Topic: FortuneJack predatory rules (Read 592 times)

As of this post, no.

You still have these exact terms on their ToS page:


Direct link: https://fortunejack.com/faq/terms_and_conditions
Archive: https://archive.is/ANiCl#selection-949.0-953.258

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.53516829

But yeah, it's a pretty deceitful behaviour considering it's not clearly stated and only buried in the ToS.

And I think the "min 50%" of deposit bet is a new thing.

Really? A bet with 50% of the bankroll... damn, sound like a good place to always lose, and if you win, they will keep you there until lose.

Even for high odds bet (With the chance to win x1.1) we can lose 50% of our balance, which sucks really hard and feels like a kind of abouse from their side.

ToS shouldn't be 'more' or 'less' confusing but clear and unambiguous. There is always the possibility of manipulation or abuse by either party if the rules are not clearly defined.
I've never encountered such a rule at any casino before. As I see it, there are two possibilities: the rule is intentionally written vaguely so that it can be used against players in certain situations, or, more likely, the rule is erroneously worded and should be reformulated.


I'm fairly certain this is not an issue here. It would be really good for FJ to reformulate the rule or explain it in detail so that it doesn't lead to a wrong conclusion.

I don't think the rollover is the big concern... most sites do have rollover and although it's a little bit scummy (essentially ripping into your balance every time you deposit) it's not terrible.

I can twist the equivocated semantics into either, "bet 50% of your deposit cumulatively," or "one or more bets at a minimum stake of 50% of your deposit."

If I read it left-to-right, the latter is the only logical conclusion that I can glean from the clause. Here is the compartmentalization of each semantic category:

[You] := subject
[have to make] := action
[at least one] := quantity
[bet] := object
[with minimum stake] := descriptor
[of 50% of your deposit] := details of descriptor

No offense taken at all.  We're just talking here. 

Anyway, the rollover won't stop money laundering per se but it would discourage them from using the site for money laundering.  Imagine if the site didn't have any sort of rollover.  Criminals would be all over it and it would def bring the Feds coming after the site.

And yeah, maybe making the ToS less confusing should be the way to go.  Reading it again and again, I'm quite sure the 'at least minimum one bet 50% requirement' is across multiple bets.  It said 'at least one bet', so meaning it can be multiple bets.  And I've never experienced any shenanigans from FJ.  They've been a great bookie for me.

Wow, wtf. I've never seen anything like that. That's retardedly unfair. It wouldn't even stop abuse, just a way to screw legit gamblers.

When ever I see stuff like this, I always wonder if they're scummy or stupid, but I guess either way it's not somewhere you can imagine wanting to play :/

They can just selective scam anyone with the help of this rule. Even I don't think it's mandatory to wager 1/2 of the deposit amount at a single bet to be able to withdraw your own money from the site in any fair online casino. This sounds shady as hell in itself and can make it easy for the casino to earn money by selectively enforcing this type of rules and making it less fair for the players.

FortuneJack should comment on this 8.1.2 rule and clarify it's usecase or how is it relevant atleast.

Ambiguous wording in contracts means that you are going to run into some problems. That is why they always make a big fuss out of the whole "You" and "We" pronoun game because any non-specificity can result in a legal loophole... for you or for we.

I am under impression that you don't know what is money laundering, no hard feelings. How rollover rule stops money laundering exactly?
It really doesn't, but as you said that you have made some bets and it never happened to you, they should change something in ToS, it is confusing and just because it is part of ToS, site could force player to place large bet.

^  .5x roll over is less requirement than 1x.  Lol.  And I'm not sure if I misunderstood the rules or you guys did.  I don't think FJ's ToS or any sports betting site would require anybody to bet 50% of their stake all in one time upon deposit.


8.1. You are allowed to withdraw monetary funds accumulated on Your Account, including Your deposits and winnings, to Your other crypto-wallet account not held with the Company only if: a) You are a verified User, meaning that You have verified your email address and/or the phone number and/or complied with any other verification requirement established by the Company, from time to time, and b) You comply with the wagering requirement established by the Company. Wagering requirement means the amount of monetary value or number of times You need to make bets before You are allowed to withdraw all or part of your funds from Your Account to Your other crypto-wallet account (the “Wagering Requirement”). We establish different Wagering Requirements for different Gaming Services, in particular:

8.1.1. On Slots, Casino Games and Live Games Your deposit amount must be wagered, be turned over 2 (two) times;

8.1.2. On Sportsbook Services You have to make at least one bet with minimum stake of 50% of Your deposit amount (example: if Your deposit amount is equivalent to EUR 100, You have to bet minimum EUR 50 on any position You can select on Sportsbook Services);


And it never happened to me tbh.  Deposited around 200 USD and made 20 - 30 bets with no problems.

Edit:  I'll ask them about the 50% rule and clear it up for everybody.

Edit:  Reading it again...  'You have to make at least one bet with minimum stake of 50% of your deposit.'.  'At least one bet' means you can do multiple bets until it reaches 50% of your deposit.  I think...  But let's clear things up.

A 1x rollover is [not] less predatory than a 0.5x rollover: that is true.

However, FortuneJack doesn't have just a 0.5x rollover. You have to place a bet with a minimum stake of 50% of your deposit. That is the predatory part, not the rollover. These types of rules may be linked to regulatory measures but it doesn't mean that the casinos don't milk them for all the players are willing to put up with - rollover on its own being a status quo ToS clause in casinos was bad enough. However, when we simply dismiss the scumminess with a "should have read ToS" comment then all that is happening is that the focus is being pushed not on the one enforcing unfair rules, but the one being subjected to them.

What gambling sites are those?  Let's make a thread and let everybody in the gambling section know which ones are safe to deposit in and withdraw with no questions asked and which ones have roll overs.

Anyway...  Ok...  So how is Pinnacle, a fiat sports betting site that requires 1x roll over and that's as legit as they come fine and FJ that requires .5x roll over predatory?  And 1x roll over is mostly industry standard for most bookies afaik.

And for 'item 2', money launderers pay people a percentage of the money to get them to use their identity, some could use fake ID's, etc, etc...

Not from where I am coming from. Our gambling sites don't have rollover requirement, you are free to make deposit and if you don't like what they offer or if you have changed your mind and you don't want to place bet, you are free to withdraw full deposited amount, no questions asked.

Of course, you will need to provide them your full personal information when signing up and if there is something suspicious going on, government agency will probably contact you. All these rollover requirements, selective KYC over few bucks what some casinos are doing, bet half of your deposit is bullshit and it really doesn't prevent money laundering, however, it forces player to make more bets.


Having 2 scenarios:

1) player make $100 deposit, does 1/2/3/whatever rollover, lose $10 and withdraw $90, KYC free
2) player make $100 deposit, decide not to gamble and withdraw $100, casino refuse to send them their funds and enforce KYC check, telling them it is because of their AML policy and shitty ToS.

How the fuck is this protecting them from money laundering?

If they really wanted to prevent money laundering, they could at least make that betting part accumulative or sort that some other way and not force people to bet more than they are willing to. Forcing people to bet 50% of the deposit on a single bet feels like a trap. Sure, they covered themselves with Tos, but it's a bad practice nevertheless.

As @tyKiwanuka said, OP can go around that by finding some 1.01 game, but even with those odds things can go wrong (happened to me quite a few times).

What a find here! 8.1.2 is indeed unheard of and I couldn't believe something like that is seriously an existing part of ToS... I would love to hear from @FortuneJack on this.

Jez - they all have the edge anyways so why implementing such predatory terms...

Standard in (fiat) bookies is 1x rollover of your deposit, before you can withdraw, which is ok. 2x I have never seen, though maybe still acceptable, but 3x is just brazen, greedy and not fair. But FJ's 2x is only for casino games as stated earlier, which is fine I think.

That 8.1.2 rule is the biggest joke I have ever seen, had to go to their site to see it for myself, this is a rip-off. There seems to be no min odds requirement, so you can at least play a 1.01 and pray, but this speaks volumes about what they are up to.

No it's not.  It's really quite common for fiat sportsbetting sites to have 2x or 3x deposit roll overs from my experience...  5Dimes and Pinnacle come to mind with bonus for the former, without for the latter.

And really, it's protection for the site from money laundering and stuff like bonus whoring if anything cos most crypto gambling sites don't really collect any identification.

I'm not defending the site cos I'm in their campaign...  Just telling you guys what's up.

That is kind of scummy, with a but;
There are a some real physical casinos out there that have similar rules.
I have seen table games have fine print on the signs about "Max Win". Not sure when or where it started, but I have seen it in a few places over the years.
Mostly smaller ones here and there, not in the Vegas mega-resorts, but they are out there.
I'm guessing it's just to prevent some mega payout on some side bets that have horrible odds but still have a 1000x payout for something.

-Dave

I'm not seeing anything else. 8.1 which is where they start is merely the general withdrawal clause:


And then follow the terms I've laid out.

Though, when I was looking through the section, I did come across this as well:


Not including jackpot winnings? That's good. But... seeing the bet winnings, seeing the balance placed on your account, and then having them taken away from you? That's... not.