- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
My personal experience, having played at both Casino Action casinos, and Casino Rewards casinos, is that the former has some of the best support in the industry, and the latter some of the worst.
At Casino Action, my emails were answered after 15-20 minutes, and my live chats were answered instantly (or within 30 seconds). Support seemed relatively knowledgable, and would generally answer the question correctly and promptly.
At Casino Rewards, emails generally took 2-3 days to be answered, and when they were they came with a timestamp of 1st January 1970, so they disappered to the bottom of my email folder. Live chat was usually never answered. I once tried consistently for an entire hour to get hold of someone – mostly it just said ‘all agents busy’, but sometimes it would say “You are in the queue, you will be answered in 5 minutes” and would continue to say that for anything up to 15 minutes, then it would say “..4 minutes..” for another 15 minutes, etc. When I did speak to someone, I found them fairly illiterate, and usually just reading from a script. On a couple of occasions I sent emails asking two or three questions, and got back a copy+paste of part of the FAQ that maybe answered one of the questions, but ignored the rest. Sometimes it didn’t answer any of the questions.
All of my experiences were prior to the takeover, most recently being around April 2006. So the influx of new users after the merge was not the cause.
Combined with the reputation for some of the worst support in the industry, there is also your bizarre bonus policy: send a player a bonus, then lock his rewards account and call him a bonus abuser as soon as he claims it – though I gather that may have improved of late.
I can quite understand why some affiliates were rather annoyed at the revenue they lost when Aztec and Phoe moved to Casino Rewards. But, to be honest, it wasn’t surprising – Casino Action are one of the best groups in the industry and CR simply don’t compare. Perhaps the difference wasn’t obvious to some, particularly if you don’t regularly play at the casinos you promote (or doubly so if you didn’t promote CR at all prior to the handover), which perhaps has caused the frustration. To put it another way, if I had been promoting Aztec and Phoe prior to the handover, then saw who they were being sold to, my first reaction would be “uh oh, I’m going to lose all those customers”
That’s not to say of course that CR isn’t profitable for affiliates, and doesn’t provide a reasonable gaming experience for many of its players – I’m sure it does. But it simply can’t compare to Casino Action, and so the migrated player base must have been affected to some extent.
Having said all that, I just did a quick test – logging into my Blackjack Ballroom account for the first time in some months, and choosing Live Chat – and found that support responded instantly. I haven’t re-tested email support, but it’s good to see that you have made some improvements to live chat at least.
To Ryan: please understand that I mean no disrespect here, clearly none of the above is your responsibility and you have to work with what you’re given. I am speaking frankly, but honestly, and I hope these criticisms will be taken constructively, as I intend them.
No offence taken.
Our support has significantly improved. We have a new call center manager and he has really turned it around. I think your latest test of live chat is a good indicator of that.
For the record, I never said the merger was the cause for bad support. I said that during the merger support was not able to keep up and it would be naive not to think that had some effect.
Hi Gixxer –
believe it or not it’s the one’s offering free spins. other programs are now getting depositors offering free spins as well
My experience with this group is probably one of the best on this industry. The earning model based on the player wagers is the only one that make me feel safe that I’m collecting earnings without surprises, I really don’t like to hope that players have to loose their cash all the time to build my salary. This is the best compromise because you will continue to earn from your players but nothing will go in negative, never. And the best is that all is good here, support, a lot of marketing tools, so many casinos to promote and last but not least…fast payments! I’m really loving it! :1circling
I definitely agree with you there, I am still very happy with the wager system. Works for me!
I must admit I was a big skeptic of the new earnings model but I have earned a pretty nice amount from it last month. One thing I would like to see done with the earnings model would be how much the players are depositing. Last month I had a new player that had wagered almost 200k on video poker in under three hours, I just am going off numbers in my head but the deposit required to play at that coin size and wager that much in only two hours would be a very big deposit (I am assuming 3-4k) Or he got lucky really fast and continued to wager at an inflated level untill he lost it all back. He has since to return as well, maybe an indicator he lost a boat load of money?
-Ryan what do you think of showing us the deposits players are making and losing? It would surely put a lot of worries to rest for some people.
Month one of the switch made me happy.. profits grow daily and NEVER go down.. If I could convert all my programs to this I would as I get lots of big winners monthly.. Also Would make me feel better to root for these guys rather than hope they drop 15K in losses a week
$16,000 wagered – $200 earned! Must be a reason your don’t include deposits in your ‘extensive’ stats. Most programs include deposits in their stats, why not CR? Most affiliates think this is an important stat and want it included but CR doesn’t think it important. Why?
Actually deposits are irrelevant here.
You can deposit $20 and spend hours wagering and generate a nice comission.
Or you can deposit $1000 and make one bet and generate next to nothing.
Or you can deposit $1000 and win $5000 and play it all back. The play on both amounts is counted.
This type of system rewards you for players who spend time playing.
Win or lose is irrelevant, and deposits are irrelevant and just confuse the issue.
It’s like apples and oranges.
If you ever used one of these player cards for comps when playing slots in Vegas you know how it works. It’s not the deposit, it’s the play that counts.
What really matters here is the bottom line. And mine looks pretty darn good.
I know we are used to gauge things by looking at deposits, but they are just totally irrelevant here.
Dominique wrote:Actually deposits are irrelevant here.Actually deposits ARE relevant! Also, I know how the system works.
I have been watching your posts concerning CR for over a year now and have been more than curious about something. What is it with you and them?
Look we all know how you wonderful you are doing with CR and how much you love them. What I would like to know is why you defend them so vigorously (we have seen all your posts) but aren’t so quick to defend other programs when a little criticism blows their way? Considering all the affiliates that are unhappy with them (with legit gripes-like lost players from Cooks) it amazes me how fast you are in their corner defending them and Ryan (with all his double-talk). Just curious.
I see number now I never had with the rev share there.. I guess if you used to get a lot of $10 free people that would add up or somthing but with people playing for real its a no brainer to keep with the new system
Dominique wrote:Actually deposits are irrelevant here.You can deposit $20 and spend hours wagering and generate a nice comission.
Or you can deposit $1000 and make one bet and generate next to nothing.
Or you can deposit $1000 and win $5000 and play it all back. The play on both amounts is counted.
This type of system rewards you for players who spend time playing.
Win or lose is irrelevant, and deposits are irrelevant and just confuse the issue.
It’s like apples and oranges….
….I know we are used to gauge things by looking at deposits, but they are just totally irrelevant here.
I disagree on this,
This may be correct for cases that are not common/average.
In such cases that are not often, a player will deposit X amount of money and manage to play with it for many hours of wins and loses.Let’s get real,
How many cases like this will an affiliate get in a given time? What are the odds? This is casino gambling for crying out loud, the average player will most likely deposit a few hunderd dollars per month and lose them faster than the time it takes to eat lunch.Therefor, in most cases the Wager Share model is not that good as it is claimed to be.
YES, it’s great in theory and if you have a few whales.. You might even earn more.
BUT,
All the complaints and dissatisfaction we all see here can’t be ignored.. One must be blind to think those who complain fail to understand the new model and that’s why they complain.If all the players an affiliate sends are small players who lose their money fast.. {and in a casino they will most likely lose it fast} and assuming the total deposits were $1000 and the total wager was $5000
on wager share, it will be caculated arround {$5000X0.9% = $45 } (i don’t recall the exact formula, don’t get me by this)on rev share the affiliate will get 35% from $1000 = $350
So,
What was it about the “I know we are used to gauge things by looking at deposits, but they are just totally irrelevant here” again?Actually deposits are irrelevant here. You can deposit $20 and spend hours wagering and generate a nice comission. Or you can deposit $1000 and make one bet and generate next to nothing.
Actually deposits ARE relevant!
Actually you are both correct. The amount of the deposit matters only to the extent of the play-through it can generate which can be calculated with a statistical certainty.
I have an article titled Bonus Terms Explained and sections 7-10 calculates play-through using the stats from Phoenician Casino and slot game Bush Telegraph.
deposits would make the reporting fairer that´s a fact. If we could see the depositing behaviour we would know wether the wagering figures make sense. Another problem with the Wagering model is that you may get an unusually high number of pure blackjack players sneaky2.gi
Goldfinger wrote:deposits would make the reporting fairer that´s a fact. If we could see the depositing behaviour we would know wether the wagering figures make sense. Another problem with the Wagering model is that you may get an unusually high number of pure blackjack players sneaky2.giGoldfinger,
I suggest you’ll read my previous post on this page and you’ll understand why the deposits will never be available for the wager share modelif the majority of the players you send is of small depositors, you will gain more by focusing on rev share programs.. more money and probably more peace of mind.
