Topic: bustabit – The original crash game - page 34. (Read 61526 times)

I'd guess the number of investors with >0.5 btc invested who are also regular players is somewhere below 10%. Makes it *extremely* -ev to divest and reinvest in bankroll frequently, so you'd have to just be  withdrawing every so often to bet, which I'm sure happens just at a low frequency.

Does anybody know what proportion of bankroll investors are actually playing and betting at Bustabit? If as an example devans (however unlikely) decided to return the bankroll and fund the site himself, how many of those bankroll investors that play there because they have invested - would stop betting there?

If for example 50% of all users betting at Bustabit are bankroll investors then there would be a large chunk of those that would stop betting there if they withdrew their bankroll, right? So would the website be as profitable and successful without the present bankroll structure? I think the status quo suits everybody so there is no need to change anything.

I don't think that's the complaint. At least my problem with most casino review/comparison sites is they pretend to be a list of "the best casinos for you to play at" but are in reality are a list of "these casinos make us the most money". Often those two lists are wildly divergent, to the point some of the biggest casino review sites literally knowingly promote some of the most worst casinos out there.

All this talk of advertisement has people missing the main point: When you run a crowd-funded bankroll dice/crash site, the most effective marketing you can have is having the largest bankroll/betting limits/# of investors. It's an immediate boost to credibility and bankroll investors act as co-owners of sorts driving traffic to the site since it's in their best interest - and thereby not pushing/promoting other sites where they deem their investment to be more profitable. If, for example, Daniel decided tomorrow to eliminate bankroll investors and fund the site himself, it would have a large detrimental affect on the betting volume on the site if all other factors remained the same. As long as he has the biggest bankroll and largest # of investors, Bustabit will continue to crush it.

No one knows (except daniel, admin of bustabit). I thought he will keep betting on Wangtang_V6 new account around 2 weeks ago, but until now it didn't made any bet after profited 1.5 btc. For sure anyone who have lose 297 bitcoins won't touch gambling activity for a while, doesn't matter he has lot of bitcoins or not.

it's a business decision, and considering how much casinos spend on affiliates, SEO, and player retention I think it is a legitimate strategy. It saves a lot of money that you can spend on other things, for example working on a great product.

I don't understand the "no one advertises for free for us" complaints though.

Considering how extremely profitable it is to run this casino, it seems hard to justify not trying to spend some money on advertising. If it doesn't work out, it can be stopped, but it seems like it hasn't been tried, or at least for years.

I don't know what there is to discuss really. If you spent money on advertisement you get more advertisement than someone who doesn't spend money on it.

That's just how it is, no reason to complain about it. At least you have extra money in your pocket that you can spend on other things

Anyone knows what happened with the Wang Tang dude? I am very curious about him and what happened with him. Last we heard or seen of him was the fact that he lost a ton of money, came back and gambled just a tiny amount and never to be heard from ever again. I don't know his last account and how to find it, but if anyone can find it, could you check and see what he is doing?

Moreover, when someone deletes their account and we find another account with his name, does that really even mean it is him? Another person can start with the same name with different VX and act like it is him but unless we know their IP we may never know if it is really him neither. I really hope he is doing well, the amount he lost is not a child's play, so I really wish him the best both psychologically and financially.

 That is exactly what I was trying to say. If you go to a review website and it is only good places, that means they are doing it right. lets assume there are 200 casinos in crypto world that you can review (there are probably more nowadays) and lets say there are 100 good and 100 bad ones (there are more bad ones than good ones normally but lets go with this example). What I was trying to say that, as long as none of the 100 bad ones are listed, and lets say only 80 of the good ones have affiliate system in place, any review website could go with 80 good ones. This leaves 20 good ones aside along with 100 bad ones, thats something they should do and they are free to do that.

 However the bad part which I also agree is that they get paid by bad places and list them too, which lowers their credibility. It should be the way I said, list a bit of good, remove all bad, and if you want, do not list other good ones that have no affiliate system, those all makes sense.

Like captain corporate said, I agree with the notion that what you guys are saying on "bad place gets good review for affiliate commission" is a bad thing but I also think that what you are missing out here is that what he was trying to say is that as long as they do not list shady casinos as good just for good income, they also do not have to list good places that have no affiliate business neither.

I mean you are still saying that "these places list bad casinos as good because of affiliate" and we get that, nobody denies that, but you are also not focusing on the part where they are not forced to show any casino they do not want to show, it is their own business and if they do not want to list you because you have no affiliate, they are free to do that.

Only thing they are responsible for is not listing bad casinos, as long as they do not list bad casinos, they can list "some" good casinos and not list other good casinos.

Yeah, your site was actually one I had in mind of thinking of exceptions. It just is unfortunately pretty small compared to some of the competitors, although I think if you expanded more with content (reviews?) (and community?) there would be some serious potential. There was one site (thebitcoinstrip.com) that I thought had so much potential and was going the right way, but then as I understood, sold to someone who just destroyed it

Hey, not all of us have bad intentions!  

Since I started GamblingSiteFinder.com back in 2018, I've had both Bustabit and Bustadice ranked very highly in the Crash Gambling and Dice categories. We're ranking #1 in Google for various Busta- related keywords and have happily sent hundreds (probably even 1000+) new players to BaB and BaD over the years.

My site is quite small, but I can only imagine how much referral commission we could have generated if we had referred those players to higher paying, yet inferior crash gambling and dice sites.

Something readers here might not know either is that online gambling sites approach review site owners (like myself) and offer us money in exchange for higher rankings. You wouldn't believe how many times a major competitor to Bustadice (I won't say names) has emailed me offering $$$ in exchange for removing BaB and BaD from the top positions on my site.  

I asked about something similar in the Bustadice thread and he said he would not in to detail which is definitely his right but he seems to have covered ways for investors to get their funds back though he did not elaborate: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.55608148

The 2-of-3 multisig cold wallet I think is a brilliant idea (for multiple reasons). I hope devans is doing something similar on bustabit. If devans hasn't already revealed a basic overview of how he handles bustabit's cold wallet (I assume RHavar would've known otherwise) I'd be interested in knowing for peace-of-mind reasons. I assumed bit/dice both used the same multisig cold wallet storage techniques, but if devans has a superior way of doing it, don't know why he wouldn't use whatever is the safest, most secure option on both sites.

I can only speak for bustadice, which does indeed use 2-of-3 multisig wallet, of which I hold one of those 3 keys.  I can independently verify bustadice's player profit/loss (and thus investor profit/loss). So I use that to guide if I should sign a transaction. Although worth emphasizing that  independently verifying player profit/loss is not really enough information to do a great job at being a cold-wallet-key-holder because I have no way to independently verify the bankroll size. (i.e. If Daniel was malicious, he could simply say "Oh we've had a mass exodus of investors. Need you to sign the withdrawal so I have enough funds to pay them" and I'd have no way to know either way).

I have a special role for bustadice (I run the audit server, and hold one of the keys). But don't provide a similar service for bustabit. I could however take a pretty good guess at what Daniel is doing for cold storage there, but it's not really my place to do so.

So, to clarify, Bustabit has one sole owner of the cold wallet (devans) and bustadice's cold wallet had 3 multi-sig owners that require at least 2 signatures to open it?

Is this right?

This is true, of course, thanks for the clarification. Like any review (no matter if hardware, shoes or even casinos) you should not trust them blindly but get further opinions if necessary before you deposit larger amounts of precious BTC.But why I mentioned BTCGosu is that efialtis also reports about scam accusations against casinos and in such cases even takes their reviews offline. This was the case not long ago with Sportsbet: Sportsbet.io & Bitcasino.io temporarily deactivated on BTCGOSU

I have already pointed out to efialtis that both bustadice and bustabit are definitely worth a review, if only because they are among the longest existing casinos and serve thousands of customers per year. I will ask about the reviews when the opportunity arises

That makes sense, although I think I can make a decent counter-argument. By giving people dilution fee credits, you are giving them something worth something but it'd be very tricksy to sell. As they would basically have to sell their entire busta* account to someone who wanted to invest. At first I thought it'd be neat if you allowed people to safely trade their dilution fee credit for bitcoin with prospective investors, but that seems overly complicated when you yourself could just give everyone cold-hard BTC instead and recollect it on the next X of new investments. So in effect, it would be like everyone immediately and safely selling their dilution fee credits, and you're just fronting the money until enough new investments come in.

Then again, it is a bit of a weak argument as you logically extended it basically means the dilution fee shouldn't exist (as someone's should be able to sell their investment, rather than divest). But thought I'd throw that out there anyway 


My experience with virtually all casino-review sites (there are however a couple small exceptions) has been the only thing they care about and optimize for is their own bottom line, which generally means pushing what gives them the most affiliate returns. The casinos that give the most affiliate returns often are the worst (i.e. that's why they need to spend so much on affiliate, and they do dodgy stuff to have high margins). Ever wonder why sites like askgamblers will knowingly list and excuse outright scammy behavior like bitstarz as #1 (even defend WTF-bad practices, like seizing account balances for accidentally exceeding a software unenforced and unwarned betting limit )?

It's a pretty rotten industry really. I've been waiting for someone honest to disrupt it, but doesn't seem to be happening any time soon.




I have never been doing that for bustabit. I do that for bustadice, as I run the audit server -- so it makes sense in that context -- as running the audit server allows me to verify wins/loses due to bustadice's multi-party provably fair scheme (there's basically 2 server seeds, and the audit server has one which Daniel himself doesn't know).

Looking at these statistics shows just how big a success Bustabit (and after looking at Bustadice stats) these websites have become.

With phenomenal amounts of money involved it is clear not all investors and game players for that matter will be happy with all the decisions made but it would be wise to try to have some form of input from them at least to gain some form of consensus.