Would Recommend 32red Casino to Anyone

[punter1]

After reading lots of bad stories on message boards, I only play crypto casinos as they are the only casinos i trust to pay me if i win. I have been reading lots of good posts about got2bet.com & 32red lately so i decided to give them a go. I signed up from got2bet.com & made 500 deposit to get the match bonus. WOW i played & met the WR, games are fair, software is great & best of all turned it into 1220 & was paid in 1 day. This is a casino i would recommend to anyone. :notworthy

 

[Freudian]

After reading lots of bad stories on message boards, I only play crypto casinos as they are the only casinos i trust to pay me if i win. I have been reading lots of good posts about got2bet.com & 32red lately so i decided to give them a go. I signed up from got2bet.com & made 500 deposit to get the match bonus. WOW i played & met the WR, games are fair, software is great & best of all turned it into 1220 & was paid in 1 day. This is a casino i would recommend to anyone. :notworthy

32red are a very classy casino. Shame that US players can't play there. I trust them with my deposit any day.

 

[Yankee]

32red are a very classy casino. Shame that US players can't play there. I trust them with my deposit any day.

Is that true? I didn't realize that. Is this for legal reasons or why?

 

[Ed Ware]

Hello All

Thank you from everyone at 32Red to Punter1 and Freudian. You will both be pleased to know that our support staff are always thrilled to hear that our players are very happy with our service. It always makes me extremely proud to see our members so pleased to recommend 32Red to other people. Despite being recognized by CasinoMeister as the Number 1 Online Casino this year, I can assure you that we are as committed as ever to providing an unmatched level of service to our players. Thank you for your feedback.

In response to your question Yankee, it is indeed for legal reasons that we currently do not accept US players at the Casino. Although our licensing jurisdiction does allow Internet Casino wagers to be accepted by it's licensees, we took the decision internally a number of months back to play very safe and exclude the US market for the moment.

This decision was made having considered a number of issues, not least of which was the lack of progress being made in the legal arena in the US in respect of the online gaming industry. I know we have some fans in the United States and, as we have stated in the past, we are constantly reviewing our position on this.

Best wishes

Ed Ware
32Red

 

[bethug]

32 red i like your casinos, even thru i could come up, I dont see why u stressing over the usa, it ok to look at porn , but it wrong to gamble online

 

[daywalker]

A big thumbds up to 32 from me too. I managed to turn this months 32 match bonus into a 100 bonus, It was alot higher at one stage but no complaints here, they pay out faster than any casino I've known

 

[Ed Ware]

Thanks again Guys

Bethug - I know where you are coming from and we appreciate your point of view entirely. Perhaps one day we'll be able to welcome back US players.

Daywalker - nice one and keep it up!

Regards

Ed Ware
32Red

 

[largeeyes]

I'm so tired of people rubbing it in us yanks faces

 

[Macgyver]

Ed,

If you ever do let in US players, I know I'm not the only one who'd be happy to deposit money into your coffers.

I always see a lot of good bonus offers coming from your casino, but always have to remind myself of your restricted countries. My money's good, I promise!

Give us Yanks a chance!

 

[Ed Ware]

Hi Macgyver

Believe me this is a hot topic internally at the moment. As a Casino it is frustrating for us to literally turn away business, but as I have said in the past here, the circumstances have made things hard for a Company like us.

There are some developments that may enable us to remove the USA from our restricted territories list, but we are still reviewing things. I will keep this Board up to speed if there is anything to report.

If I may, I also would like to take this opportunity to assure largeeyes that this issue is about proceeding with care and attention in respect of quite complex and sensitive legal matters. I am sure we all agree that it would make far more sense, from all perspectives, if progress similar to that being made in the UK on the legislative front were being made in the United States.

Best wishes and thanks again for the feedback.

Ed Ware
32Red

 

[largeeyes]

Hi Macgyver

Believe me this is a hot topic internally at the moment. As a Casino it is frustrating for us to literally turn away business, but as I have said in the past here, the circumstances have made things hard for a Company like us.

There are some developments that may enable us to remove the USA from our restricted territories list, but we are still reviewing things. I will keep this Board up to speed if there is anything to report.

If I may, I also would like to take this opportunity to assure largeeyes that this issue is about proceeding with care and attention in respect of quite complex and sensitive legal matters. I am sure we all agree that it would make far more sense, from all perspectives, if progress similar to that being made in the UK on the legislative front were being made in the United States.

Best wishes and thanks again for the feedback.

Ed Ware
32Red

Well, if we as citizens of this fine country can help those things, let us know. I would think the industry has lobbyists. Only problem is, online gambling could take away from each representatives local casinos, and their lobbyists I am sure pay a bit more into the reelection campaign. I think the recent incident with Paradise Poker and Discovery Channel show how far we still have to go. The casinos that seem to ban US players are those that already have interests of some sort or another in the US that they do not wish to jeopardize.

 

[sw2003]

Hi Macgyver

Believe me this is a hot topic internally at the moment. As a Casino it is frustrating for us to literally turn away business, but as I have said in the past here, the circumstances have made things hard for a Company like us.

There are some developments that may enable us to remove the USA from our restricted territories list, but we are still reviewing things. I will keep this Board up to speed if there is anything to report.

If I may, I also would like to take this opportunity to assure largeeyes that this issue is about proceeding with care and attention in respect of quite complex and sensitive legal matters. I am sure we all agree that it would make far more sense, from all perspectives, if progress similar to that being made in the UK on the legislative front were being made in the United States.

Best wishes and thanks again for the feedback.

Ed Ware
32Red

I have yet to see any online casinos getting into legal troubles just by opening doors to US players so aren't you guys a bit too cautious??

 

[spearmaster]

Believe me - no one is more disappointed that 32Red does not accept US players than the Meister and I.

However - I am certain Ed would love to accept US players once again at the earliest opportunity - we had discussed this in London in January and I think that if 32Red could have continued to accept US players, they most certainly would have.

I hope that Ed is right when he says developments may occur which will allow 32Red to once again allow US players. In the meantime, though, US players will just have to grit their teeth and wait And for the rest of the world - you can be sure you are playing with probably the best casino in the world (sorry, Carlsberg).

 

[largeeyes]

Does 32red have interests in the US(like casinos/property/real estate)? That seems to be the most common reason for no US members.

 

[Simmo!]

Just out of interest, isnt 32Red Poker in US Dollars? How does this differ from the casino?

I play 32Red. It would definatley be my first port of call if it didn't have the "Reverse Withdrawal" option.

 

[Ed Ware]

Thanks again for the questions and comments.

There are a couple of issues I would like to explain in light of some if the recent posts. I am going to start with the most recent, if that's OK....

Simmo - you are indeed correct, our Poker Room does use US Dollar chips exclusively. However, this is to not say that deposits have to be in US Dollars. As you may well realise, the vast majority of 32Red's Poker Players deposit in Sterling. At the moment Simmo, USD is simply the easiest denomination of poker chip for the entire network, and we are comfortable with that. There may be a time in the future when we can offer tables with various chip currencies. By the way, compliments are due to you on your websites - very informative and well presented.

Largeeyes - I agree, very often it is the ownership of assets in the US that causes prohibition of American players by an operator. We do not have physical interests in the United States but (to us) that isn't entirely relevant. If you like, just because you can do something without being penalised, doesn't mean to say you should! The stance taken by the banking industry along with the lobbying taking place is our concern. As I have said before we are looking closely at this and plan to make a decision in the next couple of weeks on how we treat US domiciles going forward.

Spearmaster - thank you for your extremely kind words, appreciated. You are a Gentleman. One day all Casino Advocates will be made this way (sorry, Seiko).

sw2003 - Agreed. I have not heard of any online casino operations being officially "pulled" by the authorities. Could I leave it that we are keen on blazing the trail with customer-focused initiatives!

Once again, it's been a pleasure to be fielding these questions on the whole subject and it really does highlight something to us: there is a lot of interest in 32Red from the USA! It poses the question of how can we overcome some of the problems and resume serving American players? Food for thought our end.

As ever, all the best

Ed Ware
32Red

 

[caruso]

And the big deal is what?? There's a whole bunch of identical MGs, same games, equally good and nothing like as tight. Jeez, I think I took three 32 monthly freebies, plus a 100 match invite (stress "invite"), before I was kicked out. And I bust on the 100 invitation to add insult to injury.

Funny stuff, this 32 Red hysteria - but then I never was much of a groupie.

 

[spearmaster]

One day all Casino Advocates will be made this way (sorry, Seiko).

LMAO...

Caruso - I wouldn't call it hysteria. The players have voiced their opinions based on their experience with 32Red. The Meister and I have talked quite a bit with Ed and, at least from my perspective, are fully convinced that there are few, if any, casinos which will live up to the reputation of 32Red - fast support, nary a complaint, new games just introduced which are not from the Microgaming suite, etc.

Iny my review of 32Red I stated that casino operators should take a page out of 32Red's operations manual - or better yet, steal the entire book - and I continue to stand by that view.

On top of that - Got2Bet wasn't even an affiliate with them at the time, so there can be no question of bias. We did, however, work out a deal to start promoting them a few months ago with an exclusive bonus that only Casinomeister and Got2Bet can offer. And to be honest, we haven't made one red cent (no pun intended) because the players have been winning.

 

[Simmo!]

Simmo ....compliments are due to you on your websites - very informative and well presented.

Flatterer But thanks...you can link to me if you want

 

[caruso]

Yuh, my point was just that there's nothing that stands them apart. Have to say, I put FL, Trident and VPL way ahead. That's just me, though.

On top of that - Got2Bet wasn't even an affiliate with them at the time, so there can be no question of bias. We did, however, work out a deal to start promoting them a few months ago with an exclusive bonus that only Casinomeister and Got2Bet can offer. And to be honest, we haven't made one red cent (no pun intended) because the players have been winning.

Now I'm confused. As I understood it, Bryan is an "advertiser" as opposed to an affiliate in the traditional sense, ie. casinos pay a fee as opposed to a percentage of players' losses. In fact, I thought you worked this way, too, as it happens. What am I missing here?

 

[spearmaster]

The offer is the same on both sites - however, I am working on a percentage. I don't know what the Meister is working on but a flat monthly advertising fee is definitely possible.

In any case, I certainly don't get paid to say that 32Red is good

 

[largeeyes]

I know paradise poker lost about $3,000,000 when it was seized from Discover Channel, so obviously there are other issues. I don't think the american public quite understands it or there would be more to do about it.

 

[sw2003]

I know paradise poker lost about $3,000,000 when it was seized from Discover Channel, so obviously there are other issues. I don't think the american public quite understands it or there would be more to do about it.

What do you mean by "seized from Discover Channel"? Do you mean Discovery Channel showed them cheating or what? Or Discovery Channel was the operator of this casino???????

 

[Freudian]

What do you mean by "seized from Discover Channel"? Do you mean Discovery Channel showed them cheating or what? Or Discovery Channel was the operator of this casino???????

It was advertising money seized by the government. So it was not Discovery Channel doing anything.

 

[jetset]

Here are the two relevant piecves from Casinomeister News on this issue - the first one gpoes back a couple of months.

Latest development is that a US media company is in the process of challenging the activities of the DoJ in regard to alleged intimidation of law-abiding media companies.

$3.2 MILLION WRITE-OFF?

Paradise Poker drops disqualification case

Two weeks back we carried an Infopowa report on the litigation initiated by Paradise Poker against Discovery Communications in relation to non-performance on a $3.2 million advertising contract that Discovery had to suspend due to Department of Justice actions against the media and confiscation.

Reports now in confirm that the case has been dropped. Tropical Paradise Enterprises, the Costa Rican operator of paradisepoker.com that filed the lawsuit in an attempt to recover $3.25 million last week filed a notice of dismissal without prejudice with the court, thereby dropping its case.

US FEDS CONFISCATE $3.2 MILLION

Advertising money taken by DoJ officials

The US Department of Justice expanded its attack on Internet gambling in April by confiscating $3.2 million in advertising cash paid to Discovery Communications by Tropical Paradise sportsbook for advertising slots, according to a report this week in the New York Times.

The newspaper reported that Federal law enforcement officials routinely seize money they suspect is connected to activities like money laundering, terrorism or drug smuggling and this has apparently been extended to cases involving internet gambling advertising.

The money initially belonged to Tropical Paradise, a Costa Rica-based Internet casino operation, which in October paid Discovery for television spots to advertise an online poker room, ParadisePoker.com.

According to court documents, the government seized the money and told Discovery, which is based in Silver Spring, Md., that it could be party to an illegal activity by broadcasting such advertisements.

Federal prosecutors contend that online gambling sites are illegal, but the offshore casinos fall outside their jurisdiction. So for nearly a year, the government has been trying to curb the sites' activities by investigating and pressuring American companies that provide services to offshore gambling sites on the theory that they are "aiding and abetting" the operations.

Until now, the effort has largely involved seeking information from American companies, including major broadcasters, Web portals and industry consultants. The seizure of money significantly escalates the government's attack.

Matt Richtel, the author of the report says that the move has raised strong criticism from First Amendment experts, media industry executives and people involved with offshore casinos. They assert that the federal government is relying on an untested legal theory in taking action against American companies, and using tactics more typically used against organised crime activities.

"This is not drug money or terrorist money," said Rodney A. Smolla, dean of the University of Richmond School of Law. "The fact it is being treated as such shows a crusader's zeal against offshore gambling."

The possible message being sent, legal experts said, is that any American company that does business with an offshore casino - including software makers and consultants - could be in danger of having proceeds from that business seized.

"This is a strategy of intimidating anybody who is in the chain of commerce," said Lawrence Walters, a lawyer who works with offshore Internet casinos, as well as software companies that do business with the casinos.

The Justice Department declined to comment about this case or other investigations in this area.

Tens of millions of Americans place bets over the Internet, wagering on sporting events and on casino games like virtual blackjack, roulette and poker. But the casinos are outside the United States, typically in Costa Rica and the Caribbean or in Britain, where the operations are fully licensed and legal.

The legality of online betting is a complicated matter of some dispute in the United States. The government asserts that the federal Wire Act prohibits all Internet casinos, but the courts have been divided, legal scholars said.

The individual states also have laws that prohibit any gambling enterprises that they do not formally authorise. Some states, but not all of them, make it illegal for individuals to place a recreational bet; New York, for instance, does not make it illegal to place a bet online.

In June 2003, the Justice Department sent letters to trade groups representing major broadcasters and publishers, telling them their members could be violating the law by displaying advertisements on behalf of offshore casinos. The government said the businesses could be seen as aiding and abetting the activities of the casinos.

Then, Raymond W. Gruender, the United States attorney in the Eastern District of Missouri, convened a grand jury, sending subpoenas to companies asking them to provide a broad range of information about their relationships with offshore casinos. The investigation had a significant impact. Some major broadcasters, including Infinity Broadcasting and Clear Channel Communications, stopped taking gambling ads last fall. Google and Yahoo, the Internet search engines, said in April that they would stop taking such advertisements.

So far, executives at media companies have not voiced public challenges to the government campaign. An executive for one media company, who asked that his firm not be identified so as not to attract further attention from the Department of Justice, said that the government was promising to go easy on broadcasters and Internet sites that cooperate with its inquiry.

The executive said he had heard from people involved in the investigation that the government might begin levying fines or pressing charges against media companies.