I mentioned that these players only grind out a few dollars and that is true for the majority of them but they also have every bit as much a chance of being a big winner as the next guy, and inevitably their sheer numbers alone will undoubtedly take their toll on the casino bottom line.
The real damage done in paying these players is it sets precedent which will have those undesireable type of players increase to such numbers that what is now an out-of-hand situation turn into a horrible disaster for the casinos. Instead of gaining loyal customers the casinos, all online casinos, would see gamblers jumping from one bonus to the next like herds of locusts and when the good grazing was gone so would be the players that these bonus offers were created to aquire. Therefore not only defeating the whole purpose of offering a sign-up bonus but it actually would be working against that desired result as it would teach players to jump from one spot to the next, the exact opposite of what was sought.
I personally don't think it would be a bad thing for the legitimate casinos to get away from the sign-up bonus because it does create so much controversy. It does take comps away from what the legitimate player could be enjoying and is the entire motivation for a segment of opportunists to exist which otherwise would be somewhere else mooching freebies. They are taking away from the legitimate enthusiasts of the hobby.
If the casinos would put that sign-up bonus money towards such endeavors as increasing loyalty rewards and existing player bonuses it stands to reason the controversy over play-through requirements would end because so would the need for their very existence. I have lobbied for this approach for years and would very much like to see it that way. Reward those deserving and the casino not put itself in a position for parasites to feed on its blind sides.
However the casinos believe that if they can get a player to come in and try them that their payout percentages are so good that the player wil be impressed enough to want to come back and play again. The only way to get people to come in however and try online gambling is to offer them the chance to gamble using somebody else's money, namely the casino's dime in this instance. The casino doesn't mind putting up the money but they want in return an honest effort by the new player to try out the casino. If the casino states upfront they will not fall victim to such tactics as are seen from bonus chasers, then they are stating they they won't let their legitimate players pay any further price for the actions of a group of people who have no honorable intentions in respect to the spirit in which the bonus was offered. Frankly I don't see where anybody with legitimate intent stands to get hurt? Certainly not more often than they would if the bonus requirements were increased to a point where the casino doesn't have as much risk in losing the free money they are bleeding out.
Everything else aside, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that if you just played a little deeper into the game than quitting just when you hit the minimum play-through requirements, that you wouldn't have to worry about being accused of this issue. The major reason behind the complaints voiced is that they are coming from bonus chasers who as I mentioned are seeking to play the bare minimum and then cash out whatever small amount they were able to hedge. Any extra playing risks their losing what small financial gain they have made.
The real damage done in paying these players is it sets precedent which will have those undesireable type of players increase to such numbers that what is now an out-of-hand situation turn into a horrible disaster for the casinos. Instead of gaining loyal customers the casinos, all online casinos, would see gamblers jumping from one bonus to the next like herds of locusts and when the good grazing was gone so would be the players that these bonus offers were created to aquire. Therefore not only defeating the whole purpose of offering a sign-up bonus but it actually would be working against that desired result as it would teach players to jump from one spot to the next, the exact opposite of what was sought.
I personally don't think it would be a bad thing for the legitimate casinos to get away from the sign-up bonus because it does create so much controversy. It does take comps away from what the legitimate player could be enjoying and is the entire motivation for a segment of opportunists to exist which otherwise would be somewhere else mooching freebies. They are taking away from the legitimate enthusiasts of the hobby.
If the casinos would put that sign-up bonus money towards such endeavors as increasing loyalty rewards and existing player bonuses it stands to reason the controversy over play-through requirements would end because so would the need for their very existence. I have lobbied for this approach for years and would very much like to see it that way. Reward those deserving and the casino not put itself in a position for parasites to feed on its blind sides.
However the casinos believe that if they can get a player to come in and try them that their payout percentages are so good that the player wil be impressed enough to want to come back and play again. The only way to get people to come in however and try online gambling is to offer them the chance to gamble using somebody else's money, namely the casino's dime in this instance. The casino doesn't mind putting up the money but they want in return an honest effort by the new player to try out the casino. If the casino states upfront they will not fall victim to such tactics as are seen from bonus chasers, then they are stating they they won't let their legitimate players pay any further price for the actions of a group of people who have no honorable intentions in respect to the spirit in which the bonus was offered. Frankly I don't see where anybody with legitimate intent stands to get hurt? Certainly not more often than they would if the bonus requirements were increased to a point where the casino doesn't have as much risk in losing the free money they are bleeding out.
Everything else aside, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that if you just played a little deeper into the game than quitting just when you hit the minimum play-through requirements, that you wouldn't have to worry about being accused of this issue. The major reason behind the complaints voiced is that they are coming from bonus chasers who as I mentioned are seeking to play the bare minimum and then cash out whatever small amount they were able to hedge. Any extra playing risks their losing what small financial gain they have made.
About the Author:
Steve Briggs is the author of this article on Casino Bonus. Find more information about the subject at www.high-roller-casino-bonus.com
