loyal customers are not affected by this term.

Exactly this was their own interpretation and the reason for confiscating players balance. They were referring to something that does not exist, because the customer played without a bonus. They refer it also on playing without bonus.

They have simply no guts to say that they have made mistakes. Would be so then there would be also a chance that they are not under "not recommanded casinos"

They mean they handled it correct but they are not right.

The Owner can further mean that i'm nasty and no gentleman in this matter.

What are doing all these players if no one would be to mediate or to help them ?

The only way they have is to post it on communities or request someone for help.

I don't like to know how many players are affected and can do nothing, because some casinos decide how they want.

Very strange all or not ?

 

[hoff1985]

WOW. That is a weird one:

• When playing with a bonus, you cannot wager more than 30% of the required wagering on a single game. You will also need to place bets on at least 10 games if the promotion allows it.

Never saw something like this.... If i want to play only 4 or 5 slots i can't withdraw, i need to play at least 10 slots... Thats so weird!!!

What do you mean with old and new management ? Since when are there a new management ? I was also in touch with one of the owners and some for me sounds similiar what i got as answers.

They are upset because it is published in the forums and damaged their reputation and therefore they are stubborn. The answer from Tropica i got was clear enough: Casinomeister is an unfair community.

The problem of our german player will remain an unresolved issue, i believe. They offered me to credit the player with 500 Euro if i keep my mouth.

I answered that it has nothing to do what i say or write. It goes only around their terms and conditions on their website and how they interprete it. Their own strange interpretation regarding terms and conditions is a shame.

This is what they understand regarding fair play. I ask myself what kind of people or companys are lead a casino ?

The player don't made a mistake, he only made higher bets, which casino don't like. If they don't like those customers then they should pay them in full and close their accounts after paying.

And always the same statement that one couldn't know whether the player lose his balance or not and there was no cashout. (player has also a shady history at rival)

I gave them the chance to decide and resolve but the owner only referred regarding the bad communication between customer service and me and of course posting in forum which would not the correct way.

I hate this to post all these details but they let me no choice.

And what a surprise, they have changed their general bonus terms and conditions!

3 passages are suddenly removed how the balance from the players account.

removed:

• Under review, a withdrawal may be voided if a customer is found to be using a betting pattern or system such as the Martingale System for example.

• When playing with a bonus, you cannot wager more than 30% of the required wagering on a single game. You will also need to place bets on at least 10 games if the promotion allows it.

• If necessary, management reserves the right to apply the Max Cashout of your last promotion. For example: you win 1000 on a promotion where 1000 was the Max Cashout. You now withdraw 5 x 200 and then those increments of 200 to take up additional bonuses. If management deems it necessary, they will apply the Max 1000 Cashout of the winning promotion. Kindly note that loyal customers are not affected by this term.

Exactly this was their own interpretation and the reason for confiscating players balance. They were referring to something that does not exist, because the customer played without a bonus. They refer it also on playing without bonus.

They have simply no guts to say that they have made mistakes. Would be so then there would be also a chance that they are not under "not recommanded casinos"

They mean they handled it correct but they are not right.

The Owner can further mean that i'm nasty and no gentleman in this matter.

What are doing all these players if no one would be to mediate or to help them ?

The only way they have is to post it on communities or request someone for help.

I don't like to know how many players are affected and can do nothing, because some casinos decide how they want.

Very strange all or not ?

 

[The Dude]

As most of you know, I was out pretty much the entire time this thread was going on. One thing I can say for sure is that this underscores the reason why there is only one Rival casino listed at Casinomeister.

It's true that I emailed Duwayne some weeks ago at the same time I sent him a PM concerning this thread. It was/is an alarming thread - not just of the payout involved, but by the way support reacted. That was my main concern - support. I know there are always two sides of every coin - I'm not privy on the veracity of the player's complaint, but the reaction of Rival's support pretty much was a solid hit out of the ball park.

As Nifty mentioned earlier, he received via email, a response from Duwayne, which he forwarded to me, but Duwayne had forwarded me the same email as well. It stated that we didn't have the full picture on what the player was saying - only half (obviously, that's why a casino rep needs to address complaints). But he went on with another issue of sour grapes.

He felt that I was biased towards a number of casinos that receive a fair share of complaints in the forum, yet his casino was tossed to the curb when it came to problems at Rival. He also doesn't like the fact that Tropica was associated with some other casinos - and that I never made any correction to this. I cannot police every thread as most people should know. He feels that I am not a real proponent to fair play. Well, that's his opinion, but I just didn't have the time to get into some email debate. I have enough on my plate as it is.

The bottom line is that Tropica casino is a white label. White labels are disqualified from the Accredited list - this thread exemplifies why. He told me that I had plenty of players coming from this site to Tropica, and that I could be earning a fair amount of cash. But sorry, no deal, that's not a reason to give them the opportunity to become accredited.

White labels have a history of poor management and failure. I've been told over and over how unfair I am when I lump white labels together - but players who have a decent memory can remember some RTP problems, and massive problems with their customer service. Over time this snowballed, but I always gave Tropica the benefit of the doubt. Remember when all white label Rival casinos were listed in the NR section? Tropica was exempt from that since they had a good rep in the forum. In fact, just prior to the BS lawyer letters I was getting, last year I was contemplating making an exception on white labels and bringing Tropica on. Glad I got those letters - they forced me to get off the fence and into the right side of the playing field.

I am in contact with the new operator who has taken over Duwayne's account. He's wondering why they are in the Not Recommended section - it's because of the OP's "support on crack" episode - and now the new one with the Martingale system being applied to a game other than Roulette (wtf?).

Out of the 26 Rival casinos, there is only one listed at Casinomeister (Slots Capital) which is run by Slotocash. Slotocash is a trusted operator who I've known for a number of years, and runs their own support (obviously). The rest of the Rival casinos are either in the "Reservation" or Rogue Pit. Nevertheless, all Rival Casinos but Slots Capital are in the No Can Do list - and for a very good reason. This thread just goes to show that quite a few people couldn't give a care where they throw their money.

 

[hoff1985]

Perfect Post. I have experience with some Rival casinos, and i can say Slots Capital is awesome. I had a lot of cashouts (and cash-in's of course) and never a big problem. And when i had small issues the rep here (Ms Sloto) could always help very fast. I think RIVAL is a fantastic software with fantastic features (a.e Free Spins Multiplier carried over to bonus round) and i think the software is extremely underrated. I wouldn't know what to do if Slots Capital would not run a RIVAL casino... I just don't get it why no other operator tries an "independent" Rival casino, just don't get it.

As most of you know, I was out pretty much the entire time this thread was going on. One thing I can say for sure is that this underscores the reason why there is only one Rival casino listed at Casinomeister.

It's true that I emailed Duwayne some weeks ago at the same time I sent him a PM concerning this thread. It was/is an alarming thread - not just of the payout involved, but by the way support reacted. That was my main concern - support. I know there are always two sides of every coin - I'm not privy on the veracity of the player's complaint, but the reaction of Rival's support pretty much was a solid hit out of the ball park.

As Nifty mentioned earlier, he received via email, a response from Duwayne, which he forwarded to me, but Duwayne had forwarded me the same email as well. It stated that we didn't have the full picture on what the player was saying - only half (obviously, that's why a casino rep needs to address complaints). But he went on with another issue of sour grapes.

He felt that I was biased towards a number of casinos that receive a fair share of complaints in the forum, yet his casino was tossed to the curb when it came to problems at Rival. He also doesn't like the fact that Tropica was associated with some other casinos - and that I never made any correction to this. I cannot police every thread as most people should know. He feels that I am not a real proponent to fair play. Well, that's his opinion, but I just didn't have the time to get into some email debate. I have enough on my plate as it is.

The bottom line is that Tropica casino is a white label. White labels are disqualified from the Accredited list - this thread exemplifies why. He told me that I had plenty of players coming from this site to Tropica, and that I could be earning a fair amount of cash. But sorry, no deal, that's not a reason to give them the opportunity to become accredited.

White labels have a history of poor management and failure. I've been told over and over how unfair I am when I lump white labels together - but players who have a decent memory can remember some RTP problems, and massive problems with their customer service. Over time this snowballed, but I always gave Tropica the benefit of the doubt. Remember when all white label Rival casinos were listed in the NR section? Tropica was exempt from that since they had a good rep in the forum. In fact, just prior to the BS lawyer letters I was getting, last year I was contemplating making an exception on white labels and bringing Tropica on. Glad I got those letters - they forced me to get off the fence and into the right side of the playing field.

I am in contact with the new operator who has taken over Duwayne's account. He's wondering why they are in the Not Recommended section - it's because of the OP's "support on crack" episode - and now the new one with the Martingale system being applied to a game other than Roulette (wtf?).

Out of the 26 Rival casinos, there is only one listed at Casinomeister (Slots Capital) which is run by Slotocash. Slotocash is a trusted operator who I've known for a number of years, and runs their own support (obviously). The rest of the Rival casinos are either in the "Reservation" or Rogue Pit. Nevertheless, all Rival Casinos but Slots Capital are in the No Can Do list - and for a very good reason. This thread just goes to show that quite a few people couldn't give a care where they throw their money.

 

[chuchu59]

They are only in the Not Recommended category at the moment - I foresee them ending in the Rogue pit very soon ! Nasty nasty !

Eh? I thought I saw in the Reservation section that they are rogued. Whatever, in my mind they are rogues and forever will be. Leopard casino.

 

[vinylweatherman]

As most of you know, I was out pretty much the entire time this thread was going on. One thing I can say for sure is that this underscores the reason why there is only one Rival casino listed at Casinomeister.

It's true that I emailed Duwayne some weeks ago at the same time I sent him a PM concerning this thread. It was/is an alarming thread - not just of the payout involved, but by the way support reacted. That was my main concern - support. I know there are always two sides of every coin - I'm not privy on the veracity of the player's complaint, but the reaction of Rival's support pretty much was a solid hit out of the ball park.

As Nifty mentioned earlier, he received via email, a response from Duwayne, which he forwarded to me, but Duwayne had forwarded me the same email as well. It stated that we didn't have the full picture on what the player was saying - only half (obviously, that's why a casino rep needs to address complaints). But he went on with another issue of sour grapes.

He felt that I was biased towards a number of casinos that receive a fair share of complaints in the forum, yet his casino was tossed to the curb when it came to problems at Rival. He also doesn't like the fact that Tropica was associated with some other casinos - and that I never made any correction to this. I cannot police every thread as most people should know. He feels that I am not a real proponent to fair play. Well, that's his opinion, but I just didn't have the time to get into some email debate. I have enough on my plate as it is.

The bottom line is that Tropica casino is a white label. White labels are disqualified from the Accredited list - this thread exemplifies why. He told me that I had plenty of players coming from this site to Tropica, and that I could be earning a fair amount of cash. But sorry, no deal, that's not a reason to give them the opportunity to become accredited.

White labels have a history of poor management and failure. I've been told over and over how unfair I am when I lump white labels together - but players who have a decent memory can remember some RTP problems, and massive problems with their customer service. Over time this snowballed, but I always gave Tropica the benefit of the doubt. Remember when all white label Rival casinos were listed in the NR section? Tropica was exempt from that since they had a good rep in the forum. In fact, just prior to the BS lawyer letters I was getting, last year I was contemplating making an exception on white labels and bringing Tropica on. Glad I got those letters - they forced me to get off the fence and into the right side of the playing field.

I am in contact with the new operator who has taken over Duwayne's account. He's wondering why they are in the Not Recommended section - it's because of the OP's "support on crack" episode - and now the new one with the Martingale system being applied to a game other than Roulette (wtf?).

Out of the 26 Rival casinos, there is only one listed at Casinomeister (Slots Capital) which is run by Slotocash. Slotocash is a trusted operator who I've known for a number of years, and runs their own support (obviously). The rest of the Rival casinos are either in the "Reservation" or Rogue Pit. Nevertheless, all Rival Casinos but Slots Capital are in the No Can Do list - and for a very good reason. This thread just goes to show that quite a few people couldn't give a care where they throw their money.

Well, who REALLY calls the shots. It seems it's "what Rival says goes", and even the OWNER has no power to make up their own mind. It seems even Duwayne was having this problem, so a change of owner is not relevant, as it seems owners have no actual power to make decisions.

From the start, it looks like them using one reason after another for voiding payment. First it's geolocation, when that gets kicked into touch, it's notarised documents, and then a "system". Last of all, the new owners can't access any data prior to them taking over, and it seems Rival are in no hurry to help.

On the one hand, individual Rival white labels are asking for exceptions over the rule if they can prove that they are individual enough to stand out from the crowd in a good way, yet at the same time it's a case of "Rival says" on almost every important decision, making it clear ALL white labels are much the same when it comes to how players get treated.

They got traffic from this site because of how Duwayne was performing, and how the experience in general flew in the face of the stereotypical view of Rival white labels. For certain, nothing about Tropica was broken, yet at the end of January Rival saw fit to "fix it", and well and truly smashed the whole thing to pieces. It is as though they WANTED to drag down this exceptional player friendly white label to the level of the rest.

I am sure that in the past I have seen comment indicating that there is some kind of policing by Rival designed to prevent one white label from getting so good that it starts to poach from the others. If so, this looks like a case of Rival central applying the handbrake on Tropica, and getting rid of Duwayne to install their own crack pipe smoking generic team who have come up with the wonders that put Tropica back with the others, not recommended and no-can-do.

They should not need accreditation in order to behave, it should be the other way around, behave and then earn accreditation.

There is now the additional factor of them trying to bribe someone with $500 to "keep their mouth" and allow this PR tragedy to die away.

How about a £7K "bribe" to the OP to announce in public that everything is resolved, he is happy, and the casino did the right thing in the end. They can always blacklist him for life from ANY Rival, but of course they could never win the money back, something that REALLY bothers them.

Given that the show is run by Rival anyway, what does it matter if the OP gives that £7K back to Rival through another white label skin, it all ends up in the same four pockets.

 

[mrmark21]

I'm not impressed at all by Tropica. They act oblivious to the FACT that two (possibly more players) have gone unpaid. They should have thought about the possible consequences before putting themselves under a bad light. IMPO they should also be grateful that they haven't been fully rogued.

 

[KasinoKing]

Eh? I thought I saw in the Reservation section that they are rogued. Whatever, in my mind they are rogues and forever will be. Leopard casino.

It says in the Rogue Pit.
The Rogue Pit consists of several sections, including "Rogue Casinos" and "Not Recommended casinos".
Two different sections, two different reasons for casinos being in them.

Out of the 26 Rival casinos, there is only one listed at Casinomeister (Slots Capital) which is run by Slotocash. Slotocash is a trusted operator who I've known for a number of years, and runs their own support (obviously). The rest of the Rival casinos are either in the "Reservation" or Rogue Pit. Nevertheless, all Rival Casinos but Slots Capital are in the No Can Do list - and for a very good reason.

[nit-pick mode]
There are a lot more than 26 Rival casinos; Over 50 in fact (Even I don't know the exact number!)
DNC (Desert Nights Rival Powered casino) is also run by Sloto'Cash - why is that not on the Accredited list too?
[/nit-pick mode]

KK

 

[hoff1985]

It says in the Rogue Pit.
The Rogue Pit consists of several sections, including "Rogue Casinos" and "Not Recommended casinos".
Two different sections, two different reasons for casinos being in them.


[nit-pick mode]
There are a lot more than 26 Rival casinos; Over 50 in fact (Even I don't know the exact number!)
DNC (Desert Nights Rival Powered casino) is also run by Sloto'Cash - why is that not on the Accredited list too?
[/nit-pick mode]

KK

Oh the website it says "accredited" So i'm guessing they just handle it in a way "SLOTS CAPITAL = DESERT NIGHTS" Are there any differences then just the name? But you're right, Desert Nights should be in the accredited List too. 32red and Dash are also both there even if it's basically the same casino (Correct me if i'm wrong

 

[Zodiac]

I wish i could explain it better to you all what i think and try to say. Can be that not all of you understand what i mean. I'm not nasty and it takes a long time if i set a casino in a "not recommended" list.

This will happen if i have the feeling that it makes no sence to discuss furthermore. Most of the companys are saying that they don't discuss player issues with 3rd parties although one have the players datas and details.

Tropica was one of an exception and VIP management tried to give me answers. I appreciated but all their answers wasn't really satisfied.

This new issue was the hit otherwise i can't explain why an owner tried to get in contact with me.

If he mailed and offered me that he will re-open the account with the full amount the player had before, then i believe kept silent and reported that they are doing the right thing. But he wrote that he offered €500 in lieu of the fact that the term on the website was not clear enough for me to understand and i had declined.

My intention is to try and help players where having problems and get in contact with responsible managers. Sometimes i have luck and the manager has experience enough to solve it. But sometimes you run against a wall.

I agree with the weatherman, saying "that it seems owners have no actual power to make decisions". This is 100% correct. The software providers in the background have definitely too much influences. This is a matter of the licensee and casino operators. But i don't know whether makes it better.

He told me that I had plenty of players coming from this site to Tropica, and that I could be earning a fair amount of cash. But sorry, no deal, that's not a reason to give them the opportunity to become accredited.

that suits as well: You need to understand that this is not a good player. Affiliates or operators will never make money off players like this and we did you a favour in the long run.

If this is an opinion or statement from all the casinos, then good night.

Normally i want not to handle player issues, because it means a lot of work and time. I have no interest to make a casino bad but what should you do ?

The users know me as a person where can help sometimes.

I like to work with my projects, that's what i normally like to do.

 

[vinylweatherman]

We have been here before, with Tradition.

We didn't just get "a rep", we got the OWNER personally taking care of any issues. They shone like Tropica did with Duwayne around. Then they pulled a clumsy stunt and blamed it on a trainee.

It seems even the exceptional Rival white label may merely be a deception designed to manipulate affiliates into accepting that Rival overall are reliable.

There are other white label operations on other softwares, and although there are problems, they don't seem anywhere as bad as those experienced with Rival white labels. They are doing something different, and it produces far worse results, yet rather than change, it seems Rival tries to sneak past the checks and balances through deception in order to get at least some of their casinos recommended as "top picks" by affiliates.

Just imagine the fall out for CM if Tropica had managed to keep the charade going for longer, and made it to accredited as an exception to the rule, and then slaughtered the "lambs" the status brought their way by suddenly showing their true colours.

 

[maphesto]

We have been here before, with Tradition.

We didn't just get "a rep", we got the OWNER personally taking care of any issues. They shone like Tropica did with Duwayne around.

I don't agree at all here. Tradition did not have the reputation here as Tropica had with Duwayne around. Not even close. The only not accredited White Label Rival who had a good reputation here was at one point Vegas Regal with Nicholas as a rep. Tropica fooled many experienced members here that they were a special White Label, above the others. So did Vegas Regal, claimed that they hade their own support (maybe correct, don't know).

 

[Refilliates Casinos]

Hey everybody,

Hope you are all well.

Apologies for not replying sooner. I have been on a short break while Tropica undergoes a change of ownership.

Myself and Dieter are working on this matter. Please be patient while we gather all the information needed for a resolution.

There have been quite a few incorrect facts posted in this thread which we really need to clarify for the record. We could address each and every post in this thread and present a sound argument, truth or acknowledgement where necessary, but fear you could be reading all weekend long, so we have addressed some of the important / relevant ones below.

Thank you for your time,
Duwayne

• It will be greatly appreciated if every one posting online could stick to the truth when posting something as a fact. I know you are players and you see things differently from operators, affiliates and other stakeholders in this industry, but posting the first thing that pops into your head as a fact (without been 100% certain) is simply not conducive to finding a viable resolution. Other members here read these posts and believe everything stated as fact. It will certainly help other operators, players, reps, affiliates etc. in the future.
  .
• No "bribes" were offered to anyone and Zodiac should post the mail Dieter sent to him last week along with all the mails he sent to Tracy and Dieter so that you have all the information you need.
  .
• No player info was, or is ever shared via PM with anyone (unless permission is granted). Nifty was mailed to say that the OP was not been completely honest and that he (Nifty) posted an incorrect fact about my association with Loco Panda. I wanted Nifty to retract the statement and he did.
  .
• Rival do not own any casinos - this message seems to be a common post for 1 or 2 members here. Rival is a software company, like MGS, NETENT etc.
  .
• Rival do not get involved with operators. If an operator fails, then the business is closed or sold off to an operator who can look after it. All software companies adopt this policy if it makes good business sense.
  .
• We have been added to the rogue pit here because of this complaint. This is regrettable considering we never had the opportunity to look into this, as should be the custom when a dispute is filed on a public forum.
  
• Tropica has been in operation for 3.5 years and I have been here since inception. Several posters in this thread play/ed at Tropica and it is surprising that no one has mentioned the good service and fast payouts they have received (except Chopley). I personally would not work for a casino that does not pay players or treats people poorly. I take pride in my work and in helping build this brand. A Google search should establish that we are most certainly not a rogue operation. There are affiliates here that can attest to our service, payments and generosity. We have a rock solid team with ample knowledge, as well as good capital backing.
  .
• It is true that we decided months ago to stop been present on this forum as we were not allowed to become accredited. Bryan was steadfast in his rule that no white label could ever become accredited. As we did our own processing and support (office hours and central support after hours), we felt we were not a white label, however we could not get a Baptism by Fire. That is why I have not been present as no matter how much work we did, we would never get off the "Not Recommended List". This particular matter however warrants our involvement and if we can leave the forum knowing we did the best we could, then we will be satisfied with that.
  .
• I have to end on this point: One regular poster here (you will know who you are) - You were operating 2 accounts and we proved that to you. You had linked accounts at several Rival casinos and were taking up multiple bonuses at each. We did not punish you or embarrass you with the proof here on the forum; we simply bonus banned the 2nd account and allowed you to continuing playing with bonuses, yet you have made multiple posts against Tropica since then in an effort to tarnish our reputation. It will be appreciated if you file a PAB or a PM, if you feel you were hard done by in any way. I will gladly try to understand your reasoning.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Well it's nice to see some official input from the casino in this, but there are still questions that are unanswered.

Can I ask, is this comment attributed to Tropica Support an accurate quotation?

Added to this, we have confirmation from Rival that you are not a
genuine player. You simply play big till you win and then you cash out
and move on. While we understand winning is what all players go for, it
is cause for concern when we know we will not get a chance to win some
of our winnings back.

Personally I'd really like to see Rival and (some of) their casinos in a more 'accepted' sort of place, because I've said before and I'll say again that I think they have some great games on their books with 'industry standard' payouts and a lot that they do right - but you really can't have CS sending messages like that to a player, whatever else may be going on.

Also Duwayne, I think you'd be best served by remaining active on the CM forums and maintaining a presence, whatever your personal grumbles with the processes are.

Even without accredited status, a casino can achieve a good reputation simply by word of mouth - (Redbet for example, were basically 'accredited by the members' long before they were actually accredited, simply because it became obvious they were a quality operation) - as it stands at the moment it just looks like you've thrown your toys out of the pram because you couldn't get what you wanted out of Bryan.

 

[Mouche12]

@ Duwayne, that's all nice and dandy, but when will the player get paid his € 7K? THAT's the answer I am looking for! You know the player has done nothing wrong whatsoever, so why does it take so long?