Licensing question for Rep's

[Rusty]

To all Reps

With which Licensing authority is your Casino registered and on what basis did your Casino choose this Licensing authority over others?

Thanks

 

[Ed Ware]

Hi Rusty

Providing a good spread of operators decide to contribute to this thread, you should get some interesting answers to your question.

As far as 32Red is concerned, we have always seen the licensing jurisdiction as very much part of the overall proposition to the player and not just a means to an end (to doing business). We believe that being a licensee in a creditable and regulated jurisdiction says a lot of about the quality of the operation and should be something a player researches before joining a casino. In 2002 the choice for operators basically consisted of some Caribbean locations, Kahnawake and Gibraltar.

Gibraltar has always operated a very strict and controlled approach to licensing online gaming operators and it is clear that not every applicant has been able to attain a licence in Gibraltar. We regard this as a sign of a strong licensing regime and while the reasons for refusals arent known, it is clear that Gibraltar has set out to establish itself as home to blue chip companies including Ladbrokes, Bwin and Coral Eurobet. We have always believed that this sends a clear and positive message to those prospective players who feel licensing jurisdiction is important when making their choice of casino.

Gibraltar has a structured licensing and regulatory environment which serves to protect the player (and thus the reputation of Gibraltar and the operators based here). The Government continues to apply a great deal of resource to regulating the operators and upgrading various parts of the legal framework. In essence, the enterprise is taken extremely seriously by the Authorities and not just as a way of getting money into central coffers. This is important to 32Red.

Additionally, with our interest in the UK player, Gibraltar offers unfettered access to that market basically through its status as British Overseas Territory. Being in the European Economic Area is also important in this regard and the physical proximity to the United Kingdom is an obvious logistical advantage for us. This has become even more important since the passing of the 2005 Gambling Act which prohibits advertising in the UK by online gambling firms, unless they are licensed in particular jurisdictions. Gibraltars position, thanks to its status and heritage is rock solid.

Since 32Red opened its virtual doors, the United Kingdom and Malta have become viable alternatives. However, from our perspective both still have some areas to attend to before they can be considered serious alternatives to Gibraltar.

I hope thats of some use.

Best wishes

Ed.

 

[Pinababy69]

Malta have become viable alternatives. However, from our perspective both still have some areas to attend to before they can be considered serious alternatives to Gibraltar.

I don't know much about the UK alternative Ed, but your comments re: Malta are putting it mildly. They could start with taking less time than six months to answer a player complaint. That's if they ever do. Honestly, they are useless, and IMO, nothing more than window dressing for some casinos to post on their websites.

Gibraltar is about the only licensing jurisdiction I have any faith in whatsoever. The Lucky Ace (888 whitelabel) issue comes to mind....that got cleared up pretty quickly once the Commissioner got wind of it, and the complaints were sent in.

You made a wise choice.

 

[Rusty]

Hi Rusty

Providing a good spread of operators decide to contribute to this thread, you should get some interesting answers to your question.

As far as 32Red is concerned, we have always seen the licensing jurisdiction as very much part of the overall proposition to the player and not just a means to an end (to doing business). We believe that being a licensee in a creditable and regulated jurisdiction says a lot of about the quality of the operation and should be something a player researches before joining a casino. In 2002 the choice for operators basically consisted of some Caribbean locations, Kahnawake and Gibraltar.

Gibraltar has always operated a very strict and controlled approach to licensing online gaming operators and it is clear that not every applicant has been able to attain a licence in Gibraltar. We regard this as a sign of a strong licensing regime and while the reasons for refusals arent known, it is clear that Gibraltar has set out to establish itself as home to blue chip companies including Ladbrokes, Bwin and Coral Eurobet. We have always believed that this sends a clear and positive message to those prospective players who feel licensing jurisdiction is important when making their choice of casino.

Gibraltar has a structured licensing and regulatory environment which serves to protect the player (and thus the reputation of Gibraltar and the operators based here). The Government continues to apply a great deal of resource to regulating the operators and upgrading various parts of the legal framework. In essence, the enterprise is taken extremely seriously by the Authorities and not just as a way of getting money into central coffers. This is important to 32Red.

Additionally, with our interest in the UK player, Gibraltar offers unfettered access to that market basically through its status as British Overseas Territory. Being in the European Economic Area is also important in this regard and the physical proximity to the United Kingdom is an obvious logistical advantage for us. This has become even more important since the passing of the 2005 Gambling Act which prohibits advertising in the UK by online gambling firms, unless they are licensed in particular jurisdictions. Gibraltars position, thanks to its status and heritage is rock solid.

Since 32Red opened its virtual doors, the United Kingdom and Malta have become viable alternatives. However, from our perspective both still have some areas to attend to before they can be considered serious alternatives to Gibraltar.

I hope thats of some use.

Best wishes

Ed.

Thank you for taking the time to reply with such a detailed answer and addressing the question directly.
It would be unfair to press you for an opinion on other LGA's but I assume the issue with the UK is not with the regulations or credibility as such but rather a tax issue?

I hope more Reps will respond to this thread.

 

[Ed Ware]

Thank you for taking the time to reply with such a detailed answer and addressing the question directly.
It would be unfair to press you for an opinion on other LGA's but I assume the issue with the UK is not with the regulations or credibility as such but rather a tax issue?

I hope more Reps will respond to this thread.

Thanks Rusty and I think you are right on the UK....

 

[Simmo!]

Gibraltars position...is rock solid.

Impossible to argue that

Gibraltar is about the only licensing jurisdiction I have any faith in whatsoever.

Alderney just gets my vote ahead of Gib but I don't think it was an option until the past 3 years or so. The only ones I feel I really trust are Gib, Alderney and the Isle Of Man. Good topic Rusty.

Jurisdiction is important to me when deciding where to play but more when deciding where *not* to play. I wouldn't play any in Costa Rica, it used to be I'd only play a Kahnawake operator if it was Microgaming, but now I have less confidence in Microgaming's backup, I probably wouldn't play Kahnawake period unlesss the casino had a good history behind it.

 

[Pinababy69]

Alderney just gets my vote ahead of Gib but I don't think it was an option until the past 3 years or so. The only ones I feel I really trust are Gib, Alderney and the Isle Of Man. Good topic Rusty.

I had high hopes for Alderney until that PKR.com case....maybe a year or more ago? I'd have to go back and find the thread, but I'm pretty sure they initially ruled against the player....who, as far as I can remember, hadn't done anything wrong. There were also some pretty serious implications of the casino accusing the player of fraud to Moneybookers and having their account closed there. To be fair to Alderney, I believe they reversed their decision and that the player did get paid. I guess the most important thing was that they eventually made the right decision...it just wasn't the best first impression for me.

EDIT: Just for reference, as Alderney was quite involved with this one.....thought maybe some might like to read it.

https://sussexmskpartnershipeast.com/forums/threads/pkr-revoking-bonus-for-no-reason.25696/

 

[Rusty]

Quite disappointing that only One Rep has responded to this thread thus far.
I have to wonder why so many are reluctant to participate.

Licensing Authorities are increasingly coming under the scrutiny of the player and we currently have an ongoing high profile case in the hands of LGA of Malta.

Malta has already had its integrity questioned over recent (none)actions so some players and no doubt Casinos will be looking very carefully at their findings over the disputed Jackpot win at Casino club.

Which ever way they rule they need to show that they have approached this case objectively and taken into consideration all the available information and evidence at their disposal and acted accordingly.
Any failure to address any of the arguments in this manner will result in the assumption that they are incompetent or even prejudice in some way.

We have already seen previously respected (because they never had to make an important ruling) Kahnawake Gaming commission fall over themselves to appear as corrupt and inept as possible with their handling of the Absolute poker Scandal.
Without dragging up the well publicised details of the case again I think it fair to say anyone who is aware of them would never trust Kahnawake Gaming commission to make a fair judgment on a case again and this of course has big implications for the Casinos who are licensed under them.

Also as PinaBaby mentions Alderney have not exactly covered themselves in glory recently either.
What is really concerning is that these were Two of the more respected licensing authorities, there are a whole plethora backwater jurisdictions that this sort of behaviour could be expected from.

All these Licensing authorities demand fees from their clients and for many this seems to be where there responsibilities end.
The Casinos that pay these fees and the players should both demand much more.
It is in the Casinos best interests as well as the players that the authority they are licensed by are proactive and seen to be fair.

Casinomeister has a wealth of information with which the player can educate themselves and this includes some references to gaming authorities.
Perhaps though it is time to draw up a list such as the Ones for Casinos that players can easily reference.
I would personally nominate Kahnawake for the rogue section along with many others and Alderney and Malta in the not recommended but this would be for Casinomeister to judge.
There is no reason not to have a positive list such as recommended either.

What are your feelings on such a list Bryan?

 

[The Dude]

Quite disappointing that only One Rep has responded to this thread thus far.
I have to wonder why so many are reluctant to participate.

Because most reps are focused on the complaints section - and there are a number who are licensed in Kahna-haha-wake

They may be reluctant to be slam-basted .

I would personally nominate Kahnawake for the rogue section along with many others and Alderney and Malta in the not recommended but this would be for Casinomeister to judge.
There is no reason not to have a positive list such as recommended either.

What are your feelings on such a list Bryan?

Licensing is a tricky subject - mainly because there are a number of variables that come into the decision making process when it comes to licensing. A lot of it has to do with costs - how much money a start up operation can dictate where they choose to go. It could be Cowboy Town - it could be the Isle of Man/Gibraltar - or somewhere in the EU.

There are some crapholes of casinos operating out of Costa Rica - and yet there are some excellent ones as well. Same thing goes for Kana-haha-wake. There are pros and cons for each jurisdiction and I feel that a jurisdiction can reflect on a casino, it can't reflect on it 100%. That's why I don't rogue jurisdictions.

I do write about them though. These write-ups can be found here:
Best Worst 2008
https://sussexmskpartnershipeast.com/static/bestworst2007.php

Edited to add: What is frustrating for me is that most licensing entities are set up primarily to serve the operator. Players have a difficult time trying to contact a real person who can resolve a complaint. This industry is over ten years old, and most jurisdiction fail when it comes to dealing with player issues effectively. It's truly amazing.

 

[Pinababy69]

I do right about them though.

You mean you write about them...tsk, tsk.

 

[jetset]

I would agree that Alderney and the Isle of Man are suitable alternatives to Gibraltar.

And although it is a very human reaction, I think it would be unfair to condemn a jurisdiction out of hand on the basis of a single adverse ruling, mistake or failure - especially when the situation is ultimately rectified.

Unfortunately, in the case of some of the jurisdictions criticised here, there have been way more than single failings and a lamentable lack of player sensitivity, and it is therefore hard to disagree with the harsh judgements in those cases.

I often wonder whether these licensing jurisdictions really appreciate how critically important it is from a player trust perspective to have a responsive player complaint channel.

It always astonishes me when I hear of player complaints being ignored, or treated in a lax and dilatory manner.

And I find it difficult to believe that most of these complaints cannot be resolved within days or weeks rather than months (often without the player receiving the courtesy of progress reports) When I look at the turnarounds on most PABs here at Casinomeister it confirms that this is entirely possible with the right structure and will.

This is an interesting topic, and I hope that other operators will give us their perspectives.

 

[The Dude]

You mean you write about them...tsk, tsk.

OMG - haven't done that in a while

..And I find it difficult to believe that most of these complaints cannot be resolved within days or weeks rather than months (often without the player receiving the courtesy of progress reports) When I look at the turnarounds on most PABs here at Casinomeister it confirms that this is entirely possible with the right structure and will...

Mind boggling, really. It's funny how our PAB section with Max at the helm is way more effective than most of the jurisdictions all put together.

We have over 10,000 members here - around 2000 are active participants, and this forum is over ten years old. Show me the posts where players actually submitted complaints to a gaming authority - and then had these dealt with in a swift and fair manner.

If you do find any, (which I doubt you will), I bet you could count them on one hand.

All it would take is to add a "complaints" submission form on their websites and then hire a couple of interns to manage the complaints.

I'll see if I can stir up the interests of some of the I-Gaming Reps.

 

[JSM_Jason]

All Rival casinos are licensed and regulated by the Government of Curacao N.V.

I'm just a rep for our specific Rival casinos so I don't know the exact details of how or why Rival decided on Curacao, but from what I understand (and what I've heard), although it's more expensive than some other jurisdictions, it's one of the most secure places to be licensed.

Hope that helps.

 

[Rusty]

Because most reps are focused on the complaints section - and there are a number who are licensed in Kahna-haha-wake

They may be reluctant to be slam-basted .

Rusty>


Licensing is a tricky subject - mainly because there are a number of variables that come into the decision making process when it comes to licensing. A lot of it has to do with costs - how much money a start up operation can dictate where they choose to go. It could be Cowboy Town - it could be the Isle of Man/Gibraltar - or somewhere in the EU.

There are some crapholes of casinos operating out of Costa Rica - and yet there are some excellent ones as well. Same thing goes for Kana-haha-wake. There are pros and cons for each jurisdiction and I feel that a jurisdiction can reflect on a casino, it can't reflect on it 100%. That's why I don't rogue jurisdictions.

I do write about them though. These write-ups can be found here:
Best Worst 2008
https://sussexmskpartnershipeast.com/static/bestworst2007.php

Edited to add: What is frustrating for me is that most licensing entities are set up primarily to serve the operator. Players have a difficult time trying to contact a real person who can resolve a complaint. This industry is over ten years old, and most jurisdiction fail when it comes to dealing with player issues effectively. It's truly amazing.

Thanks for your perspective on that Bryan.
I was at first thinking along the same lines as regards guilt by association but then I considered that perhaps the pros far outweighed the cons?

After all, if Licensing authorities are scrutinized in this way and come out negatively then is it not up to the Casino to consider that the authority with which they are with may be damaging their reputation and so change to another more credible authority?
If I were running a legitimate business that relies on customer trust I would not be hiring a known crook to do my accounting.

The longterm upshot of this would be that poorly performing authorities would get less and less revenue and have to improve their ways or sink.
Authorities that performed well would get more revenue.
Casinos would benefit from being with flagship authorities with increased reputation and probably revenue.
Players would have more idea of where a safe online gaming environment might exist.

Of course all that would depend upon just how much influence and impact such a list would have.
Ultimately it is the player that has the power (responsibility) to change things by where they make their deposits and play.
Arming them with as much useful information as possible is all we can do.
After that it is up to them.

Either way I understand your view and I do recognize you post information as and when appropriate but perhaps it is something you may consider again in the future?

 

[Rusty]

All Rival casinos are licensed and regulated by the Government of Curacao N.V.

I'm just a rep for our specific Rival casinos so I don't know the exact details of how or why Rival decided on Curacao, but from what I understand (and what I've heard), although it's more expensive than some other jurisdictions, it's one of the most secure places to be licensed.

Hope that helps.

Thank you for contributing.
I have not heard of any misgivings about Curacao but a concern would obviously be with it being such a small Island with a population of around 150 Thousand it is not recognized for its tight legislation.
It is to your credit that you have posted here and it is difficult to ask you for more information without it looking like an interrogation.
Could you tell us though why you understand it to be One of the more secure Licensing authorities?

Thanks

Edit:
Reading back,
Perhaps my comments are unfair regarding Curacao as they should be judged on performance and nothing else.

 

[TheBoyMitchell]

Hi there

Yeah - I didnt see this thread until Bryan pointed it out to me.

William Hill is licensed in Gibraltar as well and is also listed in the UK Stock Exchange. It has over 2300 bricks and mortar shops in the UK.

As an Account Manager I dont know why Gibraltar was chosen, but I am going to assume that as William Hill is an old established company and that Gib was the most reputable place to be licensed then it seemed an obvious choice.

Hope that helps

 

[thelawnet]

Because most reps are focused on the complaints section - and there are a number who are licensed in Kahna-haha-wake

They may be reluctant to be slam-basted .

And let's not forget the shambles that is Malta. I get the impression Antigua are slightly better these days, although at heart they will always be a tiny country with a history of influence by dubious men.

Edited to add: What is frustrating for me is that most licensing entities are set up primarily to serve the operator. Players have a difficult time trying to contact a real person who can resolve a complaint. This industry is over ten years old, and most jurisdiction fail when it comes to dealing with player issues effectively. It's truly amazing.

It's a shame that EU jurisidictions are greenlighted in the UK simply because they are in the EU.

Otherwise there might be some motivation for Malta to improve their act.

As it is, there is not.

 

[thelawnet]

All Rival casinos are licensed and regulated by the Government of Curacao N.V.

I'm just a rep for our specific Rival casinos so I don't know the exact details of how or why Rival decided on Curacao, but from what I understand (and what I've heard), although it's more expensive than some other jurisdictions, it's one of the most secure places to be licensed.

Hope that helps.

Hmm. They didn't turn down Golden Palace.

I bet they wouldn't have got a Gibraltar licence.

 

[JSM_Jason]

Thank you for contributing.
I have not heard of any misgivings about Curacao but a concern would obviously be with it being such a small Island with a population of around 150 Thousand it is not recognized for its tight legislation.
It is to your credit that you have posted here and it is difficult to ask you for more information without it looking like an interrogation.
Could you tell us though why you understand it to be One of the more secure Licensing authorities?

Thanks

Edit:
Reading back,
Perhaps my comments are unfair regarding Curacao as they should be judged on performance and nothing else.

As I said, I'm not a rep for Rival, just for 2 casinos that use their software but I was told when I got involved with the casinos that Curacao is one of the more reputable and secure places to be licensed.

I did Google it at the time and found nothing but good comments about licensing in Curacao, supporting this idea. In the 4 years that I have been in this industry I have never heard anything to change my opinion. Simple as that.

I would tent to agree with you that jurisdictions should be judged on performance and as far as I can tell Curacao seems to have a solid track record.

 

[thebescasino]

Thebes Casino

Ok I am just going to go ahead and say it Thebes Casino is licensed in Costa Rica

At Thebes we went with a license in Costa Rica because that is where our software provider is based and licensed from.

Now whilst I can completely understand that some players are hesitant about casinos licensed there and in various other places, I do believe that an casino much like any other operation should be judged by the way it deals with its players or clients.

The fact that Topgame is licensed in Costa Rica is not of a concern to us. More important is the fact that they are a developer who is really trying to deliver a innovative and quality product and they are working very closely with us to achieve this.

Best Regards


David

 

[JSM_Jason]

Now whilst I can completely understand that some players are hesitant about casinos licensed there and in various other places, I do believe that an casino much like any other operation should be judged by the way it deals with its players or clients.

The fact that Topgame is licensed in Costa Rica is not of a concern to us. More important is the fact that they are a developer who is really trying to deliver a innovative and quality product and they are working very closely with us to achieve this.

Well said

 

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by thebescasino View Post

Now whilst I can completely understand that some players are hesitant about casinos licensed there and in various other places, I do believe that an casino much like any other operation should be judged by the way it deals with its players or clients.

The fact that Topgame is licensed in Costa Rica is not of a concern to us. More important is the fact that they are a developer who is really trying to deliver a innovative and quality product and they are working very closely with us to achieve this.

Well said

Nobody is suggesting that Casinos be judged any other way but unfortunately being that we do not live in a utopian World and some Casinos actually do wrong then it is important that a player can feel he will get a fair hearing should a case go to arbitration.

If all the Casino is interested in is a hassle free cheap license and profit and all the Licensing authority is concerned with is their share then that leaves the player out in the cold.

Can you really say that such a situation does not exist with some jurisdictions and Casinos?

Thank you for your input.

 

[Jasminebed]

For me, licencing jurisdiction is not the primary concern for me as a player. To be sure that you are playing in a fair jurisdiction presuposes that you will have a problem, and one large enough to require court processes.

I'm pretty much a low roller, so highly unlike that I hit a huge win unless on a progressive.

For established casinos with few complaints, I'm willing to trust that. Ones accredited here give me access to Casinomeisters Pitch-A-Bitch arbitration process. A decade ago, there were not as many licensing options as now.

Quite frankly, it would be more difficult and costly for me to pursue a win through the court systems in the UK as closer to home in Kahnawake.

For new casinos starting up however, to be licenced where players have a real course of redress, as opposed to a jurisdiction where a licence is granted to anyone with the filing fee does matter.

 

[Rusty]

For me, licencing jurisdiction is not the primary concern for me as a player. To be sure that you are playing in a fair jurisdiction presuposes that you will have a problem, and one large enough to require court processes.

Is that not like saying having house insurance presupposes your house will burn down?
A good licensing jurisdiction is as free to the player as a bad One surely it makes sense to want the best we can get.
The idea of arbitration is to avoid court cases and legal costs but it only works if the arbitrator is up to the task.

 

[bwin]

bwin Casino - Gibraltar

Hello,

bwin Casino is licensed in Gibraltar, because it is like Ed from 32Red already said (thank you very much for the excellent reply, I hope it is ok if I quote you):


"...being a licensee in a creditable and regulated jurisdiction says a lot of about the quality of the operation and should be something a player researches before joining a casino. In 2002 the choice for operators basically consisted of some Caribbean locations, Kahnawake and Gibraltar.

Gibraltar has always operated a very strict and controlled approach to licensing online gaming operators and it is clear that not every applicant has been able to attain a licence in Gibraltar....the United Kingdom and Malta have become viable alternatives. However, from our perspective both still have some areas to attend to before they can be considered serious alternatives to Gibraltar."

there is nothing left to be added for bwin - beside the fact that we would be more then willing to go for more casino licenses especially in european countries if they would open up their monopolies - even though in most of the cases this very likely means higher taxes and even stronger regulations!

Kind regards,

Ben

 

[VerboomC]

Licencing

Hi Rusty, I think this is a great initiative! And hope other operators will follow suit quickly.

As far as Plex Gaming Ltd is concerned:

When PokerPlex was powered by Cryptologic we had a Maltese gaming license till we moved to Playtech. Due to the fact that Playtech did not have a class 4 license we needed to find the quickest alternative and for us that was to get a license from Netherlands Antilles (Curacao). We are waiting on Playtech to receive their Maltese license in order to revert back to Malta.

We are currently in the process of obtaining a Maltese license for our bingo operations.

I also agree with Ed's visions about licensing and the importance to us as operators that players come first. ( I am not going to quote Ed again but I do agree with his views)

Plex Gaming is one of the oldest and most respected companies in the online gambling industry, with offices in Cyprus, Malta and Curacao (Netherlands Antilles).

Our experience coupled with superior online gambling software and our commitment to player satisfaction, makes us the first choice for affiliates seeking a unique affiliate program which will enable them to promote 3 of the most popular online games; Bingo, Casino and Poker.

Hope this information is use full and any feedback or comments are welcome.

 

[Westland Bowl]

.....Licensing Authorities are increasingly coming under the scrutiny of the player.....they need to show that they have approached this case objectively and taken into consideration all the available information and evidence at their disposal and acted accordingly.
Any failure to address any of the arguments in this manner will result in the assumption that they are incompetent or even prejudice in some way....

Without dragging up the well publicised details of the case again I think it fair to say anyone who is aware of them would never trust Kahnawake Gaming commission to make a fair judgment on a case again and this of course has big implications for the Casinos who are licensed under them....

What is really concerning is that these were Two of the more respected licensing authorities, there are a whole plethora backwater jurisdictions that this sort of behaviour could be expected from.....

All these Licensing authorities demand fees from their clients and for many this seems to be where there responsibilities end.....

It is in the Casinos best interests as well as the players that the authority they are licensed by are proactive and seen to be fair.....

......What is frustrating for me is that most licensing entities are set up primarily to serve the operator. Players have a difficult time trying to contact a real person who can resolve a complaint. This industry is over ten years old, and most jurisdiction fail when it comes to dealing with player issues effectively. It's truly amazing.

......I often wonder whether these licensing jurisdictions really appreciate how critically important it is from a player trust perspective to have a responsive player complaint channel.

It always astonishes me when I hear of player complaints being ignored, or treated in a lax and dilatory manner.

....I find it difficult to believe that most of these complaints cannot be resolved within days or weeks rather than months (often without the player receiving the courtesy of progress reports) When I look at the turnarounds on most PABs here at Casinomeister it confirms that this is entirely possible with the right structure and will....

....Mind boggling, really. It's funny how our PAB section with Max at the helm is way more effective than most of the jurisdictions all put together.

......Show me the posts where players actually submitted complaints to a gaming authority - and then had these dealt with in a swift and fair manner.

If you do find any, (which I doubt you will), I bet you could count them on one hand....

All Rival casinos are licensed and regulated by the Government of Curacao N.V.

I'm just a rep for our specific Rival casinos so I don't know the exact details of how or why Rival decided on Curacao, but from what I understand (and what I've heard), although it's more expensive than some other jurisdictions, it's one of the most secure places to be licensed....

Thank you for contributing. I have not heard of any misgivings about Curacao but a concern would obviously be with it being such a small Island with a population of around 150 Thousand it is not recognized for its tight legislation......

Edit: Reading back, Perhaps my comments are unfair regarding Curacao as they should be judged on performance and nothing else.

As I said, I'm not a rep for Rival, just for 2 casinos that use their software but I was told when I got involved with the casinos that Curacao is one of the more reputable and secure places to be licensed.

I did Google it at the time and found nothing but good comments about licensing in Curacao, supporting this idea. In the 4 years that I have been in this industry I have never heard anything to change my opinion. Simple as that.

I would tent to agree with you that jurisdictions should be judged on performance and as far as I can tell Curacao seems to have a solid track record.

.....Nobody is suggesting that Casinos be judged any other way but unfortunately being that we do not live in a utopian World and some Casinos actually do wrong then it is important that a player can feel he will get a fair hearing should a case go to arbitration.

If all the Casino is interested in is a hassle free cheap license and profit and all the Licensing authority is concerned with is their share then that leaves the player out in the cold.

Can you really say that such a situation does not exist with some jurisdictions and Casinos?....

.....A good licensing jurisdiction is as free to the player as a bad One surely it makes sense to want the best we can get.
The idea of arbitration is to avoid court cases and legal costs but it only works if the arbitrator is up to the task.

My case of winning $39,000 from Heroes Casino is currently under review by Cyberluck, the Master Licensing authority under Curacao Internet Gaming Commission (CIGA). CIGA requires disputes to be submitted to CIGA members first before contacting CIGA.

Next week it would be 2 months since I submitted my dispute to Cyberluck. They are conducting "forensic analysis" of my play there. How long is a fair amount of time to review, audit, analyze, evaluate, examine, assess (circle one) a player dispute by a licensing authority?

 

[Stryyke_Team]

Hey!
Stryyke is licensed in Malta. There are several reasons:
-Software Provider Net Ent is located there
-full Eu license
-gaming and income Tax situation
-euro zone
-banking costs,
-Double tax treaty with major Eu contries
-english speakers
-English based law system and administration
- cheap costs of living

Thats about it what came up to my mind spontaneously...

 

[Rusty]

Hi Rusty, I think this is a great initiative! And hope other operators will follow suit quickly.

As far as Plex Gaming Ltd is concerned:

When PokerPlex was powered by Cryptologic we had a Maltese gaming license till we moved to Playtech. Due to the fact that Playtech did not have a class 4 license we needed to find the quickest alternative and for us that was to get a license from Netherlands Antilles (Curacao). We are waiting on Playtech to receive their Maltese license in order to revert back to Malta.

We are currently in the process of obtaining a Maltese license for our bingo operations.

I also agree with Ed's visions about licensing and the importance to us as operators that players come first. ( I am not going to quote Ed again but I do agree with his views)

Plex Gaming is one of the oldest and most respected companies in the online gambling industry, with offices in Cyprus, Malta and Curacao (Netherlands Antilles).

Our experience coupled with superior online gambling software and our commitment to player satisfaction, makes us the first choice for affiliates seeking a unique affiliate program which will enable them to promote 3 of the most popular online games; Bingo, Casino and Poker.

Hope this information is use full and any feedback or comments are welcome.

Yes all Rep replies are great feedback and much appreciated.
Marketing blurb excluded.

Hey!
Stryyke is licensed in Malta. There are several reasons:
-Software Provider Net Ent is located there
-full Eu license
-gaming and income Tax situation
-euro zone
-banking costs,
-Double tax treaty with major Eu contries
-english speakers
-English based law system and administration
- cheap costs of living

Thats about it what came up to my mind spontaneously...

A spontaneous Rep? Is that allowed?
Anyway excellent feedback thanks.

...Now where have I seen that Avatar before, hmmmm.

Westland Bowl;

My case of winning $39,000 from Heroes Casino is currently under review by Cyberluck, the Master Licensing authority under Curacao Internet Gaming Commission (CIGA). CIGA requires disputes to be submitted to CIGA members first before contacting CIGA.

Next week it would be 2 months since I submitted my dispute to Cyberluck. They are conducting "forensic analysis" of my play there. How long is a fair amount of time to review, audit, analyze, evaluate, examine, assess (circle one) a player dispute by a licensing authority?
Today 10:43 AM

That is very good question.

For an interesting comparison and to understand what we should expect here is a quote taken from a leading Ombudsman Website in the UK.

Dealing with cases as promptly as we can

We aim to be able to settle most disputes by issuing a Provisional Conclusion within six weeks. But some cases can take longer, particularly if we need to make wide-ranging enquiries - or if they involve particularly complex issues.

When we start work on your case, we will keep you informed about the progress we are making and about what you need to do next. You will always know the name of the person handling your case and you can contact them direct with any questions - by letter, email or phone.

Those are the standards of a professional independent watchdog and I think it is fair to say most if not all Remote (Online) Gambling Licensing Authorities fall short of that, some of them laughably so.

Once again thank you to all the Reps who have responded and contributed to this thread thus far.

 

[KasinoKing]

...Now where have I seen that Avatar before, hmmmm.

I was thinking that too.... Hmmmmm... The Italian Stallion from New York...?
Was his name Katana... or is that a Suzuki motorbike...?

 

[XOXOXOXOXOX]

I was thinking that too.... Hmmmmm... The Italian Stallion from New York...?
Was his name Katana... or is that a Suzuki motorbike...?

kakata - just in case u r serious

 

[Rhyzz]

I think that people are bang on the money when it comes to who're the best - Gib, Isle of Man & Alderney are by far the most efficient and trustworthy. They all have good secure regulations and don't take crap from their operators - you do it their way of you lose your license, so from a consumer point of view, it's good to know that there are jurisdictions out there that aren't just concerned about making a profit.

I haven't seen much mention about the actual regulations that these jurisdictions impose though? Surely they must all have unique points about what they expect from an operator, such as identity checks, bonuses offered, capital available and risk assessment. I'd be pretty interested to know who the more relaxed of the 3 big ones are and what they constitute as a 'safe and fair' operator.

 

[quber]

The procedures for player protection are laid out on the relevant websites.

Gib has fixed times for resolutions Old / Expired Link

Alderny has the procedure laid out Old / Expired Link

I.O.M. and Malta only have a brief passage

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Link Removed (Old/Invalid)

 

[jetset]

Hey!
Stryyke is licensed in Malta. There are several reasons:
-Software Provider Net Ent is located there
-full Eu license
-gaming and income Tax situation
-euro zone
-banking costs,
-Double tax treaty with major Eu contries
-english speakers
-English based law system and administration
- cheap costs of living

Thats about it what came up to my mind spontaneously...

But what about a player dispute channel - does the LGA have an effective email or website address for player complaints?

That said, thanks for the comment in this very interesting thread.

 

[jetset]

Yes all Rep replies are great feedback and much appreciated.
Marketing blurb excluded.



A spontaneous Rep? Is that allowed?
Anyway excellent feedback thanks.

...Now where have I seen that Avatar before, hmmmm.

Westland Bowl;

My case of winning $39,000 from Heroes Casino is currently under review by Cyberluck, the Master Licensing authority under Curacao Internet Gaming Commission (CIGA). CIGA requires disputes to be submitted to CIGA members first before contacting CIGA.

Next week it would be 2 months since I submitted my dispute to Cyberluck. They are conducting "forensic analysis" of my play there. How long is a fair amount of time to review, audit, analyze, evaluate, examine, assess (circle one) a player dispute by a licensing authority?
Today 10:43 AM

That is very good question.

For an interesting comparison and to understand what we should expect here is a quote taken from a leading Ombudsman Website in the UK.

Dealing with cases as promptly as we can

We aim to be able to settle most disputes by issuing a Provisional Conclusion within six weeks. But some cases can take longer, particularly if we need to make wide-ranging enquiries - or if they involve particularly complex issues.

When we start work on your case, we will keep you informed about the progress we are making and about what you need to do next. You will always know the name of the person handling your case and you can contact them direct with any questions - by letter, email or phone.

Those are the standards of a professional independent watchdog and I think it is fair to say most if not all Remote (Online) Gambling Licensing Authorities fall short of that, some of them laughably so.

Once again thank you to all the Reps who have responded and contributed to this thread thus far.

I think Rusty's quote from a professional Ombudsman site bears repeating, because it is applicable to how online casino operators handle player complaints, too:

"Dealing with cases as promptly as we can

"We aim to be able to settle most disputes by issuing a Provisional Conclusion within six weeks. But some cases can take longer, particularly if we need to make wide-ranging enquiries - or if they involve particularly complex issues.

"When we start work on your case, we will keep you informed about the progress we are making and about what you need to do next. You will always know the name of the person handling your case and you can contact them direct with any questions - by letter, email or phone."

Whilst I accept that a very few truly complicated cases may take six weeks or longer, the general run of disputes should be capable of being resolved in a relatively short period - but the principles remain of acknowledging the player's complaint, dealing with it professionally and as quickly as possible and keeping him or her informed if it drags on.

And the player should be provided with the name and contact number of whoever is handling his complaint to ensure that additional information, or just a reassuring check on progress, can be made if necessary.

I believe all licensing jurisdictions should have a prominent link to an effective dispute channel, and that complaints submitted should be aknowledged within 24 hours.

Edited to add: Regarding Malta, hopefully the new CEO of the LGA will spend some time on the important aspect of player complaints and improve his agency's record in this area.

 

[jetset]

Another question on this topic:

Should licensing authorities publish on their websites the broad details of complaints against licensees and the result of the consequent enquiry?

 

[The Dude]

But what about a player dispute channel - does the LGA have an effective email or website address for player complaints?

That said, thanks for the comment in this very interesting thread.

It's here:
Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)

 

[RobWin]

I was thinking that too.... Hmmmmm... The Italian Stallion from New York...?
Was his name Katana... or is that a Suzuki motorbike...?

Yea, I thought Kakata was back as well.. I miss that guy..

 

[The Dude]

Yea, I thought Kakata was back as well.. I miss that guy..

I don't miss him. The man has some serious personal issues.

https://sussexmskpartnershipeast.com/forums/threads/rushmore-casino-experiences.24300/

Let's keep the thread on track please.

...Edited to add: Regarding Malta, hopefully the new CEO of the LGA will spend some time on the important aspect of player complaints and improve his agency's record in this area.

This is a key point. When the LGA took on online gaming, I was thrilled at first. I had been in touch with the people behind this agency for years, and we shared the same philosophy when it came to player issues and how they ought to be dealt with. This is not just some island jurisdiction (what a lot of people call "offshore") but a full fledged member of the European Union. But over the past year, it has been disappointment after disappointment. The LGA has became increasingly distant and non-responsive.

I hope that there will be some changes in which they respond to player complaints. We have a major issue at the moment with Casino Club, and all eyes are on the LGA watching how this is handled. So far, I'm not too impressed.

 

[Westland Bowl]

.......Whilst I accept that a very few truly complicated cases may take six weeks or longer, the general run of disputes should be capable of being resolved in a relatively short period - but the principles remain of acknowledging the player's complaint, dealing with it professionally and as quickly as possible and keeping him or her informed if it drags on.

And the player should be provided with the name and contact number of whoever is handling his complaint to ensure that additional information, or just a reassuring check on progress, can be made if necessary.

I wish Cyberluck would do this! I haven't had any requests for information nor been asked any questions by them in nearly 2 months since I've contacted them though they've requested information from Heroes whenever they needed to. I feel like I'm treated like a "suspect".

 

[Rusty]

Another question on this topic:

Should licensing authorities publish on their websites the broad details of complaints against licensees and the result of the consequent enquiry?

I will put forward my view, as I understand things, from the players perspective and perhaps some Reps could post from the Casinos.

Absolutely they should make available their findings for open scrutiny.
A transparent procedure and resulting judgment are the best way to earn player trust (If that were their aim) and it would provide a valuable service to players as an information source on Casinos.
After all should that not be a Licensing authorities ultimate aim, regulate the industry in a manner that protects the player from bad Casinos and rewards good Casinos by encompassing them with the honesty and fairness they prevail?
I do not see how a closed shop helps anybody.
It is a sad reflection and indictment of the current state of Online gambling that the player not only has to worry about whether he is playing at a respectable Casino but also if the authority they are licensed by have any integrity.

I do not believe details of complaints against Casinos should be published.
A name and shame policy as such though will never happen anyway.
Firstly it would be unfair to simply list Casinos that have complaints against them.
Secondly even if we consider the Licensing authorities only publishing Casinos with upheld complaints against them then it still will not happen.
This is because they actually only offer an arbitration service and their findings have no legal status.
This means that they would leave themselves open to be sued for defamation by their own members.
However giving open access to their judgments I do not believe could be seen as malicious by the courts.
(No doubt Casinomeister could impart some knowledge in this area)
The power of any licensing authority is therefor limited to sanctions over their members.
Now this is where the whole thing gets messy because the ultimate sanction is to revoke a Casinos license but said Casino can just pop down to the Gambling License Quicky Mart and be back in business before you can say "WTF?"

Those are my thoughts and no doubt there are other opinions that disagree with at least some of that.
So get posting.

 

[DiamondGeezer]

Rusty are you sure the findings of these jurisdictions have no legal status? It was my understanding that when you say play at a Malta registered Casino you are agreeing to be bound by their decision should a dispute arise. I do not know this to be a fact though. But I thought that was the idea behind the 2006 Gambling Bill for the EU - namely that in return for getting proper protection in EU jurisdictions players must accept the judgements or findings of the said jurisdictions.

It would at least be logical for that to happen. If you are say playing in the Uk at a Swedish firm based in Malta then any legal redress is going to be complicated. I thought the idea of these jurisdictions was to manage that process. It certainly would make sense. As a player you give up your rights to go to court but in return you get a free and impartial service. I can see how that would be a good solution for everyone. But ofcourse the reality is a lot different.

 

[DiamondGeezer]

I would like to ask operators in Malta this - when it is very public knowledge that a Malta based Sportsbook has been owing players a total over 100K for two years yet continues to trade, are you not a little concerned what players might conclude about that?

 

[Rusty]

Rusty are you sure the findings of these jurisdictions have no legal status? It was my understanding that when you say play at a Malta registered Casino you are agreeing to be bound by their decision should a dispute arise. I do not know this to be a fact though. But I thought that was the idea behind the 2006 Gambling Bill for the EU - namely that in return for getting proper protection in EU jurisdictions players must accept the judgements or findings of the said jurisdictions.

It would at least be logical for that to happen. If you are say playing in the Uk at a Swedish firm based in Malta then any legal redress is going to be complicated. I thought the idea of these jurisdictions was to manage that process. It certainly would make sense. As a player you give up your rights to go to court but in return you get a free and impartial service. I can see how that would be a good solution for everyone. But ofcourse the reality is a lot different.

I don't honestly know.
Some of what you say makes sense but I do not believe that any arbitration process would forfeit your right to access the courts.
How would that work?
I mean even if a court finds against you in most cases you have the right of appeal.
Do you have any documentation on this?

 

[Kerching]

I'm a little bit late on this one!

Our licence is in Alderney (through WagerWorks). I do find it pleasing that most players do seem to have faith in Alderney, and this matches our view as an operator, as we are very happy to be licenced there. The AGCC take great interest in operations under their jurisdiction (as they should do), particularly when it comes to testing of new systems, and this certainly helps ensure that such systems work well, and are thoroughly tested.

Our mobile games are operated under a UKGC licence.

 

[Rusty]

I'm a little bit late on this one!

Our licence is in Alderney (through WagerWorks). I do find it pleasing that most players do seem to have faith in Alderney, and this matches our view as an operator, as we are very happy to be licenced there. The AGCC take great interest in operations under their jurisdiction (as they should do), particularly when it comes to testing of new systems, and this certainly helps ensure that such systems work well, and are thoroughly tested.

Our mobile games are operated under a UKGC licence.

Thanks.

That is the way it should work.
A Licensing authority that is respected by the players and Casinos alike benefits all in the long run.

I have a general question of any Rep that cares to answer which cuts cuts straight to the heart of the issue of trust in the software and RNG's.

Just how proactive are your licensing authority in ensuring your games are fair and what measures do they take?

For example;
Is not only the RNG checked but also the software code on a random basis to ensure there is no manipulation of RNG results and how frequently on average does this occur?

What safeguards are there against the use of plug ins or software modules that could effect the return percentage of games?

I do not want this discussion to get too technical as I want it to be accessible to all so if you have someone from your technical department answer then please try to keep technical jargon to a minimum, many thanks.

(Malta we are watching you)

 

[Rusty]

Two weeks later...