I hear what you are saying here and its a valid point. For example, look at the past issues with Fulltiltpoker and their "ponzy scheme" under their license in Alderney. Since this whole thing broke, as far as we see, majority of the top tier licensing jurisdictions are putting very strict measures in place to avoid this from every happening again. I'm sure most operators see this. Obviously, its a good thing for players and the industry as a whole.
In terms of wintingo players, I would like to clarify that player balances AND player liability (unpaid-winnings), regardless of when the customer receives their winnings i.e. whether its paid in one lump sum or its paid in weekly installments, the entire amount needs to be kept and secured in a completely segregated account and Wintingo management and directors cannot under any circumstances access these funds. This falls under rules and regulations of our Isle of Man license and therefore assures players that no matter what happens to Wintingo as a business, players funds are always protected.
With regards to changing the max bet sizes in order to be more inline with our current weekly withdrawal limit, i'm waiting for conformation from MGS but i don't think its actually possible in the Quickfire environment, its very much standardised across the board across all operators however i put the question forward. Maybe other quickfire operators on CM can comment on this? Apart from this, we admit that we will review the current weekly withdrawal limits and come up with a better alternative.
I have had some pretty big wins, £52K at 32Red and £66K at Lucky Nugget. Unlike the scenario at Wintingo, the "industry standard" as far as my experience has gone has been a weekly limit of £52K at 32Red and £66K at Lucky Nugget.
Were I to "empty a fruitie" at Wintingo, I would get an atypical experience of receiving £4000 per week. The regular "empty" can be between £10K and £25K, the rare exception is higher. I would be repeatedly falling foul of "instalment schemes" were Wintingo to suffer the extraordinarily bad luck of me emptying each of their fruities.
One CAN "deposit in instalments" though, just deposit and bet lower according to the weekly limits. High rolling can be done at casinos without such limits.
Having this limit seen as "standard" at Flash based casinos, and very rare at download casinos, leads to the impression that the Flash casinos are less well funded than the download casinos.
There is also a big problem with this statement:-
In terms of wintingo players, I would like to clarify that player balances AND player liability (unpaid-winnings), regardless of when the customer receives their winnings i.e. whether its paid in one lump sum or its paid in weekly installments, the entire amount needs to be kept and secured in a completely segregated account and Wintingo management and directors cannot under any circumstances access these funds. This falls under rules and regulations of our Isle of Man license and therefore assures players that no matter what happens to Wintingo as a business, players funds are always protected.
The rules for securing players' funds are the same at the LGA (Malta), but this didn't protect Purple Lounge players, nor the players of a number of LGA licensed operations that went bust in the past taking players' money with them. Even now, there is yet another LGA licensed operation (a niche one) that is in the process of going bust and taking players' funds with them. Players can see that the LGA just don't learn from past mistakes.
Even the more highly respected Alderney authorities dropped the ball over Full Tilt, and then demonstrated that it was the operators, not themselves, that really call the shots when they broke their own rules to hold their inquiry in private after pressure from investors, and despite pressure from PLAYERS for a proper public inquiry.
How can we trust 100% that the IOM is unique in that such a disaster would be "impossible" under their regime.
It's unfortunate, but so many other jurisdictions and operators have shafted players over this that the trust is all but gone. This would make players nervous about any long term instalment plan unless the casino gave the player cast iron proof, such as a purchased annuity to cover the payments, or a verifiable independent insurance policy guaranteeing the win will be paid no matter what happens to the operator.
What WILL bring back the trust is for an IOM based operator to go bust, and then players seeing the IOM regulators stepping in and making sure all player balances are paid from the segregated accounts right away.
). So, he will get paid +100K over a period of more than 25 weeks... Man, he must be pissed!
