- Joined
- Jun 30, 1998
- Location
- Bierland
...and Lock Casino is not?
Recently, my announcement of Rival Casinos (white labels) being placed in the Not Recommended section of the rogue pit has drawn criticism from the affiliate community. I've been accused of having double standards when it comes to determining what casino property deserves to be placed in that section. Let me explain a little bit on how the determination is made.
Lock Casino - as you can read in this thread - had a crisis with a payment processor that vanished with their funds. As they have explained several times, this is being addressed and they are slowly but surely paying their players as reported here and here. During this period, they have been removed from the accredited list where they remain in limbo until this situation is eradicated. Lest we forget, this casino is in full operation with dedicated staff doing whatever they can to get back to normal.
All casinos that are US facing have these risks. And if I remember correctly, I have stated numerous times in the past that US based players ought to find something else to do until the US gets its act together. US players may experience slow payouts from time to time - this should be expected. As a US based player, these are the risks you take.
Is this (Lock Casino issue) fodder for the NR list? No. Is it a reason to be removed from the "Accredited Section"? Unfortunately, yes.
Rival Casino white labels: Rival has at least 35 Rival powered casinos. All but four of these casinos are white labels (Slot 'o Cash, Box24, BetUS, and Black Diamond Casino are not white labels and should not be included with the rest). With white labels, the software provider provides the software, the ecash processing, and the player support. The casino owner/operator provides the funding and the marketing. So in other words, if you have the funds and the marketing know-how to promote a casino, you're in business. Unfortunately it takes more than knowing how to market a casino to run a casino - but that's another story. The problem with Rival is that the white label operators are operating in the red, and they're dropping like flies as discussed here.
iGaming Pro, First Gaming Partner, 23 Partners, and Royal Apollo affiliate programs have all gone out of business, and I am predicting that there are more closures on the horizon. Let's see what happens in the next week or two.
These closures are not stemming from operator level issues; they are generated by the way Rival is set up. There is a domino effect and we haven't seen or heard the last of it.
Is this criteria for the not recommended list? Yes, I feel that players and affiliates should avoid these casinos - and they are listed here.
So comparing the recent Lock Casino issue with what is happening at Rival is like comparing apples with suitcases: you can carry them in one hand, and that is about how far it goes.
Recently, my announcement of Rival Casinos (white labels) being placed in the Not Recommended section of the rogue pit has drawn criticism from the affiliate community. I've been accused of having double standards when it comes to determining what casino property deserves to be placed in that section. Let me explain a little bit on how the determination is made.
Lock Casino - as you can read in this thread - had a crisis with a payment processor that vanished with their funds. As they have explained several times, this is being addressed and they are slowly but surely paying their players as reported here and here. During this period, they have been removed from the accredited list where they remain in limbo until this situation is eradicated. Lest we forget, this casino is in full operation with dedicated staff doing whatever they can to get back to normal.
All casinos that are US facing have these risks. And if I remember correctly, I have stated numerous times in the past that US based players ought to find something else to do until the US gets its act together. US players may experience slow payouts from time to time - this should be expected. As a US based player, these are the risks you take.
Is this (Lock Casino issue) fodder for the NR list? No. Is it a reason to be removed from the "Accredited Section"? Unfortunately, yes.
Rival Casino white labels: Rival has at least 35 Rival powered casinos. All but four of these casinos are white labels (Slot 'o Cash, Box24, BetUS, and Black Diamond Casino are not white labels and should not be included with the rest). With white labels, the software provider provides the software, the ecash processing, and the player support. The casino owner/operator provides the funding and the marketing. So in other words, if you have the funds and the marketing know-how to promote a casino, you're in business. Unfortunately it takes more than knowing how to market a casino to run a casino - but that's another story. The problem with Rival is that the white label operators are operating in the red, and they're dropping like flies as discussed here.
iGaming Pro, First Gaming Partner, 23 Partners, and Royal Apollo affiliate programs have all gone out of business, and I am predicting that there are more closures on the horizon. Let's see what happens in the next week or two.
These closures are not stemming from operator level issues; they are generated by the way Rival is set up. There is a domino effect and we haven't seen or heard the last of it.
Is this criteria for the not recommended list? Yes, I feel that players and affiliates should avoid these casinos - and they are listed here.
So comparing the recent Lock Casino issue with what is happening at Rival is like comparing apples with suitcases: you can carry them in one hand, and that is about how far it goes.
Last edited: