Thread Rating:

lojo
lojo
Joined: Jun 24, 2013
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 112
June 24th, 2013 at 7:54:14 PM permalink
Well Finsoft was bought by Gtech before Lottomatica bought Gtech. Lottomatica changed their name to GTECH as of June 3. I'm seeing net income of $74.7 million for first quarter 2013 with revenues for that 3 months at $797.5 million or over 3 billion a year - should cover it. According to htxx://www.insidermedia.com/insider/north-west/45123-betfreds-sales-hit-35bn
Quote:

(Betfred's) Operating profit remained broadly static at £12.37m

for 2010 and it has to be a bit more than that now with their rapid growth so they can probably pay back all they didn't earn and then some.

You know it's not like some elderly lady living off social security and a meager income from her bar who gets nicked by Nevada for allowing lewd acts and they turn off her slots for awhile, not wanting to bankrupt her with massive sanctions. These guys are giants. That's what bothers me so much they can make it right but aren't even trying as far as we know. Now they have their stake in the Greek gambling monopoly they can give their lottery style odds to players there with 60% RTP - a complete captive market, but I digress. I think they can afford whatever a fair settlement might be.

I don't know how public access to politics works in the UK but you would think that someone could at least let the Commissoner's boss (Minister of Finance) know that someone might need to find a new job.
Caruso
Caruso
Joined: Jan 26, 2013
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 74
June 25th, 2013 at 4:31:44 PM permalink
Quote: binary128

I'm posting this to correct my previous statement - "The fact that there were no posts in this thread from Casinomeister ..." - which is clearly not true.

Chris




Indeed, there was one substantive post beyond the "here is what Phil Brear asked me to post" collection, about downgrading the GRA / GGC. I'd forgotten that, possibly not unexpectedly given it was just the one. But anyway, he did manage to get out one criticism. Probably as much as we can expect from the industry side.
4ofaKind
4ofaKind
Joined: Sep 28, 2010
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 221
June 26th, 2013 at 3:30:25 AM permalink
Here's a perfect example showing how I explained in my last post in this thread that Casinomeister banks on the fade away of negative threads with negative news about the online industry so newbies decisions to sign on don't get infected.

The last of the threads on this issue that exposed the incompetence of the alleged regulators and their hideous findings was just about to be forgotten. The fade away tactic had the thread down to page three, but a member brought it back to the top with more negative comments.

First thread and most important thread exposing how the casinos cheated in detail was locked and long gone.

Second thread faded away long ago, hard to even find.

Third and final thread even more important which confirmed regulation enforcement for players safety does not exist at all, which was just about extinct with the fade away tactic, but was given a bump to the top with another post.

So, when all else fails trying to hide negative threads there's only one last tactic left to do that will rid it once and for all. The famous and final "LOCK THE THREAD" maneuver which guarantees extinction.

To bad you couldn't do a search on the site that would bring up all locked threads since the site began.

See for yourself: http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/online-casinos/57063-announcement-gra-concerning-hilo-reeldeal-games-25.html#post564130
Caruso
Caruso
Joined: Jan 26, 2013
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 74
June 26th, 2013 at 6:28:32 AM permalink
And what a pathetic, reprehensible excuse to use - that a member took the opportunity to sling a bit of mud the way of Phil Brear. He could have easily done a quick edit and said "please don't post insults" if he'd been concerned about invective. He was looking for an excuse to lock the thread, and one of his members entirely unwittingly served it up to him.

Typically disgraceful.
GBV
GBV
Joined: Jun 12, 2012
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 110
June 27th, 2013 at 4:16:25 AM permalink
It is amazing that people are still discussing CM's integrity. He is an affiliate portal owner. His loyalty is going to be to the people that pay him. This conversation has been going on for ten years.

I have never taken CM seriously as a player advocate, I've never found it necessary to use his site, I don't see why this is such an ongoing issue.

"Regulators" are the same.

Who do you trust in the onling gambling world? No one.

No one has any incentive to provide honest, accurate mediation or information about online casinos.

The one asset players have is that if a casino rips players off obviously they can band together and
complain and reduce the flow of new customers to the business. That's it. That's all there has ever
been and all there ever will be.

I don't actually want the industry regulated. In the unlikely event there was some kind of effective
regulation we would end with the same situation you have in Nevada-the cost of regulatory compliance
gets passed onto the customers in the form of poor value games and deals. I'd rather make money.
4ofaKind
4ofaKind
Joined: Sep 28, 2010
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 221
June 27th, 2013 at 6:14:27 AM permalink
Quote: GBV

I don't actually want the industry regulated. In the unlikely event there was some kind of effective
regulation we would end with the same situation you have in Nevada-the cost of regulatory compliance
gets passed onto the customers in the form of poor value games and deals. I'd rather make money.



Not sure what you mean when you say you'd rather make money in unregulated online casinos who control the power to do whatever it is they please.

Grinding away at -EV games? Taking advantage of -EV bonuses?

If you hit a 20k Royal Flush or a 50k Jackpot; which would you prefer, hoping you get paid sooner or later or not at all online, or walking to a regulated window and having crispy hundred dollar bills handed to you on the spot?
Caruso
Caruso
Joined: Jan 26, 2013
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 74
June 27th, 2013 at 6:25:59 AM permalink
Quote: GBV

It is amazing that people are still discussing CM's integrity. He is an affiliate portal owner. His loyalty is going to be to the people that pay him. This conversation has been going on for ten years.

I have never taken CM seriously as a player advocate, I've never found it necessary to use his site, I don't see why this is such an ongoing issue.



I would agree with this but for the claim to be a "watchdog", which is plainly false. Without this, I would say, go right ahead, no problem. But the false claim is what his business is built on. This is what annoys me.


Quote:

The one asset players have is that if a casino rips players off obviously they can band together and complain and reduce the flow of new customers to the business. That's it. That's all there has ever been and all there ever will be.

I don't actually want the industry regulated. In the unlikely event there was some kind of effective regulation we would end with the same situation you have in Nevada-the cost of regulatory compliance gets passed onto the customers in the form of poor value games and deals. I'd rather make money.



I largely agree. Pre-regulation, things were a lot better as far as I was concerned.
GBV
GBV
Joined: Jun 12, 2012
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 110
June 27th, 2013 at 3:33:55 PM permalink
Quote: 4ofaKind

Not sure what you mean when you say you'd rather make money in unregulated online casinos who control the power to do whatever it is they please.

Grinding away at -EV games? Taking advantage of -EV bonuses?

If you hit a 20k Royal Flush or a 50k Jackpot; which would you prefer, hoping you get paid sooner or later or not at all online, or walking to a regulated window and having crispy hundred dollar bills handed to you on the spot?



When online casinos started there was no regulation and they offered the best opportunity there has ever been for advantage players. It was a time when you could grind up a million from nothing playing basic strategy.

Many casinos cheated, many didn't. The professional could work out who was paying and who wasn't most of the time, and make a ton of money. A lot of them slow-paid, but a significant minority paid very fast.

By contrast B&M gambling locations such as Nevada and AC have regulation, at least to some extent. They also have very poor games. Speed of payment is not a factor to me if I can't get a decent edge in the first place. I don't want formal regulation. All you get is industry people who invariably side with their former paymasters rubber-stamping decisions and diverting funds away from decent promotional offers.
lojo
lojo
Joined: Jun 24, 2013
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 112
June 27th, 2013 at 8:40:02 PM permalink
Quote: GBV

... All you get is industry people who invariably side with their former paymasters rubber-stamping decisions and diverting funds away from decent promotional offers.



Oh I wouldn't be so fast to judge the rubber stamp. New Jersey in all of their oversightful wisdom decided to invest in hiring the founder and current grand poobah of the LGA as their online gambling consultant. You know, the guy who will let them know how it really is. And anyone who plays online or follows the boards knows that Malta has never rubber stamped anything - gee, I'd say they rank with the best, bettered only by Gilbraltar for neutrality and protecting players. Nevada regualtion seems to be moving te way of insider D.C. lobbying politics to if we look at who is on the commission, in the House, and enjoying their "promotions" into and out of the industry and other power seats.

All sarcasm aside. NO, regulation will not be good. It can't be. They waited to long and big fish like Gtech will call the shots, mark those words.
4ofaKind
4ofaKind
Joined: Sep 28, 2010
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 221
June 28th, 2013 at 9:41:25 AM permalink
I officially retire from all of this nonsense, since I realize the only hope I have of once again enjoying online gaming is to wait for the USA. Hope I live long enough to find out being 60 years old already.

Later

  • Jump to: