_mr_e
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 817
Merit: 1000
|
 |
August 07, 2014, 01:29:58 AM |
|
"Our biggest expense in July was a 19 BTC payment for a user which won over 30 BTC
playing the PeerBet Wheel with only one spin. As discussed at the time this occurred in May,
there was a defect in the PeerBet application which allowed users to roll and potentially win more
than 1% of the bankroll this defect was addressed shortly after this user won. Worth noting,
while this actually occurred in May; the user that won agreed to be paid out 11 BTC at the time of
the spin, and the remaining BTC to be paid in July"
Why are we paying out for a defect?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
casinobitco
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1833
Merit: 1030
|
|
August 07, 2014, 01:35:31 AM |
|
This is a good and fair question! We chose this route because the player is a good, consistent player - and at the time (and even today), I don't believe he knew he was taking advantage of a defect - he was just playing. At the end of the day, we put ourselves in the player's shoes and imagined what it would feel like to hit essentially a jackpot - then not get paid out. The management collectively debated a few options and ultimately we decided it was in our best interests to do right by him and all our players - so we paid him out. "Our biggest expense in July was a 19 BTC payment for a user which won over 30 BTC
playing the PeerBet Wheel with only one spin. As discussed at the time this occurred in May,
there was a defect in the PeerBet application which allowed users to roll and potentially win more
than 1% of the bankroll this defect was addressed shortly after this user won. Worth noting,
while this actually occurred in May; the user that won agreed to be paid out 11 BTC at the time of
the spin, and the remaining BTC to be paid in July"
Why are we paying out for a defect?
|
|
|
|
_mr_e
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 817
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 07, 2014, 01:45:30 AM |
|
Because the player is a good, consistent player - and at the time (and even today), I don't believe he knew he was taking advantage of a defect - he was just playing. At the end of the day, we put ourselves in the player's shoes and imagined what it would feel like to hit essentially a jackpot - then not get paid out. The management collectively debated a few options and ultimately we decided it was in our best interests to do right by him and all our players - so we paid him out. "Our biggest expense in July was a 19 BTC payment for a user which won over 30 BTC
playing the PeerBet Wheel with only one spin. As discussed at the time this occurred in May,
there was a defect in the PeerBet application which allowed users to roll and potentially win more
than 1% of the bankroll this defect was addressed shortly after this user won. Worth noting,
while this actually occurred in May; the user that won agreed to be paid out 11 BTC at the time of
the spin, and the remaining BTC to be paid in July"
Why are we paying out for a defect?
All these defects are very concerning... I remember a few months ago where someone on Reddit had been arguing with you about a number of possible defects on the site and your complete denial that there were any. Now it is costing us a lot of money and it seems like they just keep popping up. As a programmer I would love to know how a wheel game - a glorified random number generator - could have such a large hole. I really hope this is the last of it. |
|
|
|
|
AcoinL.L.C
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 07, 2014, 04:34:18 AM |
|
Because the player is a good, consistent player - and at the time (and even today), I don't believe he knew he was taking advantage of a defect - he was just playing. At the end of the day, we put ourselves in the player's shoes and imagined what it would feel like to hit essentially a jackpot - then not get paid out. The management collectively debated a few options and ultimately we decided it was in our best interests to do right by him and all our players - so we paid him out. "Our biggest expense in July was a 19 BTC payment for a user which won over 30 BTC
playing the PeerBet Wheel with only one spin. As discussed at the time this occurred in May,
there was a defect in the PeerBet application which allowed users to roll and potentially win more
than 1% of the bankroll this defect was addressed shortly after this user won. Worth noting,
while this actually occurred in May; the user that won agreed to be paid out 11 BTC at the time of
the spin, and the remaining BTC to be paid in July"
Why are we paying out for a defect?
All these defects are very concerning... I remember a few months ago where someone on Reddit had been arguing with you about a number of possible defects on the site and your complete denial that there were any. Now it is costing us a lot of money and it seems like they just keep popping up. As a programmer I would love to know how a wheel game - a glorified random number generator - could have such a large hole. I really hope this is the last of it. I have to agree with mr_e on this.. A wheel game is incredibly simple, even with the invest feature. You could have one developed in a ~month from scratch, easy. Most likely 2-3 weeks. CBTC has been in possession of Peerdice/wheel etc for what, 4-5 months now? Thats absolutely ridiculous. The defect should go out of managements paycheck, not having a script checked over before entrusting it with tens of thousands of dollars... I can't even. The share buybacks is good, however the funds being put towards the buyback are also being put towards bigger bankrolls / acquisitions and development? I think the acquisitions should slow down, as the sites currently being operated need to be fixed up first. Why not set aside ~20% of profit to development, and 30% to buybacks? Its very vague to say the least right now. Also, whats the current bankroll across all sites (Bankroll owned by CBTC that is)? Currently the "x" factor for CBTC is how much bankroll it has... The current share price is pretty pitiful. First time I have seen it under $.04 in value (currently at $.03), as well as dip below 5k satoshi. Buybacks can't happen soon enough  |
|
|
|
|
freemarketaussie
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
August 07, 2014, 09:25:46 AM |
|
I think Casinobitco is making the right decision to hold some dividends back to re-invest back into the business. I'm looking forward to seeing Peerbet 2.0 and a more streamlined integration between Casinobitco and Peerbet. Not sure you need to buy back units however this will benefit the investors who hold onto their units.
I'm encouraged that there seems to be a methodical approach to improving the site, even if there have been bugs you have been proactive to fix it, communicate with the community and move on... Well done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ron~Popeil
|
|
August 07, 2014, 01:17:48 PM |
|
"Our biggest expense in July was a 19 BTC payment for a user which won over 30 BTC
playing the PeerBet Wheel with only one spin. As discussed at the time this occurred in May,
there was a defect in the PeerBet application which allowed users to roll and potentially win more
than 1% of the bankroll this defect was addressed shortly after this user won. Worth noting,
while this actually occurred in May; the user that won agreed to be paid out 11 BTC at the time of
the spin, and the remaining BTC to be paid in July"
Why are we paying out for a defect?
The defect was not the players fault. If it was not payed out the reputation of the casino suffers. Paying that out was exactly the right move. It hurts in the short term but builds trust which is even more important in the long term. |
|
|
|
casinobitco
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1833
Merit: 1030
|
|
August 07, 2014, 01:30:15 PM |
|
mr_e and AnoinL.L.C -> This is fair criticism, so hopefully my response doesn't get lost in translation - if it does, please don't hesitate to reach out to me personally and we can continue chatting. The wheel itself, meaning it's fairness and randomness, was never broke - the defect revolved around users being able to bet more than 1% of the available bankroll. This surfaced in early May and (I agree) its something I wish we identified either before or shortly after the purchase in late February. To say it should come out of management's pockets is not the solution to this though, the equivalent would be for me to say "My team nailed the World Cup last month - that ~+15 BTC we took in should go directly to me and my guys". Goes without saying this is not how you run a business.. CBTC is a company - and unit holders share in the success and failures of the company, we are more than transparent with details and we strive to continue this level of transparency and be more successful. Regarding the buyback / retained profits: Any further acquisition is literally the last on our minds. We clearly have learned a lot with the Peerbet acquisition (see above) and need to really finish upgrading CasinoBitco.in and cleaning up PeerBet before we even consider any other consolidation of the marketplace - but in a few months when we are in a good spot, I wouldn't want us to not take on more opportunities if the situation is ideal. Before our next scheduled dividend (end of Q3), we will find a happy balance between unit buyback as well as the bolstering of the bankroll. Any decision will be properly communicated with all unit holders via the Havelock Update feature as well as our monthly reports. We just as frustrated with the low price as you are - but at the current price point it does seem like a great opportunity for us to start the buyback on the cheap. Because the player is a good, consistent player - and at the time (and even today), I don't believe he knew he was taking advantage of a defect - he was just playing. At the end of the day, we put ourselves in the player's shoes and imagined what it would feel like to hit essentially a jackpot - then not get paid out. The management collectively debated a few options and ultimately we decided it was in our best interests to do right by him and all our players - so we paid him out. "Our biggest expense in July was a 19 BTC payment for a user which won over 30 BTC
playing the PeerBet Wheel with only one spin. As discussed at the time this occurred in May,
there was a defect in the PeerBet application which allowed users to roll and potentially win more
than 1% of the bankroll this defect was addressed shortly after this user won. Worth noting,
while this actually occurred in May; the user that won agreed to be paid out 11 BTC at the time of
the spin, and the remaining BTC to be paid in July"
Why are we paying out for a defect?
All these defects are very concerning... I remember a few months ago where someone on Reddit had been arguing with you about a number of possible defects on the site and your complete denial that there were any. Now it is costing us a lot of money and it seems like they just keep popping up. As a programmer I would love to know how a wheel game - a glorified random number generator - could have such a large hole. I really hope this is the last of it. I have to agree with mr_e on this.. A wheel game is incredibly simple, even with the invest feature. You could have one developed in a ~month from scratch, easy. Most likely 2-3 weeks. CBTC has been in possession of Peerdice/wheel etc for what, 4-5 months now? Thats absolutely ridiculous. The defect should go out of managements paycheck, not having a script checked over before entrusting it with tens of thousands of dollars... I can't even. The share buybacks is good, however the funds being put towards the buyback are also being put towards bigger bankrolls / acquisitions and development? I think the acquisitions should slow down, as the sites currently being operated need to be fixed up first. Why not set aside ~20% of profit to development, and 30% to buybacks? Its very vague to say the least right now. Also, whats the current bankroll across all sites (Bankroll owned by CBTC that is)? Currently the "x" factor for CBTC is how much bankroll it has... The current share price is pretty pitiful. First time I have seen it under $.04 in value (currently at $.03), as well as dip below 5k satoshi. Buybacks can't happen soon enough |
|
|
|
senorbendito
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 7
Merit: 0
|
|
August 07, 2014, 03:38:01 PM |
|
I have to say the one thing that is concerning to me is that growth seems to be slowing down. Hoping football season brings some new players in
|
|
|
|
|
AcoinL.L.C
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 07, 2014, 09:39:11 PM |
|
mr_e and AnoinL.L.C -> This is fair criticism, so hopefully my response doesn't get lost in translation - if it does, please don't hesitate to reach out to me personally and we can continue chatting. The wheel itself, meaning it's fairness and randomness, was never broke - the defect revolved around users being able to bet more than 1% of the available bankroll. This surfaced in early May and (I agree) its something I wish we identified either before or shortly after the purchase in late February. To say it should come out of management's pockets is not the solution to this though, the equivalent would be for me to say "My team nailed the World Cup last month - that ~+15 BTC we took in should go directly to me and my guys". Goes without saying this is not how you run a business.. CBTC is a company - and unit holders share in the success and failures of the company, we are more than transparent with details and we strive to continue this level of transparency and be more successful. Regarding the buyback / retained profits: Any further acquisition is literally the last on our minds. We clearly have learned a lot with the Peerbet acquisition (see above) and need to really finish upgrading CasinoBitco.in and cleaning up PeerBet before we even consider any other consolidation of the marketplace - but in a few months when we are in a good spot, I wouldn't want us to not take on more opportunities if the situation is ideal. Before our next scheduled dividend (end of Q3), we will find a happy balance between unit buyback as well as the bolstering of the bankroll. Any decision will be properly communicated with all unit holders via the Havelock Update feature as well as our monthly reports. We just as frustrated with the low price as you are - but at the current price point it does seem like a great opportunity for us to start the buyback on the cheap. Because the player is a good, consistent player - and at the time (and even today), I don't believe he knew he was taking advantage of a defect - he was just playing. At the end of the day, we put ourselves in the player's shoes and imagined what it would feel like to hit essentially a jackpot - then not get paid out. The management collectively debated a few options and ultimately we decided it was in our best interests to do right by him and all our players - so we paid him out. "Our biggest expense in July was a 19 BTC payment for a user which won over 30 BTC
playing the PeerBet Wheel with only one spin. As discussed at the time this occurred in May,
there was a defect in the PeerBet application which allowed users to roll and potentially win more
than 1% of the bankroll this defect was addressed shortly after this user won. Worth noting,
while this actually occurred in May; the user that won agreed to be paid out 11 BTC at the time of
the spin, and the remaining BTC to be paid in July"
Why are we paying out for a defect?
All these defects are very concerning... I remember a few months ago where someone on Reddit had been arguing with you about a number of possible defects on the site and your complete denial that there were any. Now it is costing us a lot of money and it seems like they just keep popping up. As a programmer I would love to know how a wheel game - a glorified random number generator - could have such a large hole. I really hope this is the last of it. I have to agree with mr_e on this.. A wheel game is incredibly simple, even with the invest feature. You could have one developed in a ~month from scratch, easy. Most likely 2-3 weeks. CBTC has been in possession of Peerdice/wheel etc for what, 4-5 months now? Thats absolutely ridiculous. The defect should go out of managements paycheck, not having a script checked over before entrusting it with tens of thousands of dollars... I can't even. The share buybacks is good, however the funds being put towards the buyback are also being put towards bigger bankrolls / acquisitions and development? I think the acquisitions should slow down, as the sites currently being operated need to be fixed up first. Why not set aside ~20% of profit to development, and 30% to buybacks? Its very vague to say the least right now. Also, whats the current bankroll across all sites (Bankroll owned by CBTC that is)? Currently the "x" factor for CBTC is how much bankroll it has... The current share price is pretty pitiful. First time I have seen it under $.04 in value (currently at $.03), as well as dip below 5k satoshi. Buybacks can't happen soon enough Glad to hear that acquiring more sites is off the radar for the meanwhile. However, Im still baffled how a mistake in the code that significant was able to sit there for months without it being fixed. Was the script tested with more than the allowed max bet? A casinos first priority should be making sure their games work as intended, and testing them thoroughly before bringing them to the market. Maybe you should offer crowdcurity bounties across all the sites? And could you please PM me the current bankroll of all the sites if you don't want to publicly post it here, as its currently one of my biggest concerns with CBTC. |
|
|
|
|
xuyongpku
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 22
Merit: 0
|
|
August 09, 2014, 02:34:03 PM |
|
just a total liar!
The company is over, it is my worst investment!
|
|
|
|
|
_mr_e
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 817
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 09, 2014, 02:40:38 PM |
|
just a total liar!
The company is over, it is my worst investment!
Why do you say that? |
|
|
|
|
AcoinL.L.C
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 09, 2014, 03:58:10 PM |
|
just a total liar!
The company is over, it is my worst investment!
Why do you say that? Probably a troll. Lots of them on this forum |
|
|
|
|
_mr_e
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 817
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 09, 2014, 04:14:53 PM |
|
mr_e and AnoinL.L.C -> This is fair criticism, so hopefully my response doesn't get lost in translation - if it does, please don't hesitate to reach out to me personally and we can continue chatting. The wheel itself, meaning it's fairness and randomness, was never broke - the defect revolved around users being able to bet more than 1% of the available bankroll. This surfaced in early May and (I agree) its something I wish we identified either before or shortly after the purchase in late February. To say it should come out of management's pockets is not the solution to this though, the equivalent would be for me to say "My team nailed the World Cup last month - that ~+15 BTC we took in should go directly to me and my guys". Goes without saying this is not how you run a business.. CBTC is a company - and unit holders share in the success and failures of the company, we are more than transparent with details and we strive to continue this level of transparency and be more successful. Regarding the buyback / retained profits: Any further acquisition is literally the last on our minds. We clearly have learned a lot with the Peerbet acquisition (see above) and need to really finish upgrading CasinoBitco.in and cleaning up PeerBet before we even consider any other consolidation of the marketplace - but in a few months when we are in a good spot, I wouldn't want us to not take on more opportunities if the situation is ideal. Before our next scheduled dividend (end of Q3), we will find a happy balance between unit buyback as well as the bolstering of the bankroll. Any decision will be properly communicated with all unit holders via the Havelock Update feature as well as our monthly reports. We just as frustrated with the low price as you are - but at the current price point it does seem like a great opportunity for us to start the buyback on the cheap. Because the player is a good, consistent player - and at the time (and even today), I don't believe he knew he was taking advantage of a defect - he was just playing. At the end of the day, we put ourselves in the player's shoes and imagined what it would feel like to hit essentially a jackpot - then not get paid out. The management collectively debated a few options and ultimately we decided it was in our best interests to do right by him and all our players - so we paid him out. "Our biggest expense in July was a 19 BTC payment for a user which won over 30 BTC
playing the PeerBet Wheel with only one spin. As discussed at the time this occurred in May,
there was a defect in the PeerBet application which allowed users to roll and potentially win more
than 1% of the bankroll this defect was addressed shortly after this user won. Worth noting,
while this actually occurred in May; the user that won agreed to be paid out 11 BTC at the time of
the spin, and the remaining BTC to be paid in July"
Why are we paying out for a defect?
All these defects are very concerning... I remember a few months ago where someone on Reddit had been arguing with you about a number of possible defects on the site and your complete denial that there were any. Now it is costing us a lot of money and it seems like they just keep popping up. As a programmer I would love to know how a wheel game - a glorified random number generator - could have such a large hole. I really hope this is the last of it. I have to agree with mr_e on this.. A wheel game is incredibly simple, even with the invest feature. You could have one developed in a ~month from scratch, easy. Most likely 2-3 weeks. CBTC has been in possession of Peerdice/wheel etc for what, 4-5 months now? Thats absolutely ridiculous. The defect should go out of managements paycheck, not having a script checked over before entrusting it with tens of thousands of dollars... I can't even. The share buybacks is good, however the funds being put towards the buyback are also being put towards bigger bankrolls / acquisitions and development? I think the acquisitions should slow down, as the sites currently being operated need to be fixed up first. Why not set aside ~20% of profit to development, and 30% to buybacks? Its very vague to say the least right now. Also, whats the current bankroll across all sites (Bankroll owned by CBTC that is)? Currently the "x" factor for CBTC is how much bankroll it has... The current share price is pretty pitiful. First time I have seen it under $.04 in value (currently at $.03), as well as dip below 5k satoshi. Buybacks can't happen soon enough Anyway this makes sense, I just really hope we can keep improving. Thank you for your honesty and openness. Our SEO results still seem sub par in a lot of important categories, any ideas why and what are we doing to improve them further? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ozziecoin
|
|
August 18, 2014, 02:20:18 PM |
|
I'm surprised cbtc has not replicated the just dice site.
|
|
|
|
AcoinL.L.C
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 18, 2014, 06:23:23 PM |
|
I'm surprised cbtc has not replicated the just dice site.
They have Peerbet which is similar to Just-Dice, users can invest. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ozziecoin
|
|
August 19, 2014, 02:00:07 AM |
|
I'm surprised cbtc has not replicated the just dice site.
They have Peerbet which is similar to Just-Dice, users can invest. Yes, you are right. Shows you how much I know about gambling. LOL. |
|
|
|
_mr_e
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 817
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 19, 2014, 02:03:07 AM |
|
I'm surprised cbtc has not replicated the just dice site.
They have Peerbet which is similar to Just-Dice, users can invest. Haven't seen it marketed nearly as well as just dice... they had such a big thing going. |
|
|
|
|
AcoinL.L.C
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 19, 2014, 03:04:15 AM |
|
I'm surprised cbtc has not replicated the just dice site.
They have Peerbet which is similar to Just-Dice, users can invest. Haven't seen it marketed nearly as well as just dice... they had such a big thing going. I think peerbet could easily become one of their biggest money makers, especially since they accept so many different cryptos, wouldn't even require much of a marketing budget. Just have someone go on each coins respective forum / ANN page on BTT and post about it... Lots of altcoin users are looking for places to spend/invest their coins, and Peerbet could eat that market up. Only competition is DiceBitco.in really, and they are solely BTC (for investments, they also run a LTC site)... And even than only have 1/15-1/16th of the amount of funds Just-Dice had invested. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ozziecoin
|
|
August 19, 2014, 03:08:26 AM |
|
I'm surprised cbtc has not replicated the just dice site.
They have Peerbet which is similar to Just-Dice, users can invest. Haven't seen it marketed nearly as well as just dice... they had such a big thing going. I think peerbet could easily become one of their biggest money makers, especially since they accept so many different cryptos, wouldn't even require much of a marketing budget. Just have someone go on each coins respective forum / ANN page on BTT and post about it... Lots of altcoin users are looking for places to spend/invest their coins, and Peerbet could eat that market up. Only competition is DiceBitco.in really, and they are solely BTC (for investments, they also run a LTC site)... And even than only have 1/15-1/16th of the amount of funds Just-Dice had invested. The PeerDice black background is extremely off putting. JD's colour scheme was much nicer. |
|
|
|
|
