Will Cassino Continue With Wagering Requirements, If Abuse is Eliminated?

[Wiwo]

One thing that has disturbed me a lot lately and that has awakened my thoughts lately is casino bonuses and how it works, if you can recall, most of the casinos offer various bonuses and other promotions because that is one of the fasted ways to attract new and old players to continue playing on the casino. But one of the major challenges that gamblers face with these bonuses and promos are the rules that are attached to them, e.g wagering requirements and other rules that need to be met before withdrawals are processed.
This led me to this question
1: What is your opinion on casinos that offers wagering requirements on both deposit and bonuses?
2: what do you think, if all necessary security checks are up to 100% and Abuse is totally eliminated from casinos, do you think gambling sites will make a no wagering requirement on their bonuses?
3: what conditional do you think could perfectly replace the wagering requirement in a casino that will serve players' purposes and also protect the revenue of the casino

[1714298051]

1714298051

[1714298051]

1714298051

[1714298051]

1714298051

[1714298051]

1714298051

[AmoreJaz]

the reality is, there will always be abusers. i don't think it can be eliminated especially if the casino is not requiring kyc to its customers. even some licensed casinos are still not requiring kyc for their small time bettors. so it is far from happening that abuse will be eliminated in my opinion.
the possibility is - they may lower their wagering requirements but they will keep certain conditions to avoid rampant abuse of their bonuses or rewards.

[robelneo]

This led me to this question
1: What is your opinion on casinos that offers wagering requirements on both deposit and bonuses?

It's an industry practice that has been going on for many years and has proven to attract new players, get more activity in casinos and be profitable for both casinos and motivate players to deposit and play.

2: what do you think, if all necessary security checks are up to 100% and Abuse is totally eliminated from casinos, do you think gambling sites will make a no wagering requirement on their bonuses?

Why would they? casinos are living on their player's deposits and playing activity, there are always wagering requirements in everything you do in casinos.

[harizen]

1: What is your opinion on casinos that offers wagering requirements on both deposit and bonuses?

Promotions and bonuses should be expected to have wagering requirements. That's not even a question.

Gambling sites won't give free money obviously. Users need to work on something fairly in order to get those bonuses.

2: what do you think, if all necessary security checks are up to 100% and Abuse is totally eliminated from casinos, do you think gambling sites will make a no wagering requirement on their bonuses?

I doubt. Especially for new gambling sites.

They might end up facing bankruptcy at the early stage if no such wagering requirements will be applied especially if there are lots of users who will gain the bonus. The wagering requirement is also necessary as users won't stay on that site if the bonus doesn't have any requirements. They need to do something for these players to stay for quite a long and that's the purpose of the wagering requirements.

The requirement will also trigger their users to deposit more just to achieve the bonus.

[danherbias07]

1. The wagering requirement is mandatory and will not be eliminated. That's proof that you are not just depositing for the bonus and the goal is to gamble. That already takes out the abuse.
This leads to the next question.
2. No, they will not. The reason is because of number 1.
There will always be abuse and they won't give out free money just because you made a deposit. Even banks don't give out interest in just a short amount of time. It takes years for just an increase of 1 percent or maybe less.

[goinmerry]

No way a wagering requirement will be eliminated. They just attract users but keeping them loyal will be a question.

For sure these users will just get the bonus and afterward, they will leave the site for good.

Definitely not a good idea for them to consider doing that and I doubt a gambling site will do that for real.

[pixie85]

the reality is, there will always be abusers. i don't think it can be eliminated especially if the casino is not requiring kyc to its customers. even some licensed casinos are still not requiring kyc for their small time bettors. so it is far from happening that abuse will be eliminated in my opinion.
the possibility is - they may lower their wagering requirements but they will keep certain conditions to avoid rampant abuse of their bonuses or rewards.

I have the same opinion. 

I have nothing against the wagering requirement. Bonuses are optional and you shouldn't choose a casino only for their bonus. Play like you would and if you happen to get the bonus and do all the wagers it's good for you, free money!

The requirement has become a standard in the industry and It's not going away. It can get lower but it won't disappear. One of the reasons for it is you cannot get rid of abuse in full. There will always be innovative people who will find ways to do it and there's a lot of poor gamblers who'd do a lot for a few dollars. The wagering requirement is the easiest way to stop the abuse. It's that or full KYC on registration and nobody has time to do that.

[Hispo]

1: What is your opinion on casinos that offers wagering requirements on both deposit and bonuses?
2: what do you think, if all necessary security checks are up to 100% and Abuse is totally eliminated from casinos, do you think gambling sites will make a no wagering requirement on their bonuses?

1. To me it sounds reasonable. Because casinos business model completely depend on people depositing and placing wagers on their money, they also place those requirements to incentivize people to wager more, so they can become part of a higher tier and have access to those perks.

2.that would imply casinos would need to go further and impose even tougher KYC (which would be highly unpopular). There is also the possibility of casinos losing money (specially the small ones) if they do not administer bonuses correctly.  

In the end, I don't think wagering requirements are going to disappear. Sure, there could be ways to make them more accessible  and friendly to newcomers or small gamblers, but from the point of view of a casino owner, they help to keep things going.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

1: What is your opinion on casinos that offers wagering requirements on both deposit and bonuses?

Here you have the best reply:

Promotions and bonuses should be expected to have wagering requirements. That's not even a question.

Gambling sites won't give free money obviously.

If you give me a 100% bonus, I deposit 1 bitcoin, and if there are no wagering requirements, as soon as you deposit the other bitcoin into my account, I withdraw 2 bitcoin. A 100% return in a moment. Much better than any bet or investment.

It would bankrupt the casinos fast.

2: what do you think, if all necessary security checks are up to 100% and Abuse is totally eliminated from casinos, do you think gambling sites will make a no wagering requirement on their bonuses?

2.that would imply casinos would need to go further and impose even tougher KYC (which would be highly unpopular). There is also the possibility of casinos losing money (specially the small ones) if they do not administer bonuses correctly. 

I don't see the KYC thing, as there are also wagering requirements at fiat casinos, such as Bwin or Betfair. Yes, it would be useful so that, following the example I gave earlier, the same person could not double their bitcoins in an instant with a multitude of slopes created, but the risk of bankruptcy without wagering requirements is there, regardless of KYC or not.

[Jawhead999]

1. This mean the casino want to increase the wagering requirement difficulty since you need to able meet the requirement on both deposit and bonuses.

2. Security check doesn't only used to fight against abusers and multiple accounts, but it's used to fight against people who want to get free money from the casino! Can you think if the casino remove the wagering requirement and they have 200% deposit bonus? the casino will rekt soon since the users can double their money without need to gamble! deposit $200 withdraw $400, deposit $400 withdraw $800 lol.

[Wiwo]

1. This mean the casino want to increase the wagering requirement difficulty since you need to able meet the requirement on both deposit and bonuses.

That is what it is right now, what motivated me to start this discussion is because of recent development as noticed with new casinos that offers player high bonus but have a max x50 wager requirements.

2. Security check doesn't only used to fight against abusers and multiple accounts, but it's used to fight against people who want to get free money from the casino! Can you think if the casino remove the wagering requirement and they have 200% deposit bonus? the casino will rekt soon since the users can double their money without the need to gamble! deposit $200 withdraw $400, deposit $400 withdraw $800 lol.

I agree with you, wagering requirements don't only combat multiple accounting by abusers but also help to protect the casino revenues, but if that is the case, there could be a better way to do that. It doesn't mean if wagering requirements are not there it will result in deposits, bonus claims and withdrawals. There could be a better way to do that without emptying players all in an attempt to meet the casino wager requirement.

[klidex]

One thing that has disturbed me a lot lately and that has awakened my thoughts lately is casino bonuses and how it works, if you can recall, most of the casinos offer various bonuses and other promotions because that is one of the fasted ways to attract new and old players to continue playing on the casino. But one of the major challenges that gamblers face with these bonuses and promos are the rules that are attached to them, e.g wagering requirements and other rules that need to be met before withdrawals are processed.
This led me to this question
1: What is your opinion on casinos that offers wagering requirements on both deposit and bonuses?
2: what do you think, if all necessary security checks are up to 100% and Abuse is totally eliminated from casinos, do you think gambling sites will make a no wagering requirement on their bonuses?
3: what conditional do you think could perfectly replace the wagering requirement in a casino that will serve players' purposes and also protect the revenue of the casino

1. Wagering requirements for deposits and bonuses are conditions that are used by some casino sites to be able to provide bonuses with the aim of users being able to increase their VIP account rankings and with other goals so that each user makes a deposit to play or bet in the casino without relying solely on bonuses given.
2. It seems that the abuse will not be removed from the casino and remains, And the no-wager requirement will never happen because the purpose of the casino is the same as I said in my first point of statement and will remain the same for the foreseeable future.

[Wexnident]

1: What is your opinion on casinos that offers wagering requirements on both deposit and bonuses?
2: what do you think, if all necessary security checks are up to 100% and Abuse is totally eliminated from casinos, do you think gambling sites will make a no wagering requirement on their bonuses?
3: what conditional do you think could perfectly replace the wagering requirement in a casino that will serve players' purposes and also protect the revenue of the casino

1. Understandable. Otherwise, bonuses and the like would most likely be abused, and they'd have no real profit off of the freebies they give (not that there is in the first place though, it's only in the cases that they actually win through said bonuses after all).
2. No. As I said earlier, abuses aren't the only factor involved here, it's also the potential profits they could by making new users reach that set wager limit. In the first place, I think abuses are already countered with the fact that most casinos require KYC on withdrawal? Just that is enough to promote a ban if they discovered multi-accounting for bonuses.
3. Again, none, simply because it isn't only protecting the revenue of casinos, but rather increasing it.

[davis196]

2: what do you think, if all necessary security checks are up to 100% and Abuse is totally eliminated from casinos, do you think gambling sites will make a no wagering requirement on their bonuses?
3: what conditional do you think could perfectly replace the wagering requirement in a casino that will serve players' purposes and also protect the revenue of the casino

1.The wagering requirement is the main protection against abuse. Can you come up with other security checks and anti-fraud measures?
It's like asking the question: "Would you rob a bank, if there are no guards, the cameras aren't working and you have all the keys?" Of course that some people will try to abuse the system, when the security is off.
2.The casinos, that offer bonuses without a wagering requirement will simply lose their money, because everyone will abuse the bonus system until the casino goes bankrupt. There's no alternative to the wagering requirement. The people, who think that KYC is a good replacement to the wagering requirement are naive. The darkweb is full with stolen ID pictures and info, which can be used for ID verification.

[bittraffic]

Wagering requirements serve a number of purposes for the operators. They make sure users are actually playing games and have deposited and bet a certain amount and that users didn't just take advantage of the bonuses and promos. It becomes a standard part of casino operators already as a sort of protecting thier interest.

[Cookdata]

One thing we should keep in mind, no matter the good intention of casinos to give back to players and bring in more players, there would be a collective set of people that would abuse that privilege, they would want to milk that advantage, and that is why I sometimes don't blame the casino, after all, is their money they are suing to attract players, there rule there way.

1: What is your opinion on casinos that offers wagering requirements on both deposit and bonuses?
2: what do you think, if all necessary security checks are up to 100% and Abuse is totally eliminated from casinos, do you think gambling sites will make a no wagering requirement on their bonuses?
3: what conditional do you think could perfectly replace the wagering requirement in a casino that will serve players' purposes and also protect the revenue of the casino

The essence of the bonus is to increase the funds of players with a little amount or increase player's funds in general, at least it will increase their potential cashout, I don't think there are benefits of the bonus if a player doesn't use it to wager or stake any games, the bonus is non-withdrawable until a player use it to play one to two games depending on the casino.

[iv4n]

2: what do you think, if all necessary security checks are up to 100% and Abuse is totally eliminated from casinos, do you think gambling sites will make a no wagering requirement on their bonuses?

Why would they? casinos are living on their player's deposits and playing activity, there are always wagering requirements in everything you do in casinos.

I agree, in casinos, it's all about wagering... and without wagering requirements, it would be like casinos are giving away money! But casinos are not charity organizations, and even if abuse is completely eliminated there will be wagering requirements for all casino features.

When it comes to money, I never saw any casino that gives some "free cash" without wagering requirements before withdrawal... imagine that abuse if you can register, get some free cash and withdraw that cash immediately! I guess even with mandatory KYC people will try to take as much as they can...
But some casinos give "free spins" without wagering requirements, but the tricky part is that with 20-30 spins you need to be extremely lucky to hit something nice. Usually, it's a few dollars so you need to play more before you reach the minimum withdrawal amount.

[coin-investor]

One thing that has disturbed me a lot lately and that has awakened my thoughts lately is casino bonuses and how it works, if you can recall, most of the casinos offer various bonuses and other promotions because that is one of the fasted ways to attract new and old players to continue playing on the casino. But one of the major challenges that gamblers face with these bonuses and promos are the rules that are attached to them, e.g wagering requirements and other rules that need to be met before withdrawals are processed.

Why fix it when it's not broken, casinos get more players, and players are motivated to play for the requirements on their bonuses, casinos make a profit from players playing, and the casinos match these with bonuses on what they wager.


This led me to this question
1: What is your opinion on casinos that offers wagering requirements on both deposit and bonuses?
It's the best that they can employ to prevent abuses because even if they have a good tracking system abusers will still try to abuse and cheat, wagering is here to prevent this.

2: what do you think, if all necessary security checks are up to 100% and Abuse is totally eliminated from casinos, do you think gambling sites will make a no-wagering requirement on their bonuses?

They will still implement to encourage their players to put in more money to reach the wagering requirement, casinos will not take out something that is advantageous and profitable for them.

3: what conditional do you think could perfectly replace the wagering requirement in a casino that will serve players' purposes and also protect the revenue of the casino

I cannot think of anything, casinos are making money on this and preventing abuse and cheating what could be a more effective method that casinos can employ when this is already a good one.

[Vaskiy]

Wagering is the key process with which the casinos make the revenue. If there is no wagering requirements, then what casinos pay as bonus and promo were just an unwanted spending for them. When people continue to wager, they can be on the winning and losing streak which brings revenue to the casino. Casinos continue with wager requirements amidst the abuse, however things were organised abuse will continue to happen.

[Saisher]

The wagering requirement is here to stay because it was created to serve the casinos, not the gamblers, cheaters, and abusers will not vanish, cheaters will always cheat, and abusers will always abuse, and the wagering requirement was put in place to prevent this.

This is the best casinos can come out to prevent abusers and its been going on since, and I don't think a casino can survive if they implement bonuses without wagering requirements, they will have to double their effort to weed out abusers because it will be targeted by cheaters and abusers.