UKGC

[dunover]

Hey @dunover, we keep hearing people in the industry banging on about this but what does it actually mean? I’m naive in this area so would be keen to understand what these extra costs are. We also get told that shaving a few percentage off the RTP makes minimal difference to the player, but if this was the case, what’s the benefit to the casino in doing so?

Also would it be an issue if 80% shut up shop and left with their sub par offerings?

Also, how do bet365 and MrQ manage to operate with max RTP across the board? Sure, bet365 is a big operation, but I would imagine that MrQ are much, much smaller.

See my last post. Well, we've probably already lost half of that 80% in the last 3 years already. You only need to search here '...leaving UK' or '...closing down' to find many of them. Bet365 are the biggest online gambling firm on the planet and have huge profits from overseas to subsidize the UK market.

Shaving 2% off of RTP certainly does NOT make 'minimal difference' to the player but in fact reduces their average play time pound-for-pound by 50%, the same figure as the casino's average profit per game will increase by if the game in question was once 96% and reduced to 94%.

If you enter your figures into this tool on my site

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

you will see exactly how any slot RTP reduction affects you and it certainly isn't minimal!

As for MrQ I do promote them and they seem to be good and it may be a business decision to shave profit to the bone but grow the player base as a result to increase the value of the site - I cannot answer past that.

 

[satchnz]

See my last post. Well, we've probably already lost half of that 80% in the last 3 years already. You only need to search here '...leaving UK' or '...closing down' to find many of them. Bet365 are the biggest online gambling firm on the planet and have huge profits from overseas to subsidize the UK market.

Shaving 2% off of RTP certainly does NOT make 'minimal difference' to the player but in fact reduces their average play time pound-for-pound by 50%, the same figure as the casino's average profit per game will increase by if the game in question was once 96% and reduced to 94%.

If you enter your figures into this tool on my site

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

you will see exactly how any slot RTP reduction affects you and it certainly isn't minimal!

As for MrQ I do promote them and they seem to be good and it may e a business decision to shave profit to the bone but grow the player base as a result to increase the value of the site - I cannot answer past that.

I’m well aware of the impacts on the player of lowering RTP, but we are led to believe by some factions that it make’s minimal difference. I do not believe this.

 

[goatwack]

Reducing RTP off existing tried and tested favourites with a 'softer' variance is indeed criminal and an affront to slotters, as well as ruining the underpinning of that mechanic. One could reel off any number of classics that have been rendered unplayable, with Immortal Romance being a prime example.

Having an RTP between 94- 96% on any of today's 'games' doesn't account for much however, sorry to say, when every game is a prolonged death-rattle towards a wishful bonus that never arrives, forcing the player to purchase the bonus, or just give up the ghost trying.

Watching my £20 wisp into the ether over 300 spins or 350 isn't tantamount to 'value', when the games' variance has been so irrevocably bent to make the games like scratchcards, less 'slots'. And that's just the state games design finds itself in, a death-loop towards ever-higher variance where number of spins gleaned from a meagre deposit is just......arbitrary....

 

[Mattue]

Having an RTP between 94- 96% on any of today's 'games' doesn't account for much however, sorry to say, when every game is a prolonged death-rattle towards a wishful bonus that never arrives, forcing the player to purchase the bonus, or just give up the ghost trying.

What makes it worse is you can finally hit a max win after chasing it, only to then discover your overall RTP is still only 89%.

You needed to hit it twice to be in profit overall.

 

[megadam]

What makes it worse is you can finally hit a max win after chasing it, only to then discover your overall RTP is still only 89%.

You needed to hit it twice to be in profit overall.

Think I'd need a Tombstone RIP 300kx max win to even make a dent in re-cooping anywhere near my losses despite having some decent ones.

Gamstop'd myself tonight. The state of the UK is absolutely appalling, playing for 9000+ hours to get a bonus that costs you an absolute fortune with an extra bet turned on for 3.35 times your base stake (DJ Psycho from NLC I'm looking at you) only for it to give you a 5x win.

No mandate for actually validating how fair extra bets are, allowing casinos to effectively promote the same product when under the hood it isn't (RTP), mandating that you're not allowed to auto-play spins anymore and actually keep track of how much you've lost/gained (Casinos's implementation of a loss counter is and has never been good enough only a provider's has), 2.5 second spin rule to slow the game down even though bonuses are allowed to speed through willy nilly and then to top it all off, you tip over that limit by £5 then you'll have credit checks and the identity police show up at your front door to verify that you can spend your £5 and you are who you are.

Don't think I've missed anything, don't think I'll miss gambling in the UK. Thank you UKGC.

 

[justdoit]

here we go again

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[slot_zombie]

Might as well replace that page with "Best non-UKGC Crypto Casinos Autumn 2023 sign up here"

 

[bamberfishcake]

here we go again

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I think watching grass grow is more productive than participating in such farcical and pointless endeavours as a UKGC public consultation.

'they came, they asked, they didn't bother to listen' pretty much sums them up.

Posturing should stay on the catwalk.

 

[Jono777]

IIRC, they took a vote previously on other "decisions"

One being removal of Auto play, where 99.99% voted against this, we all know what happened there.

"Having taken serous consideration of the vote....."

Whatever

 

[bamberfishcake]

IIRC, they took a vote previously on other "decisions"

One being removal of Auto play, where 99.99% voted against this, we all know what happened there.

"Having taken serous consideration of the vote....."

Whatever

My thoughts exactly. If the last consultation fell on deaf ears, there is no point in wasting your time in the parade.

 

[Jono777]

My thoughts exactly. If the last consultation fell on deaf ears, there is no point in wasting your time in the parade.

Not just UKGC but in general, I hate it when "they" put something out to debate / vote when their minds are clearly already made up.

Anybody with an IQ higher than 5 can usually spot this sort of thing.

 

[justdoit]

UKGC need urgent new CEO ex gambler

 

[satchnz]

UKGC need urgent new CEO ex gambler

They should be active gamblers (obviously non problem gambler). How can you regulate an industry that you are not active in? Some of the UKGC initiatives are proof of that.

 

[Guntis]

UKGC need urgent new CEO ex gambler

 

[justdoit]

They should be active gamblers (obviously non problem gambler). How can you regulate an industry that you are not active in? Some of the UKGC initiatives are proof of that.

if they have good ceo he will get steamers option ask gamblers what they think like Vote in Twitter, but all they did block comments on twitter

 

[bamberfishcake]

View attachment 188244

Tell us about yourself, so we can understand OUR perspective about you.