32 Red - Wrongly calculated monthly cash-back

Hi DaveM - thanks for getting in contact.

I'll get in contact with the team at 32 Red and see what I can find out. As it's late Friday, it's unlikely I'll receive a response before next week so please bear with me.

Have a good weekend.

ThePOGG

Hi again DaveM,

Do you know how much this error cost you in 2010 so that I have some idea what the expectation is?

Thanks

ThePOGG

Hi DaveM, I've been talking to the 32 Red team over today. they've furnished me with a fairly extensive volume of email communication that I've spent a deal of time sifting through. From what I can see the original agreement regarding the cash back was as follows; "Morning [EDIT], My pleasure Sir and as they say ‘it’s always good to talk’! To confirm our agreement; X% ‘Cashback’ on losses to be added to the account on a Monthly basis, with immediate effect. Losses will be calculated net of any bonus chips credited during the relevant month. Cashback bonus to be credited on the 1st of the subsequent month to the period in which the bonus was accrued. Hope that all make sense and I’ll sort you out something for the weekend. Shout if you need any clarification on the above. Cheers [EDIT]" That email was dated 19/02/2010. Unless you have an later communication where it was agreed that the calculation method would be changed moving forward, and while I sympathize with why you don't feel that the cashback should be calculated with bonuses deducted from net losses, that was the agreement entered into. So while I appreciate your frustration, the cashback that was awarded in 2010 appears to have been calculated via the agreement that was in place at that time. Is there anything else you'd like me to take into consideration here? ThePOGG

Hi, Sometime around mid 2011 [EDIT] agreed his bespoke calculations were wrong. Subsequently from that point (though there were times in his absent when the bespoke was calculated wrongly), he did not deduct comps/bonuses lost back to the casino from my monthly Net Losses. It's only been the last couple of months when he's decided to revert back to his previous beskpoke calculations. Again I called him out on this. As a result, he recalculated and credited to my account (on 1'st November 2013), the TRUE & CORRECT X% cash-back due for my October 2013 Net Losses. Further more, a few days later, he recalculated past errors for 2013 which amount to $154.35. [EDIT] has accepted and furthermore is fully aware, the calculations employed in the X% cash-back agreement of 2010 were/are wrong. I'm prepared to come a fair compromise over this matter, however I refuse to walk away empty-handed. I was going to to make this public but thought I'd give it one last shot with this mediation request, hoping, ThePogg could work between both parties for an amicable outcome. Hopefully you will return to [EDIT] and discuss this with him. In closing, the correct business decision is not always the right ethical or moral decision. Cheers [EDIT]

Hi DaveM, The problem as I see it is that there's not anything wrong about the calculations - they are exactly what was agreed in February 2010. They were at no point wrong in removing bonuses from the losses prior to calculating the cash back as that what you'd agreed to them doing. You may have preferred a better deal, but that's not what was offered or agreed to. Without a specific email documenting that the arrangement had changed, in a permanent fashion rather than just as a gesture to satisfy an unhappy VIP player regarding a specific months payments, I do have supporting evidence for the original agreement and nothing I've seen so far to suggest that this was changed. If you have any emails that could demonstrate a change in the agreement it would be appreciated if you could forward them on. I'll go back to 32 Red and request that they provide the email records for 2011 and see what I can find out. ThePOGG

Hi, Your an affiliate so am I. Player A deposits $100 and receives a $100 bonus/comp. Player A now has $200. However this player not only loses his deposit to the casino but also the bonus/comp. Gross Gaming $200 - Lost Bonus $100 Net Gaming = $100 To turn around and then deduct a further $100 from Net Gaming Loss seems wrong. Agreement or no agreement. If unclear refer to above GG & LB and NG example. Reiterating I'm prepared to come to an amicable compromise but I'm not walking away empty handed. The agreement is a moot point because [EDIT] has employed a deduction which goes directly again the common industry knowledge that comps/bonuses given and lost back to a casino, are deducted from Gross Gaming Losses and not additionally deducted from Net Gaming Losses. Cheers [EDIT]

Hi DaveM, I would agree with you regarding this if you had entered into an arrangement that was of the standard cashback variety. You didn't! This falls into the same category as a player agreeing to take a bonus and then complaining when they don't get their payout because they've broken the terms and conditions. As long as the terms and conditions were clear and made easily accessible to the player when the bonus was offered, it's the players responsibility to ensure that they understand and agree to the terms of the bonus. The terms of the agreement - as far as I can see - were clearly spelled out to you repeatedly. After your statement yesterday that the arrangement had changed later on - you've yet to show me with anything to support that position - I requested 32 Red furnish me with more email transcripts and found that the rules of the cashback offer you were receiving have been reiterated where you've challenged 32 Red about the calculation. Here's another example from 2012; "Hi [EDIT], I calculated it as X% of the following calculation (Deposits - Withdrawals - Promotional Chips) which is what we agreed back in February 2010. Cheers [EDIT]" That email was dated 2nd of May 2012. You entered into an arrangement where you would only receive cashback on non-bonus play. That's where the previous conversation about 'bonusing and bonus comes from'. It's not quite so simple as if you were regularly receiving bonuses of over 100% this would be a little worse for you and if you regularly received bonuses at less than 100% it's be a little better for you. At no point were 32 Red offering to give you cash back on play that already involved bonuses. I'm sorry that you're unhappy that they weren't prepared to offer you cash back on bonus play and if the figures you quoted to them were accurate it seems reasonable that you may be able to get better overall rewards with the other groups you mentioned, though whether you'd receive as good service is subjective. But 32 Red made you an offer to retain your play and at no stage that I've seen were they deceptive or misleading about the terms of the benefit they were offering. If you were unwilling to accept the terms of the agreement you were free at any time to decline the agreement and move on, but suggesting malpractice after the event because you wanted them to offer a better deal is in itself boarder line unethical. At no point did you have to accept the offer that was made. You've consistently pushed the 32 Red team to offer more reward for your play throughout your time with 32 Red and as far as I can see they have been - due to goodwill - willing to compromise with you up to a point. Now that you're threatened to create negative publicity for them to attempt to force them to pay additional historical funds that - by the terms of the agreement that you entered into - you're not entitled to, I suspect you may be putting that good will at risk. If you wish to move forward with that threat that's your prerogative, but I feel you do yourself a disservice if you do. Given the lack of supporting evidence I have to back your claims of the agreement having been changed I'm closing this complaint as 'Found for the Casino'. I have edited out certain accusations from your post as I do not agree with them and will not help tarnish the reputation of a brand simply because you were unhappy with the terms of the agreement you entered into. There's nothing for me to negotiate about here. If you're unhappy with the offer that 32 Red have made you going forward, go back and ask them to improve it. And if you don't get the answer you want - at this stage I think they've made their best offer - find somewhere else to play. There's certainly no grounds for me to ask them to add historical funds. ThePOGG

Hi, I guess [EDIT] didn't inform you of his intention to change the "Agreement" terms as on January 01 2014 though, hey... But I suppose that will be vetoed as OK too. [EDIT] can split hairs but he's aware; like as you are too, if this goes public, players wont give to rats about the "agreement" because it's based on a tilted advantage to the casino and which has used [EDIT] calculations. Much the same as players don't give two rats about [EDIT] T&C's. What players will see is the casino using wrong calculations to double dip bonuses and pay less than my rightful X%. Reiterating I'm happy to come to an amicable settlement but I'm not going to walk away from this with less by calculations which should never have happened and which are not the status quo of online casino practice. Deposits + comps/bonuses = Gross Gaming Gross Gaming - comps/bonuses - withdrawals - prog fees = Net Gaming Loss End of story. If [EDIT] can't or wont get around that fact, then I am wasting my time and it's time to go public. Cheers [EDIT]

Hi DaveM, You don't have any right to the funds you are demanding. If the agreement has been X% cashback on losses you would have. But everything I've seen states that it wasn't and you've failed to offer any countering evidence. In situations wherein casinos ignore their own terms or enforce vague terms to deny winnings, I'll always support the player. I'm not now going to say the casino should ignore the terms of the agreement simply because you want a better deal. I'm not at all convinced that many people - given all the evidence - will view you as the wronged party in this instance. You entered into an agreement! If you didn't agree to this method of calculation you should not have played. 32 Red made an offer for your custom, if it wasn't good enough why didn't you just walk away? Everything else is nonsense. As to evidence - 32 Red have been engaging with every request that I've made. On the other side of the coin, you've yet to produce any evidence that the agreement had changed and your stance that the agreement doesn't matter as it doesn't fit with the industry norm is invalided. If a casino offer me 5% cash back on all losses with the proviso that I tip the dealer 10% of any winning sessions, more fool me if I agree, but the bottom line is if I accept this offer that's my responsibility. An agreement has been reached, the terms were clear and both sides are now expected to honor their obligations. If you have something that I've not yet seen to back up your claim that the agreement was changed then I'll be happy to look at it and reassess my position. Finally, I'm not sure you've fully understood my previous post. Unless you have something solid to show me, there no reason for me to go back to 32 Red. Communication on this issue has ceased. This mediation service is here to offer a independent perspective on disputes between players and casino and - where a casino has erred - suggest a resolution to the issue. Given everything I've seen, the casino are in the right on this issue and there's no justification for me going back to them telling them to change their position. What this service is not here to do is renegotiate VIP deals for individual players. That's an internal matter that you'll have to discuss with your host.