On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 13:51:12 GMT, clubwager <clubwager@graffiti.net>
wrote:
>I am a casino affiliate. I am wondering what restrictions
>people feel are fair on the bonuses. Say a casino offers a
>100% bonus on your first $100 deposit. I think most will
>agree that if there was no restriction everyone would just
>withdraw the entire $200, so that is not realistic. Assuming
>the site is fair and uses a random number generator verified
>by independent 3rd party testing, is it reasonable to
>require you to bet 10 times the total $200 amount before you
>can withdraw it? I am interested in all opinions and please
>give your reasons.
>
I'm not sure what would be an arrangement that would be fair to both
the casinos and the players but as it is I can't help feeling that
players are better off not having bonuses.
How many players can be bothered keeping track of how many times they
have played their bonus money if they are lucky enough not to lose it
all the first time they play it which is more likely to be the case.
Hell freezing over would be a more likely event than anyone being able
to play their bonus money ten times without losing it.
Maybe 'comps' for the amount you play like real casinos offer would be
a better idea. I did come across an online casino offering comps but
what they offered was quite pathetic. Bet $4000 and get a $1 'comp'.
Dunno how bad my math is but the average loss on making $4000 bets on
a single zero roulette table would be $108 - I think. Correct me if
need be.
$1 freebie on a $108 loss - haha - ridiculous.
|
|