| Posted by: SlotsWizard at January 27, 2008, 9:31 pm | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
Quote: Originally Posted by juliack
The bottom line whether to play a casino or not should be if they cannot afford to pay all at once, any player cannot afford to play at their casino. Again, if online casinos want to compete with B&M casinos they better get with the program. Cheers
I agree.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: juliack at January 27, 2008, 8:34 pm | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
The bottom line whether to play a casino or not should be if they cannot afford to pay all at once, any player cannot afford to play at their casino. Again, if online casinos want to compete with B&M casinos they better get with the program. Cheers
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: SlotsWizard at January 27, 2008, 1:42 am | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
Quote: Originally Posted by winbig
I've read some cases here at CM where the monthly WD limit was actually LOWER than their most recent deposit. It took them about 2 months to just get their deposit back, let alone winnings.
I'm not sure what's worse, the casino who implemented the rule or the player who oluntarily deposited there.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: winbig at January 27, 2008, 1:22 am | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
Quote: Originally Posted by SlotsWizard
If (and that's a big IF) a casino chooses to enforce a limit on withdrawals, it shouldn't be flat. Instead, it should be based on the sum of all deposits made by the player within the past x-amount of time, and progressive jackpot wins should never be subject to this rule.
For example, some places set a weekly withdrawal limit of $3,000. This is downright insulting to someone who deposits $1,000 at a time, and obviously they should not play at such a prohibitive place.
A weekly withdrawal limit of 100 times the sum of the player's deposits within the past month, or something similar, would be a more realistic total.
But of course, no withdrawal limit AT ALL would be ideal.
I've read some cases here at CM where the monthly WD limit was actually LOWER than their most recent deposit. It took them about 2 months to just get their deposit back, let alone winnings.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: SlotsWizard at January 27, 2008, 1:20 am | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
If (and that's a big IF) a casino chooses to enforce a limit on withdrawals, it shouldn't be flat. Instead, it should be based on the sum of all deposits made by the player within the past x-amount of time, and progressive jackpot wins should never be subject to this rule.
For example, some places set a weekly withdrawal limit of $3,000. This is downright insulting to someone who deposits $1,000 at a time, and obviously they should not play at such a prohibitive place.
A weekly withdrawal limit of 100 times the sum of the player's deposits within the past month, or something similar, would be a more realistic total. But that could lead to problems for the player with beginner's luck.
The obvious solution is that no withdrawal limit AT ALL is the best option.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: vinylweatherman at January 27, 2008, 1:08 am | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
Quote: Originally Posted by GaryWatson
I would love to be in the position that a site needs to pay me in installments but it seems wrong for anything under 100k.
The internet is pretty olatile & I wouldnt expect a site to be around forever. I would be concerned about them changing names (Under New Management).
I can understand it with the National Lottery but they have National backing. A corner shop website doesnt fill me with confidence. Sites like William Hills & Ladbrokes are the only sites I would feel relatively safe with these rules as they have been around well before I was born & have a solid reputation.
Some sites are skanking people for $50 bonus money and closing accounts when they feel like it. They have a long way to go before they can impose a rule like this which relies on trust. Sites that use this rule should be avoided. If they can accept the bet, they should pay on request, otherwise they are gambling their future on your w... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: GaryWatson at January 26, 2008, 7:17 pm | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
I would love to be in the position that a site needs to pay me in installments but it seems wrong for anything under 100k.
The internet is pretty olatile & I wouldnt expect a site to be around forever. I would be concerned about them changing names (Under New Management).
I can understand it with the National Lottery but they have National backing. A corner shop website doesnt fill me with confidence. Sites like William Hills & Ladbrokes are the only sites I would feel relatively safe with these rules as they have been around well before I was born & have a solid reputation.
Some sites are skanking people for $50 bonus money and closing accounts when they feel like it. They have a long way to go before they can impose a rule like this which relies on trust. Sites that use this rule should be avoided. If they can accept the bet, they should pay on request, otherwise they are gambling their future on your winnings.
Anything could happen. Another .com... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: RobWin at January 26, 2008, 6:02 pm | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
Quote: Originally Posted by juliack
Hi again RobWin. After I posted my last message I noticed something at the bottom of each post. Talk about missing the obvious. Cheers
Yea that's it, I kinda was hoping that would be your answer and that you had just overlooked that crazy little button, thanks for your replies...
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: juliack at January 26, 2008, 5:56 pm | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
Hi Robwin. Believe it or not I am a bit of a computer peasant. Please tell me how you post a thanks and I will do so from now on. It took me years to find out you could take a screen shot and save it. I wish I knew how to do that prior to Jan 07 as I could have taken some amazing win shots. Cheers
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: NASHVEGAS at January 26, 2008, 4:14 pm | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
Juliack and MarkJacob,you read my mind but in my current situation I will take full blame for at least the payment amount and time restrictions. That said, it all leads back to the hubris of the online gaming industry in its present state. Hail Caesar!
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: RobWin at January 26, 2008, 4:11 pm | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
Quote: Originally Posted by juliack
I am a bit confused. I have read many posts about casinos not honouring withdrawls in full. If you went to a B&M casino and hit large enough and the management told you to come back over several weeks or months to collect would you still play at their enue. If the reason to not pay a player in full is because a casino had limited funds I would be highly skeptical to play there. I play mostly MG casinos because of their instant pay, however, I played one casino at MG that started to partial pay as they said they had a daily limit. Needless to say I do not play there anymore. Cheers
juliack, good post by the way but I am curious about something and that is the fact that you have been a member of this forum since Jan 07 and have made 171 posts so far and I also see that you have received 719 "Thanks" at this writing by other forum members which is fine and great but what sparked my curiosity is the fact that you have not foun... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: markjacob at January 26, 2008, 4:07 pm | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
Quote: Originally Posted by juliack
I am a bit confused. I have read many posts about casinos not honouring withdrawls in full. If you went to a B&M casino and hit large enough and the management told you to come back over several weeks or months to collect would you still play at their enue. If the reason to not pay a player in full is because a casino had limited funds I would be highly skeptical to play there. I play mostly MG casinos because of their instant pay, however, I played one casino at MG that started to partial pay as they said they had a daily limit. Needless to say I do not play there anymore. Cheers
I AGREE WITH YOU A 100.00% JULIACK, IT'S PRETTY SCARY TO KNOW THAT THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY IN FULL. I BELEIVE THAT THIS IS HAPPENING MORE AND MORE. CHOSE YOUR CASINO CAREFULLY.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: juliack at January 26, 2008, 4:00 pm | | Topic: 100 % Payout VS. Partial Payout Forum: Casino Meister |
I am a bit confused. I have read many posts about casinos not honouring withdrawls in full. If you went to a B&M casino and hit large enough and the management told you to come back over several weeks or months to collect would you still play at their enue. If the reason to not pay a player in full is because a casino had limited funds I would be highly skeptical to play there. I play mostly MG casinos because of their instant pay, however, I played one casino at MG that started to partial pay as they said they had a daily limit. Needless to say I do not play there anymore. Cheers
| | Static Link |
|