Is Irish Luck Casino stealing $215,000 of players money...?

[bb1web]

Oh I agree with that. Actually I never listed them but I would be taking them down if I had .

Whether evil intent or incompetence ... the way they tried to smooth things over with the winners just didn't sit well with me and I'll pass on Irish Luck but the other Rivals seem to be innocent of any wrong doing (IMHO).


Rival is so close to putting it all together and then they shoot themselves in the foot.

for the record I know that Superior casino is not owned by Silver Stone.


.........


Jim: you're right. I don't fancy the situation either (in respect to Irish Luck's part in this ... but aside Irish Luck .. I'm sticking with the other Rivals.

[Nandakishore]

The site is down for me.

xxhttp://www.maxrevshare.com/

It is still down.

[casinochipsj]

Just going to add in some comments even though 9 pages is a lot to go through and I haven't been on the forums in a week.

I don't think people should be attacking Rival as if this was their fault or that it's a reflection of Rival going down the tube. If anything Rival is growing and improving and as the # of operators grows it's going to be tougher to manage. I would love to say that you can trust all Rival operators but I think affiliates should be selective of who they choose to promote. I don't think Rival expected an operator to try to pull something like this but I think they are correcting the situation. As a software provider I think Rival do a good job of keeping their own reputation in check and trying to improve. I don't think you'll see any grand prive style events happening with Rival.

Not sure there isn't much I can say or do about this situation but I think it's being sorted out.

John

[mojo]

Welcome back John!

You may want to look over the CM thread that shows more detail and inpact. At this point I think there is a statement coming maybe. I think mostly everyone is just trying to figure this out.

http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...hit-today.html

[casinochipsj]

ouch, 18 pages. That is a lot to read through. I only skimmed the last page and the only thing I saw on there that I think is worth clearing up is the cashin policy and cashins that relate to progressives. I should have an answer from Rival about payouts on progressives and then I'll update the Rockbet site to reflect that as well, probably this will get other Rival operators to update their terms as well.

John

[mojo]

Oh that reminds me. Glad you are back. You may want to read page 17 too.

[GamTrak]

Welcome back John! Thanks for the input.

It's really to bad that Irish Luck/crooks had to put a cloud over other Rival brands.

I get more upset each day that goes by and they remain silent on what the intention of this promotion was.

I don't think people should be attacking Rival as if this was their fault or that it's a reflection of Rival going down the tube. If anything Rival is growing and improving and as the # of operators grows it's going to be tougher to manage. I would love to say that you can trust all Rival operators but I think affiliates should be selective of who they choose to promote. I don't think Rival expected an operator to try to pull something like this but I think they are correcting the situation. As a software provider I think Rival do a good job of keeping their own reputation in check and trying to improve. I don't think you'll see any grand prive style events happening with Rival.

[stgeorge]

Rival should be setting the terms under which their operators promote progressive jackpots. The are the custodians of the money after all.

This includes not allowing stupid promotions involving the progressives.

I hope Rival takes note.

[casinochipsj]

I think Irish Luck's intentions were clear but I won't say much more on the matter as I think it has been dealt with.

I don't think Rival expected an operator to try something like this but I am sure this won't be possible in the future.

Not much more for me to say on this manner so I'm going to sign off on the topic. I don't want to say there are some Rivals you shouldn't promote but if I was an affiliate I can tell you that I wouldn't promote all Microgaming, Playtech or RealTimeGaming brands. Just stick with the ones that are transparent, consistent and quick to respond.

John

[giggles7p]

John, this is for you



Thanks for stopping in, and talking to us. Class act!

[casinochipsj]

just a messenger:

http://rivalpowered.com/whatsNew

[JSM_Jason]

just a messenger:

http://rivalpowered.com/whatsNew

Ahh John, you beat me to it. In any case here's the relevant info for anyone who missed it on the page:

One Million Reels BC Progressive Jackpot

*NICOSIA, CYPRUS* – Rival Gaming, a leading provider of online gaming
solutions, would like to take this opportunity to clarify recent
confusion regarding the /One Million Reels BC/ Progressives Jackpot
reinstatement.

Each Rival licensee owns, and is responsible, for their own brand. This
is the case with the vast majority of online casinos whether they
license their software from Rival or from another company. Rival does
not have a controlling interest in any of its licensed casinos. Bonne
Chance NV is a Rival-licensed gaming service provider offering
processing and other turnkey services to Rival licensees. Rival Gaming
offers 3 Progressive Slot games in its 80+ game portfolio. These
progressive games are Rival-wide and allow a small percentage of each
real-money wager to be contributed to the corresponding jackpot. When
the jackpot is hit, the customer receives the entire amount in their
account. The customer can then withdraw or continue playing. Neither
Rival nor the operator holding the winning customer have a financial
interest in the progressive jackpot in and of itself. Progressive slot
games are meant to be used as a marketing tool to acquire and retain
customers.

On May 10, 2009 a "no-deposit required" promotion, which allowed play on
Rival's One Million BC Progressive slot game, was granted to customers
of a Rival-Powered casino property. A customer from this casino hit the
jackpot. The terms of the promotion allowed for only a small fraction of
the total win amount to be withdrawn by the winning player. The intent
of Rival's Progressive Jackpot system is for all real-money
progressive-game-playing customers, across all Rival-Powered properties,
to have a chance at winning the jackpot. In order to maintain the
integrity of Rival's Progressive Slot games, the amount of the jackpot
won with the limited cashout rules in effect was put back into the
jackpot. The terms of the promotion were followed and the intent of the
Progressive Jackpot system was maintained. Protocols have been updated
to prevent a similar occurrence in the future.

Rival and its partners would like to sincerely thank their customers,
clients, and affiliates for their continued loyalty and support. As of
this writing the One Million BC Progressive Jackpot currently stands
above $230,000 and is ready to be won!

- Jason

[GamTrak]

Thanks for posting the information Jason.

The terms of the promotion allowed for only a small fraction of
the total win amount to be withdrawn by the winning player. The intent
of Rival's Progressive Jackpot system is for all real-money
progressive-game-playing customers, across all Rival-Powered properties,
to have a chance at winning the jackpot.

This explaination is not sitting well with me, but I'm not going to kill the messenger.

[JSM_Jason]

Lol I appreciate that.

I'll take a risk here and give my 2 cents on this situation, and please understand that this is just my own humble opinion so please don't attack me . I've read a lot of complaints about this explanation on other forums (not on here and not to mention any names) but the fact is, IMO Rival did the right thing in this situation regardless of how they explained it.

From what I understand, the money was paid to the player who won and the rest was put back into the pot where it belongs ..not into the hands of a casino (which would completely defeat the purpose of a progressive jackpot). The argument can be made that the whole promotion itself defeated the purpose of a progressive jackpot and I don't know what the intention was behind this promo, but why a player would agree to these terms and claim the promotion is also a bit of a mystery to me. I guess a win is still a win, although if I hit a huge progressive jackpot and was only able to withdraw a fraction of it I'd be pretty disappointed at what could have been.

In any case, I do think it was a potentially very bad situation handled properly.. but again, this is just my opinion. Take it for what it is and you're right, I'm just the messenger so thanks for not crucifying me

J

Thanks for posting the information Jason.




This explaination is not sitting well with me, but I'm not going to kill the messenger.

[GamTrak]

I just realized that I use the word kill instead of shoot! LOL Sorry about that dude.

Although the money was put back, the only way that Rival can be redeemed in my eyes is to pull the Irish Luck license, if that is possible, otherwise IMO it's a cover up and all OP's are tarnished if they 'let this slide'.

If they don't have that option then it's another black-eye for the industry. Good luck with this!

Lol I appreciate that.

I'll take a risk here and give my 2 cents on this situation, and please understand that this is just my own humble opinion so please don't attack me . I've read a lot of complaints about this explanation on other forums (not on here and not to mention any names) but the fact is, IMO Rival did the right thing in this situation regardless of how they explained it.

From what I understand, the money was paid to the player who won and the rest was put back into the pot where it belongs ..not into the hands of a casino (which would completely defeat the purpose of a progressive jackpot). The argument can be made that the whole promotion itself defeated the purpose of a progressive jackpot and I don't know what the intention was behind this promo, but why a player would agree to these terms and claim the promotion is also a bit of a mystery to me. I guess a win is still a win, although if I hit a huge progressive jackpot and was only able to withdraw a fraction of it I'd be pretty disappointed at what could have been.

In any case, I do think it was a potentially very bad situation handled properly.. but again, this is just my opinion. Take it for what it is and you're right, I'm just the messenger so thanks for not crucifying me

J

[JSM_Jason]

Ya, geez ..I did think "kill" was a little strong haha j/k I knew what you meant.

Ya who knows. It's unfortunate though that when one casino does something right it's very rarely publicized yet all Rival casinos get lumped into the same category when one makes a mistake, even thought they're all managed by completely separate groups. Not referring to you at all or even speaking specifically just about this situation but it seems to always be the case on every board I read.

Anyway, that's all I'll say on the matter. No one really even knows the intention of whoever made the promo in the first place. I have my theories as does everyone else of course but in the end, they're just that, theories. What it really comes down to is how it was handled, and IMO I still think that Rival did the right thing here. We can agree to disagree on that tho

Anyways, hope everything is going well otherwise!

Ttys,

J

I just realized that I use the word kill instead of shoot! LOL Sorry about that dude.

Although the money was put back, the only way that Rival can be redeemed in my eyes is to pull the Irish Luck license, if that is possible, otherwise IMO it's a cover up and all OP's are tarnished if they 'let this slide'.

If they don't have that option then it's another black-eye for the industry. Good luck with this!

[bb1web]

Hi all,

Its not very often I disagree with Gams so today is rare.

I understand your POV but I agree with JS that it was handled properly or proper enough anyway.

The reason they might not be quick to pull IL's license is that while most of us will agree this wreaked of greed and malicious behavior ... if you give them benefit of doubt that perhaps this promotion was the result of some over-eager newbie who somehow implemented it past all channels and then having never been red-flagged ... was birthed.

Hardly a reason to yank a license.

While we have all speculated that the casino had sought to pocket the money the truth is that nobody knows what the owners of IL were thinking so as long as they did the right thing in the end then they've got to be given pass.

Just my 2 cents.

The actions of the casino after they had arrived at it being a free chip player are what really

[GamTrak]

LOL I can certainly understand how pulling a license must seem 'over the top' to some, and I respect that, but I can tell you for a fact that if anyone pulled some 'underhanded' stunt with my GamTrak Software Program where I give them the opportunity to make money like I do, therefore putting a cloud of suspision over myself and the other webmasters then I'd pull their license without a second thought.

We all have to be held accountable for our mistakes and I don't like the fact that Irish Luck is let off with no consequences.

Yes Jason, we can agree to disagree as I understand and respect your position.

You too Steve!

Hi all,

Its not very often I disagree with Gams so today is rare.

I understand your POV but I agree with JS that it was handled properly or proper enough anyway.

The reason they might not be quick to pull IL's license is that while most of us will agree this wreaked of greed and malicious behavior ... if you give them benefit of doubt that perhaps this promotion was the result of some over-eager newbie who somehow implemented it past all channels and then having never been red-flagged ... was birthed.

Hardly a reason to yank a license.

While we have all speculated that the casino had sought to pocket the money the truth is that nobody knows what the owners of IL were thinking so as long as they did the right thing in the end then they've got to be given pass.

Just my 2 cents.

The actions of the casino after they had arrived at it being a free chip player are what really

edit: I want to add that Irish Luck has not made a statement on their intentions to this date and if they were innocent I would have expected to see an apology or a statement of their intentions.

[joeyl]

The software supplier does'nt own the casino, nor does the user of the software...

Sounds like Absolute Slots & Cardspike all over again.

So who owns the 2000+ casinos out there?

[pgaming]

The software supplier does'nt own the casino, nor does the user of the software...

Sounds like Absolute Slots & Cardspike all over again.

So who owns the 2000+ casinos out there?

Dam close joeyl never know when that Cyprus connection comes around.

Just a thought?

greek39