Michigan just sent 33 letters and one of them went to a site i use

PokerDuke

PokerDuke

Member
Messages
46
Reaction score
79
Points
18
mgcb sent cease and desist letters to 33 offshore operators on the 8th. casino, sweepstakes, sportsbook, all of it, for serving michigan residents without a state licence.
i've been tracking this since april when they did 45 of them. so that's 78 letters in six months from one state.
what's on the list that people here actually use: mbit, slotocash, raging bull, iwild, exclusive casino, stardust, cryptoplay, bitofgold, jurassic slots, slot paradise, ronin slots. there's more and before anyone tells me a letter is just a letter. williams at mgcb said it tells operators michigan residents are not an open market, and the ones that ignore it go to the attorney general next

so i'm asking properly because i need to move and i don't want to move twice. what's actually left that's good AND going to still be there in a year??
 
yeah yeah whatever mate. you can laugh it up if you like
main reason im annoyed about is not the games, i can get live tables anywhere. its that i spent two years recommending it to people in this forum and some of them are in michigan
 
No one put any blame on you. Just shit happens like site being unlicensed in Michigan doesn't make it a bad site, it makes it an unlicensed site in Michigan. Those are different things and this thread is about to spend walls of posts confusing them.
Mbit was unlicensed in Michigan last week too. The only thing that changed is that somebody put it out...
 
what i mean is the licence isn't a quality badge, you're right about that. its a recourse badge. when something goes wrong on a licensed site there's a regulator who has to care. mgcb spelled it out in the same release, if an unlicensed site keeps your winnings or closes your account they cant help you. i've never needed that. but i've also never been in a car crash and i still wear the belt
 
Six years and no problems is good going and it is also not evidence of anything. Everyone who has ever been burned had a clean record right up until the day they didn't. There is one line in that MGCB release that nobody in this thread has picked up yet and it is the most serious thing in it.

Licensed Michigan operators have to honour the state's responsible gaming database. That is the list you put yourself on when you want to stop. Offshore sites have no obligation to honour it, so somebody who has self-excluded can go and deposit on one of those 33 tomorrow, and the MGCB has said plainly that it cannot help them get that money back.

That is not a consumer protection argument about bonus terms. That is the difference between a wall and no wall for the people here who have needed one.
 
thats me. not michigan but thats exactly what i did on two sites last year and nobody stoped me because nobody had to
 
pokerslave55 said:
thats me. not michigan but thats exactly what i did on two sites last year and nobody stoped me because nobody had to
Click to expand...
@pokerslave55 if you are on a state list and still playing offshore, the blocking software is the thing that actually works, because it does not need the site to cooperate. Gamban is free through a few of the state programmes now.

Not lecturing you. Just that the wall you signed up for only exists on sites that agreed to build it, and there is a tool that does not ask permission.
 
Since the thread is asking what's left, let me do the thing I always do and say the unglamorous part out loud first.

I'm a crypto gambling degen, everyone here knows that. Once I started playing at crypto casinos I couldn't go back to cash ones, because the deposits land, the withdrawals land, and the promotions are better for how I play. That's the honest appeal and I'm not going to dress it up as a principled position.

But the trade is real. Almost every crypto casino worth playing is unregulated somewhere important, which is why I check reviews before I touch a new one and why I won't be first through the door on anything. Bitstarz is the one I keep coming back to, and the reason is boring: they've been there since 2014 and I've got years of my own history on them rather than a review page to trust.

@PokerDuke your question has a hard edge in it though. Good AND still there in a year. I can answer the first half. Nobody in this thread can answer the second.
 
Camelott said:
Since the thread is asking what's left, let me do the thing I always do and say the unglamorous part out loud first.

I'm a crypto gambling degen, everyone here knows that. Once I started playing at crypto casinos I couldn't go back to cash ones, because the deposits land, the withdrawals land, and the promotions are better for how I play. That's the honest appeal and I'm not going to dress it up as a principled position.

But the trade is real. Almost every crypto casino worth playing is unregulated somewhere important, which is why I check reviews before I touch a new one and why I won't be first through the door on anything. Bitstarz is the one I keep coming back to, and the reason is boring: they've been there since 2014 and I've got years of my own history on them rather than a review page to trust.

@PokerDuke your question has a hard edge in it though. Good AND still there in a year. I can answer the first half. Nobody in this thread can answer the second.
Click to expand...
++ for bitstarz. nominated and awarded at askgamblers and the review sites for years, not a one day crypto shop that takes your money and vanishes

-- for most of the rest of that list honestly
 
Less than people think and more than the marketing admits.
The games are mostly the same, from the same providers. The payment is the obvious difference. The real difference is who is accountable to whom. A fiat casino with a serious licence has a bank in the chain and a regulator who can take the licence away. A crypto casino often has neither, so the only thing keeping it honest is wanting your repeat business.
That works fine right up until it doesn't, and when it doesn't there is no one to write to.
 
"wanting your repeat business" is the only thing keeping ANY of them honest. regulator just makes the paperwork longer
 
Wrong, and easy to demonstrate wrong, so let me use the thing I actually know about rather than arguing about regulators in the abstract.

Bonuses. Since 19 January this year, a UK licensed operator cannot set a wagering requirement above 10x on bonus winnings, and cannot offer you a single bonus that combines sports betting and casino. Both of those are licence conditions. Tim Miller at the Commission put the reasoning as protecting consumers from harm, and the specific concern on wagering was that requirements above 10x cause confusion and longer sessions.

Now go and read the welcome offer on any of the 33 sites on that list and tell me the multiple.

Repeat business did not produce a 10x cap anywhere in the world. A regulator did, and only inside its own borders.
 
bill_collins said:
Wrong, and easy to demonstrate wrong, so let me use the thing I actually know about rather than arguing about regulators in the abstract.

Bonuses. Since 19 January this year, a UK licensed operator cannot set a wagering requirement above 10x on bonus winnings, and cannot offer you a single bonus that combines sports betting and casino. Both of those are licence conditions. Tim Miller at the Commission put the reasoning as protecting consumers from harm, and the specific concern on wagering was that requirements above 10x cause confusion and longer sessions.

Now go and read the welcome offer on any of the 33 sites on that list and tell me the multiple.

Repeat business did not produce a 10x cap anywhere in the world. A regulator did, and only inside its own borders.
Click to expand...
that 10x made a real difference to me and i was sceptical when it came in. used to be you'd get a nice looking offer and the wagering was buried at 40x or 50x and i'd not spot it till i tried to take anything out. now it's capped and the offers are smaller but they're actually offers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top