Cheating at BetFred

[lots0]

The Betfred thing will depend a lot on what Gibraltar's findings are, IMO.

As far as casinomeister... Not just his emulating the bad old days of CAP by calling people names, Bryan also has a history of covering for 'rogue' brands... at the same time he is proclaiming himself a "player advocate".

I know of one person that got called names and banned at CM for bringing attention to an online casino that claimed to have a secret license...

[mojo]

.

Since we work with numerous brands that partner with Casinomeister, I state definitively that he works on pure rev-share deals on the low end of the industry average.

No need for this info as it's no one's business. It's completley irrelevant and means nothing except to IA.

Meanwhile bumping this thread lol. It's been some weeks with no word yet?

[Caruso]

.Since we work with numerous brands that partner with Casinomeister, I state definitively that he works on pure rev-share deals on the low end of the industry average.

Bailey has time after time claimed he's "not an affiliate" because he works on a media buy basis. So was that a lie, or did he get shifted to mainly rev share recently? Either way, it was always BS. If you get income from player losses at casinos, you're an affiliate. I think Bailey's the only affiliate who's ever fervently denied being an affiliate.

However, I lump all kinds of affy deals together in essence, so if I call rev share "advertising", it's just my own particular vocabulary, and I think it's entirely justifiable as such. But I'll rephrase the statement in the event that he does now do rev shares as well as media buys:

"In the first place, can we be clear that Bailey's conference marketing sessions, his pitches to operators to get them on his site and paying the big advertising rates or revenue share deals, are just that."

Meanwhile bumping this thread lol. It's been some weeks with no word yet?

I did get two replies from the GRA, courteous if acidic in parts. Here are some comments:

Thank you for your observations on the content of our regulations. You should be aware that the whole of the Gambling Act and the totality of our regulatory codes are taken into account in these matters, as well as the rules of natural justice, ‘due process’, privacy and numerous other relevant laws.

As you appear to be aware, this matter is under investigation by our office and information has been provided to us by various parties.

If our conclusions are to have any meaning or value, proper consideration and proper representation/explanation of all relevant material has to be provided for. We are still processing the information we have obtained and will use appropriate means to communicate our conclusions when they are reached.

And later, after I'd asked why they take such a hands-off approach in terms of having licensees report to them rather than actively monitoring themselves:

Your assumptions about “adaptive” software and ongoing monitoring are somewhat misplaced, and these are the matters only a proper investigation can define. It is not feasible for regulators in any sphere to engage in the day to day management and testing of operators’ systems, to do so transfers responsibility for integrity away from the operator and onto ourselves; the operators must have systemic auditing and reporting on top of independent software testing by authorised test houses.

As per my previous email, there are numerous Acts, Codes and ‘regulations’ which shape public authorities’ investigations, far more than you have referred to. We will endeavour to conclude our enquiries and make a statement as soon as possible (and other demands on our time allow).

My assumptions were misplaced, and there were various other legal things that I was unaware of. Neither were my misplaced assumptions corrected, nor were the additional regulations explained, or where for that matter I could find them.

A cynical interpretation would be "You're wrong, but we're not saying why (because you're not wrong)". The commissioner did deign to reply twice, which was more than I was expecting.

They can't drag this out forever. If in six months they're still silent, we can write the GRA off (or the GCC as they're now known, he also told me off for calling them "GRA" ) as as worthless as Malta or Alderney, and BetFred as proven cheats. Though the latter has already been demonstrated, irrespective of my "misplaced assumptions".

[mojo]

If in six months they're still silent, we can write the GRA off (or the GCC as they're now known,

I hope it doesn't come to that. I do believe they are trying. It is encouraging to get a response and acknowledgement. Nice job.

[Caruso]

Bryan Bailey has put cheating BetFred back on his "recommended" list. As he approaches 60 and presumed retirement in a few years, has he given up on the pretence?

[Louis - Income Access]

Bryan has worked tirelessly to understand the incident from all angles and evaluate Betfred's response to the incident and has decided that he is confident vouching for them as a reputable establishment where punters can wager. We understand that some affiliates do not feel that the same as Bryan and we apologize if you feel your concerns were not sufficiently addressed. The organization and the affiliate team invested an immense amount of time in responding to inquiries both publicly and privately and many affiliates who were initially skeptical ultimately expressed satisfaction. Betfred reluctantly accept that they can not please everyone and hope that in the end, affiliates who have worked closely with Betfred will continue to do so, due to Betfred's ongoing commitment to provide the best possible value to affiliates and players.

[Caruso]

Hm.

Bryan has worked tirelessly to understand the incident from all angles and evaluate Betfred's response to the incident and has decided that he is confident vouching for them as a reputable establishment where punters can wager.

It seems to many people that Bryan has worked tirelessly to cover this up.


As to BetFred: they ran a cheating game. The both ran it full stop, and also ran it for fully four years, and fully in the knowledge of the error - I have proof of this.

You reckon this qualifies as a "reputable establishment"? I'll put you in a minority of two - with Bailey - on that one.

we apologize if you feel your concerns were not sufficiently addressed.

"Not sufficiently"? Try "not at all". But why are you apologising? It's about BetFred, not yourself.

The organization and the affiliate team invested an immense amount of time in responding to inquiries both publicly and privately and many affiliates who were initially skeptical ultimately expressed satisfaction.

Well, that's very interesting. Can you explain what they were satisfied with? Nothing has changed. Nothing has been shown to have been addressed. What exactly were the affiliates who were happy actually happy about?

Betfred reluctantly accept that they can not please everyone.

Actually, they can't please anyone at this point. They ran a cheating game, fully in the knowledge of running it, for at least four years. Much less not pleasing everyone, I remain interested to know how it was that people who are "satisfied" have reached that happy state of mind at all since, again, nothing has changed.

How has BetFred pleased people? What is the substance?

[FictionNet]

Unless I've completely missed a massively relevant press release, or industry report, this has been shelved, buried, forgotten about, whatever you want to call it. Betfred (and others, including Stan James, let's not forget) ran rigged games and after much debate, it went off to the regulatory body, who have done sweet FA about it. And now it's 'ok'? Has something changed? WTF have I missed that now makes this okay?

[-Shay-]

Bryan has worked tirelessly to understand the incident from all angles and evaluate Betfred's response to the incident and has decided that he is confident vouching for them as a reputable establishment where punters can wager. We understand that some affiliates do not feel that the same as Bryan and we apologize if you feel your concerns were not sufficiently addressed. The organization and the affiliate team invested an immense amount of time in responding to inquiries both publicly and privately and many affiliates who were initially skeptical ultimately expressed satisfaction. Betfred reluctantly accept that they can not please everyone and hope that in the end, affiliates who have worked closely with Betfred will continue to do so, due to Betfred's ongoing commitment to provide the best possible value to affiliates and players.

Read - We back our partners 100% no matter what.

[lots0]

It seems to many people that Bryan has worked tirelessly to cover this up.

Ya, so obvious now he hardly bothers to hide his involvement in the cover-ups.
This seems to be Bryan's forte now, helping to hide/bury/discredit reports that show his CLIENTS in a bad light...

I have lost count of how many of these type of cover-ups that Bryan has helped with in the last couple of years.

Oh well... after all this is a dirty business with a LOT of criminals peeking out of the shadows... What do you expect? A real player advocate.... lol... No one is that naive.... or are they...

[Roulette Zeitung]

Hello,

cheating was some years ago an own business: http://web.archive.org/web/200406220...ur-casino.com/

ADMIN FEATURES

DEMO VERSIONS OF THE GAMES
(DEMO VERSIONS ARE SET TO WIN QUITE MORE)
SIMPLE REGISTRATION
INSTANT DEPOSIT
VERY FAST GAME LOADING!
(COMPILED FLASH GAME SIZE ~ 150K)
HISTORY OF THE GAMES PLAYED
INSTANT WITHDRAWAL
(CAN BE ENABLED/DISABLED VIA ADMIN PANEL)
ENHANCED SECURITY
(THE ADMIN PANEL CAN BE STORED ON LOCAL OR REMOTE SERVER)
ADD/REMOVE FUNDS
ONE CLICK MANUAL WITHDRAWALS
USERS MANAGEMENT
NEWSLETTER AND MAILING MANAGEMENT
STATS (GLOBAL, PER GAME)
GAMES AND TRANSACTIONS LOGS
PER GAME SETTINGS
SET CASINO PAYOUT/PROFIT

Leopold

[lots0]

Bryan has worked tirelessly to understand the incident from all angles and evaluate Betfred's response to the incident and has decided that he is confident vouching for them as a reputable establishment where punters can wager. We understand that some affiliates do not feel that the same as Bryan and we apologize if you feel your concerns were not sufficiently addressed. The organization and the affiliate team invested an immense amount of time in responding to inquiries both publicly and privately and many affiliates who were initially skeptical ultimately expressed satisfaction. Betfred reluctantly accept that they can not please everyone and hope that in the end, affiliates who have worked closely with Betfred will continue to do so, due to Betfred's ongoing commitment to provide the best possible value to affiliates and players.

Too bad we don't have a Thumbs Down option on this Board... I would use it for this post.

The only thing Bailey worked hard at was burying this issue as fast as he could...
and it seems that IA has the same goal as Bailey... Gee that is a surprise....... both are on Betfreds payroll...

[alin04]

I like the truth and if you are a thief and you are called Betfred it s time the world to know.
http://www.rosudirect.com/2013/04/be...-ca-ploua.html use the translate button on the right.

[ocreditor]

on/off
yes/no
yo/yo
...
i don't visit the forum for a weekend and the picture turns on its head. it's getting too much! arrgghh!

[Caruso]

I'd like to press on this a bit.

The organization and the affiliate team invested an immense amount of time in responding to inquiries both publicly and privately and many affiliates who were initially skeptical ultimately expressed satisfaction.

So, we have affiliates who were dissatisfied who changed to being satisfied. Something must have changed in their minds. I mean, if I want my tea with sugar, and inadvertently leave it out, I am dissatisfied. I put the sugar in. Now I'm satisfied. The change is: I added the sugar.

What was it that changed to make dissatisfied affiliates satisfied? If there was something, please clarify. If this was random marketing waffle, it doesn't look good for BetFred - you don't fix dishonesty with more dishonesty. I'll keep an open mind until it's definitively apparent one way or the other.

[Lucky Bob]

Thanks for the informative thread.

I just removed Betfred from two of my sites. Considering everything I've been reading here and elsewhere, I don't want to send my visitors there anymore.

Ah! I feel better now.

Maybe things will turn around and I'll put them back up one day?


Cheers,

[Caruso]

So, in the absence of a clarification, I think we can take this...

and many affiliates who were initially skeptical ultimately expressed satisfaction.

...as marketing - gotta say it - claptrap. Pity, though expected.

I've given Gibraltar another nudge.

[slotplayer]

Bryan has worked tirelessly to understand the incident from all angles

how so?

[-Shay-]

Bryan has worked tirelessly to understand the incident from all angles and evaluate Betfred's response to the incident and has decided that he is confident vouching for them as a reputable establishment where punters can wager. We understand that some affiliates do not feel that the same as Bryan and we apologize if you feel your concerns were not sufficiently addressed. The organization and the affiliate team invested an immense amount of time in responding to inquiries both publicly and privately and many affiliates who were initially skeptical ultimately expressed satisfaction. Betfred reluctantly accept that they can not please everyone and hope that in the end, affiliates who have worked closely with Betfred will continue to do so, due to Betfred's ongoing commitment to provide the best possible value to affiliates and players.

Louis,

I KNOW that I am interested in further elaboration of this blurb of yours and it seems that many others are as well.

Can you elaborate on more of the specifics to support your claims?

[Louis - Income Access]

Hi All,

It's not possible for us to go into details about conversations that were had with individual affiliates. Those who took the time to speak to Betfred directly know who they are and what was discussed. Personally, I spoke with numerous affiliates at LAC simply to get an understanding of what their concerns were and how they felt Betfred had done at addressing them. In the situation where affiliates were constructive in their requests for more info or further action, this was forwarded to Betfred and their team did the best they could to respond.

Income Access is not authorized or qualified to evaluate fault or involvement of any operators or third party providers in this incident, so all we can do is speak to affiliates and observe the information released and attempt to understand. Many affiliates who we respect and have shown themselves to be consistent industry leaders made comments to me that lead me to believe that Betfred had handled the situation well, and that they felt confident continuing to promote Betfred. This is the basis for my above comments.

Of course we make no effort to hide that Betfred is a client of ours, and as such we represent them here on the forum and elsewhere. With that being said, Income Access recognize that promoting transparency, honesty and cooperation between affiliates and operators is an essential part of our role as an intermediary. If affiliates have constructive suggestions for how Betfred can improve, or have specific requests for information or response to inquiries (baring requests for confidential information), we will be happy to pass this to Betfred and work to get a response in a timely manner.

We in no way wish to "sweep this matter under the rug", yet we also need to respect the fact that resources are limited to respond, as all response from Betfred needs to be vetted. We hope that those affiliates who are willing constructively seek a resolution will get in touch with their specific requests and have patient as Betfred works to respond.