Unbelievable Marketing from VeraJohn

spintee

Ueber Meister
webby
mm2
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Location
Northants
Just checking some emails, I see one from Vera&John, Well at least thats what the header states,

To by amazement it was actually from slotcrazy :what: Promoting them, As you may well know SlotC is a 888 site, It was a genuine email from slotcrazy as had my username,

I do not know whats going on here, Whats your thoughts ?

sa.JPG
 

rainmaker

I'm not a penguin
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Location
-
.

If you check Slot Crazy's T&C you will find this:

"Slot Crazy is a brand (the "Brand") owned by Mandalay Media Limited (“the Brand Owner”)."

Mandalay Media Limited is owned by the Intertain Group - the same company that owns Vera&John.

I believe Slot Crazy is operated by Cassava Enterprises as a white label.

Another similar thread from earlier this week:

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/confused-about-an-email-i-received.75524/


I am not a fan of this poor behavior from Intertain owned brands, so I will send the V&J rep a message.
 

spintee

Ueber Meister
webby
mm2
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Location
Northants
Cheers rainmaker, I missed the other thread, By the looks of it not many has responded to the other one, Only you and Dun,

This is the first I have came a cross a connection, I am sure that the rules for accreditation state that affiliates must get credit, I know its not VJ but if there the same company,


Also I wonder how many of the affiliates are going to get stiffed by this move? I bet the original affiliate for for slotcrazy or costagames are not going to see a dime
 

Vera&John

Official Rep for VeraJohn Casino
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Location
Malta
Hi Spintee,

When it comes to casino, it is known that customer likes options when it`s time to play, as part of that customer wish, VJ at time can offer an alternative to its customers who have lost interest after a certain time. That process is transparent to customer receiving selected for the offer, it is presented by VJ and made only to with its sister brand according to customer wish to receive such newsletter and under strict rule of confidentiality.

Best regards,
Rupert
Vera&John


Just checking some emails, I see one from Vera&John, Well at least thats what the header states,

To by amazement it was actually from slotcrazy :what: Promoting them, As you may well know SlotC is a 888 site, It was a genuine email from slotcrazy as had my username,

I do not know whats going on here, Whats your thoughts ?

View attachment 71409
 

spintee

Ueber Meister
webby
mm2
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Location
Northants
Hi Spintee,

When it comes to casino, it is known that customer likes options when it`s time to play, as part of that customer wish, VJ at time can offer an alternative to its customers who have lost interest after a certain time. That process is transparent to customer receiving selected for the offer, it is presented by VJ and made only to with its sister brand according to customer wish to receive such newsletter and under strict rule of confidentiality.

Best regards,
Rupert
Vera&John

Yes no worry about emails,

But slotcrazy is running from the 888 umbrella and I like to keep up with my info and had no clue you was related, I do know there are alot of players from here that do not like or trust the 888 sites, They do have some dodgy rules,

I personally have had no trouble with them, Infact I have played across the 888 / cassava sites sinse day one and to this day I have always been paid, I admit I have cut down from playing them, Only costa bingo and slot-crazy I have an odd deposit, Infact I just deposit at slot crazy 3 days ago, The rules are not as bad as I original thought

But here where the problem sits, I am a member of slotcrazy and V&J, So why is there no cross refrense with marketing?

You also sate it is known that customer likes options when it`s time to play

Yes they do but I am sure we can find our own path to sites without the necessary emails, especially when already signed up to said sites, If I only played there once and forgot all about it and singed up again due to the email it would of bought no end of trouble,

it is presented by VJ and made only to with its sister brand according to customer wish to receive such newsletter and under strict rule of confidentiality.

I do not mind emails, But when I clicked for newsletters or promo's I did not know that included other brand of sites, It goes back to the Every matrix rubbish and can spring up a whole world of trouble, If someone SE from V&J than by the U.K regs its up to you to make sure I am not playing at sites, Now if you are related to slotcrazy than as its running under the 888 sites I should be excluded from the lot OF 888 / Casava sites?
Just to let you know I have nether SE from any where nor would I,


And I repeat I have no problem with your site or SC, I have not deposit a VJ for a while but do log in now and than so not forgot about you :)
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Under UK regulations, it does not matter whether marketing is "targeted to selected potential customers" or presented to UK citizens at large. What matters is the content of the marketing, and whether or not it complies with the rules regarding advertising.

Naturally, where sister sites get involved in cross marketing, affiliates are going to raise objections about losing out because they are being bypassed, and have no real means to check whether or not "their" players originally introduced to the group are being tagged to the original referrer when they respond directly to a cross marketing invitation. This has become a particular concern after some programmes were caught deliberately trying to shift players an affiliate brought in from the initial site to a sister site as a means to cut the affiliate off from receiving the ongoing revenue share.

Infamously, Grand Prive got caught red handed when they directly emailed their players with an offer for a new casino Villa Fortuna, and then got all hot under the collar when someone posted about this new casino and the email they had received on the forum. The member was asked to remove their post because it was a "secret" that this new casino was being opened, but it was too late, the cat was out of the bag and affiliates witnessed the start of the process whereby they were about to get royally screwed by Grand Prive. Affiliates were also being lied to as they were told that the original 5 Grand Prive casinos were to be closed, which was a cover story to explain away a sudden fall in revnue share income from players they had referred. In fact, these casinos were not being closed, affiliates were merely being detagged on the sly. In the end, Grand Prive announced that they were simply closing down the affiliate program, and they would no longer get paid as promised for any future activity from the players they had brought.

The damage this did to the integrity of the industry is still being felt, and every time something happens that appears to be designed to disconnect players from their referring affiliate, you can expect affiliates to start asking questions, often with the view that the programme needs to prove they are innocent, rather than having to be caught red handed by affiliates scouring their data.

UK self exclusion rules are a mess, but any casino operator that uses a complex relationship structure is leaving itself open to breaking UK SE regulations, and in particular open to the SE scammers who are taking advantage of this mess by being smarter operators than the casino, and then using the SE regulations in a "cherry picking" manner by exercising their legal right to a refund of deposits when they lose due to being able to demonstrate they have self excluded at a "sister site", whereas operators with a complex sister site structure are prone to not cross checking for self exclusion and thus ending up paying such scammers when they win, who of course then keep quiet about their SE. The underlying "tool" the scammers are relying on is that by the regulations a casino that takes bets from a self excluded player from another sister site must void all the bets and return the players' funds. Having V&J and Cassava as sister sites effectively means that if a player self excludes from V&J, they should also be self excluded from all related sites, including the vast empire of 888 sites. Given how badly 888 operate their cross referencing, often only picking things up when a player wins, the SE scammers could have a field day by using SE at V&J, and then playing at the 888 sites, taking no bonuses (which is the main reason 888 sites even bother to run a sister site audit on a new player's withdrawal), withdrawing wins, leaving it a bit, and then claiming that they had SE'd from V&J in order to force the other 888 sites to return their deposits under UK regulations. Strictly speaking, the winnings from the other 888 sites should also be returned, but the money is already with the scammers, leaving 888 having to take them to court to recover the incorrectly paid winnings.

This mess will continue, along with the scammers, until the UKGC bring in the central SE database regulation, giving operators a single database on which to record SE requests, and also check their new players against for SE elsewhere in the UK regulated industry. This should also have the benefit of shutting down the SE scammers.


The CMA are now investigating the industry, at the request of the UKGC, as it is believed that violations of UK law are widespread. This is probably because the UK facing operators are still relying heavily on what they have always regarded as "standard industry practice", but this is the first time they have been licenced by a country that actually lets it's own citizens play, hence the clash between the industry and one country's domestic laws.

Whilst many UK facing operators hold primary licences in Malta and Gibraltar, the difference is that the Malta licence forbids citizens of Malta to be accepted as players, and it's similar with Gibraltar.

Operators need to keep a close eye on how the CMA investigation develops, and should also be looking at the ASA rulings being made against complaints made about specific marketing shots from online gambling companies. Leaning from mistakes made by the competition, rather than learning from your own clashes with the ASA, is a wise strategy to follow.

There is also likely to be an increase in UK players using the courts to resolve issues, particularly where SE is involved, as it has emerged that the UKGC is so overwhelmed that it has resorted to telling players "take it to court", and of course the ADR system is not permitted to mediate on SE cases, these must be referred to the UKGC.
 

SlotGrinder

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2016
Location
England
Hi Spintee,

When it comes to casino, it is known that customer likes options when it`s time to play, as part of that customer wish, VJ at time can offer an alternative to its customers who have lost interest after a certain time. That process is transparent to customer receiving selected for the offer, it is presented by VJ and made only to with its sister brand according to customer wish to receive such newsletter and under strict rule of confidentiality.

Best regards,
Rupert
Vera&John

I don't think players like options really . If a casino offered quick , reliable cashouts and unlimited deposit bonuses with reasonable WR plus a good selection of games then I would play on there all the time . Why risk a new site ? The reason players try new sites or just split their play between casinos is usually just for the SUB and promos or perhaps if a site has certain games like Novomatics etc . I guess other things like casino races are an incentive to play on a certain site also . But , to me it's a hassle to sign up to a new site and go through the whole process of verifying my account and checking T&C's and hoping I get paid if I win etc . It's just necessary because casinos don't offer enough incentive to continue playing on their site once you are already joined up
 

Elgoog

Experienced Member
webmeister
Joined
May 13, 2006
Location
Europe
Hi Spintee,

When it comes to casino, it is known that customer likes options when it`s time to play, as part of that customer wish, VJ at time can offer an alternative to its customers who have lost interest after a certain time. That process is transparent to customer receiving selected for the offer, it is presented by VJ and made only to with its sister brand according to customer wish to receive such newsletter and under strict rule of confidentiality.

Best regards,
Rupert
Vera&John

Hi Rupert,

Do you also add the affiliate tags in such emails?
 

spintee

Ueber Meister
webby
mm2
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Location
Northants
Hi Rupert,

Do you also add the affiliate tags in such emails?

Very rare if they do, I do know that the boss here stamps down on this hard and its one of the rules for accredited sites, Pass on the affiliate credit,

But due to that they do not promote SC they can get away with it,
I used t promote 888/cassava sites and this shit happens all the time, The original affiliate gets no credit, So if somebody new to bingo or slots and found your site and signed up, than they wil get constant emails from cassava about sister sites, Giving nothing back to affiliates

Bang out of order,
 

Biti

Full Member
webmeister
Joined
Jul 24, 2015
Location
Panama-City
Hi Spintee,

When it comes to casino, it is known that customer likes options when it`s time to play, as part of that customer wish, VJ at time can offer an alternative to its customers who have lost interest after a certain time. That process is transparent to customer receiving selected for the offer, it is presented by VJ and made only to with its sister brand according to customer wish to receive such newsletter and under strict rule of confidentiality.

Best regards,
Rupert
Vera&John

Bla, bla, bla. Is it with or without affiliate tag?
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
I don't think players like options really . If a casino offered quick , reliable cashouts and unlimited deposit bonuses with reasonable WR plus a good selection of games then I would play on there all the time . Why risk a new site ? The reason players try new sites or just split their play between casinos is usually just for the SUB and promos or perhaps if a site has certain games like Novomatics etc . I guess other things like casino races are an incentive to play on a certain site also . But , to me it's a hassle to sign up to a new site and go through the whole process of verifying my account and checking T&C's and hoping I get paid if I win etc . It's just necessary because casinos don't offer enough incentive to continue playing on their site once you are already joined up

Perhaps this is the process that needs to be upgraded in order to attract players to your nice new casino, rather than a saturation spamming of massive boni and other sign up perks in order to generate interest, only to get hammered by the advantage players who are sufficiently motivated to go through all that verification hassle, whereas it's a big hurdle for regular players who are reasonably happy with things at their current site, where they have already passed the biggest hurdle, passing verification and getting paid when they withdraw.

There isn't really that much variation in choice, it seems most sites have the same set of excluded games, the same levels of WR, and the same pitfalls for the unwary.

When every single site you find has, say, DOA listed as an excluded game, it can feel like there is no real competition, just "window dressing" to make things appear different and innovative.
 

sjikkerdennis

Dormant account
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Location
Netherlands
Hi Spintee,

When it comes to casino, it is known that customer likes options when it`s time to play, as part of that customer wish, VJ at time can offer an alternative to its customers who have lost interest after a certain time. That process is transparent to customer receiving selected for the offer, it is presented by VJ and made only to with its sister brand according to customer wish to receive such newsletter and under strict rule of confidentiality.

Best regards,
Rupert
Vera&John

I think it's a shame for VJ to do these kind of marketing. Specially when affiliates are involved. Let's say they do add the affiliate code (wich I don't think). How are they goiing to measure it and get the data correctly into their system, because the affiliate doesn't have an account at the other brand. This is much more easy for brands like 888 (if they do it) because it's under the umbrella of the same company and aff. system.
 

Vera&John

Official Rep for VeraJohn Casino
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Location
Malta
Dear Spintee,

In answer to the issues raised in the thread we would like to clarify the following:

· The email in question was sent by Slot Crazy, to dormant Slot Crazy members with open accounts who are subscribed to our promotional newsletter. Thank you for your feedback; we will endeavour to make communications clearer in future.

· Slot Crazy and Vera&John do not email players who are self-excluded. Nor do any of the other brands that are part of the group. The UKGC further understand the technical complexity involved and while a cross platform/ cross company self-exclusion database is being worked on, this is not a current requirement. Some players have tried to abuse this but have been unsuccessful given our technology and monitoring capabilities.

· Vera&John does not cross sell to affiliated players but if you are an affiliate and are concerned, please do reach out to your affiliate manager.

Best regards
Rupert
Vera&John

Cheers rainmaker, I missed the other thread, By the looks of it not many has responded to the other one, Only you and Dun,

This is the first I have came a cross a connection, I am sure that the rules for accreditation state that affiliates must get credit, I know its not VJ but if there the same company,


Also I wonder how many of the affiliates are going to get stiffed by this move? I bet the original affiliate for for slotcrazy or costagames are not going to see a dime
 

spintee

Ueber Meister
webby
mm2
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Location
Northants
Thank you,

I can understand the technical complexity which is involved with cross brands, either with the self exclusion, Affiliate issues and even promo advertising,

But I can assure you my account at slotcrazy & V&J have not been dormant, I have not deposit at V&J for a while but I regularly log in, And with slot crazy I normally have an odd deposit now and than, Due to the system with the SC site its difficult to get any previous statements up,

But the problem is, In your own words, given our technology and monitoring capabilities So surely you could of seen I am a member at both ? Or do the capabilities Only count wen necessary? Not trying to be rude but trying to find out why it happens if you have all this in place?

1. Acounts have not been dormant,
2. what technology and monitoring capabilities Surley that system would of picked me up, I use the same name, Addressee, Number and usually the same user name

In all fairness it was not exactly spam, As long as the original affiliate was getting paid, I do get a good few of SC but that boils down to the network there running on,

I appreciate your time and I guess alot will think the same,

v.PNG


Dear Spintee,

In answer to the issues raised in the thread we would like to clarify the following:

· The email in question was sent by Slot Crazy, to dormant Slot Crazy members with open accounts who are subscribed to our promotional newsletter. Thank you for your feedback; we will endeavour to make communications clearer in future.

· Slot Crazy and Vera&John do not email players who are self-excluded. Nor do any of the other brands that are part of the group. The UKGC further understand the technical complexity involved and while a cross platform/ cross company self-exclusion database is being worked on, this is not a current requirement. Some players have tried to abuse this but have been unsuccessful given our technology and monitoring capabilities.

· Vera&John does not cross sell to affiliated players but if you are an affiliate and are concerned, please do reach out to your affiliate manager.

Best regards
Rupert
Vera&John
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Dear Spintee,

In answer to the issues raised in the thread we would like to clarify the following:

· The email in question was sent by Slot Crazy, to dormant Slot Crazy members with open accounts who are subscribed to our promotional newsletter. Thank you for your feedback; we will endeavour to make communications clearer in future.

· Slot Crazy and Vera&John do not email players who are self-excluded. Nor do any of the other brands that are part of the group. The UKGC further understand the technical complexity involved and while a cross platform/ cross company self-exclusion database is being worked on, this is not a current requirement. Some players have tried to abuse this but have been unsuccessful given our technology and monitoring capabilities.

· Vera&John does not cross sell to affiliated players but if you are an affiliate and are concerned, please do reach out to your affiliate manager.

Best regards
Rupert
Vera&John

So have a good many casinos, only "discovering" that a player as self excluded only when they make a withdrawal that puts them into profit. Now, if they can "suddenly discover" that a player who has just gone into profit with the latest of a string of withdrawals under full KYC there is nothing wrong with their technical capabilities to detect such cross platform self exclusion. It's more a case of choosing not to make the checks so long as the casino is still winning from that player.

If the technical limitations were real, the SE would be undetectable regardless of whether or not the player was in profit.

Just because some players are abusing the current system, it does not mean that it's right for casinos to also abuse the current system in order to screw other players in order to replace the losses caused by the former group of players.

This is no different to saying it's OK for players to defraud casinos who themselves don't operate within the law, and then you have a righteously driven "arms race" on your hands. If anything, this may already be the case due to the largely rogue beginnings of this industry that has lead to some people to view getting one over on online casinos in general as a "righteous fight back for the consumer", which can make the unacceptable crime of fraud seem socially acceptable in some cases. It is much easier to get away with criminality that is largely regarded as being "for the good of ordinary people", such as getting one over on banks and big multinational conglomerates, often referred to as "a victimless crime".
 

spintee

Ueber Meister
webby
mm2
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Location
Northants
Its not bloody hard mate,

given our technology and monitoring capabilities, what capabilities they could not even reconise me using the same address and number, or is it when it suits them?

· The email in question was sent by Slot Crazy, to dormant Slot Crazy members with open accounts who are subscribed to our promotional newsletter

No as I am not dormant, I regularly depo at slot crazy and log into V&J even low its been a few months depo a V&J

When I subscribe which is normally mandatory across sites I do not expect a complete different outfit to message me, when infact I am a mnber of both parties and none of them are dormant,

I do not sign up to macdonalds than to get a email from Wendy saying have I eat at mcdonalds yet,

To me this makes no sences, I cannot explain it well but I think most of you get the drift

So have a good many casinos, only "discovering" that a player as self excluded only when they make a withdrawal that puts them into profit. Now, if they can "suddenly discover" that a player who has just gone into profit with the latest of a string of withdrawals under full KYC there is nothing wrong with their technical capabilities to detect such cross platform self exclusion. It's more a case of choosing not to make the checks so long as the casino is still winning from that player.

If the technical limitations were real, the SE would be undetectable regardless of whether or not the player was in profit.

Just because some players are abusing the current system, it does not mean that it's right for casinos to also abuse the current system in order to screw other players in order to replace the losses caused by the former group of players.

This is no different to saying it's OK for players to defraud casinos who themselves don't operate within the law, and then you have a righteously driven "arms race" on your hands. If anything, this may already be the case due to the largely rogue beginnings of this industry that has lead to some people to view getting one over on online casinos in general as a "righteous fight back for the consumer", which can make the unacceptable crime of fraud seem socially acceptable in some cases. It is much easier to get away with criminality that is largely regarded as being "for the good of ordinary people", such as getting one over on banks and big multinational conglomerates, often referred to as "a victimless crime".
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Its not bloody hard mate,

given our technology and monitoring capabilities, what capabilities they could not even reconise me using the same address and number, or is it when it suits them?

· The email in question was sent by Slot Crazy, to dormant Slot Crazy members with open accounts who are subscribed to our promotional newsletter

No as I am not dormant, I regularly depo at slot crazy and log into V&J even low its been a few months depo a V&J

When I subscribe which is normally mandatory across sites I do not expect a complete different outfit to message me, when infact I am a mnber of both parties and none of them are dormant,

I do not sign up to macdonalds than to get a email from Wendy saying have I eat at mcdonalds yet,

To me this makes no sences, I cannot explain it well but I think most of you get the drift

It actually does make sense in a way, it reveals that some casinos are not as "completely independent" as they claim to be. Clearly, these two are not "completely different", they are the same group, so if they have the technology to cross promote to a given player depending upon their activities at the two sites, they surely have the technology to just as accurately track self exclusion in the same manner. A dormant account at one site triggers a promotional offer for the other, so a self exclusion at one site should lead to a self exclusion at the other with immediate effect, not after the player has deposited and withdrawn a few times and then gone into profit.
 
Top