METAWIN - Transparent, Fast, Frictionless. $CASINO 🔥

[Free Market Capitalist]

Even with 0 house edge I am pretty sure they still make money, just because we are humans and we have flaws. Most people want "one more bet" or want "just a little more" until the losing run comes, that's just how it is.

By the way, a "normal casino" also doesn't have 0 house edge games. Every game in a physical casino has house edge, may it be the 0 in roulette or any other games.

No, not really. If someone plays those 0% HE games, it doesn't matter whether they bet more or less.

What's more, from an accounting point of view, MetaWin loses money on 0% HE games, because in terms of the game itself, the profit is 0 (as is the loss), but in a profit and loss statement, you have to take into account the cost of setting up and running those games. The thing is, it more than makes up for it with the profit from other games. From a business point of view, giving something away for free usually works very well to increase traffic/sales. And in this case, I'm sure that 0% games are a good attraction to increase the total revenue of the site, including games that do have an HE.

[avp2306]

While I agree, zero house edge are definitely the better choice to play, it is quite sad the wager has 0 impact on your overall wager for bonuses or level ups. I mean I understand where they are coming from but I think there should be some sort of reward since players risk their money on those games after all.
Maybe they could make those 0 HE games count at least a minor percentage to the rewards, even 10% only would be nice I think. 0 though is a bit harsh but that's only my personal opinion of course.

Are there really games with 0 house edge, like a normal casino game? If so, how are they even making money from that? They’re a casino, they’re supposed to earn from gamblers. A 0 house edge basically means 50–50 chances, and that doesn’t really make sense to me.

Can you explain what specific games people are actually talking about here? ( is it p2p game?)

The 0 house edge games are all originals. They have dice, limbo and others:



Even with 0 house edge I am pretty sure they still make money, just because we are humans and we have flaws. Most people want "one more bet" or want "just a little more" until the losing run comes, that's just how it is.

By the way, a "normal casino" also doesn't have 0 house edge games. Every game in a physical casino has house edge, may it be the 0 in roulette or any other games.

Even if these games shown zero house edge, the casino it self still get profit. Because there are lots of their gamblers didn't choose to top especially when they are enjoying or either trying to chase losses or profit.

Still the design itself is still relying on human behavior. Usually lots of people like to chase and try to win more.

So with all of those  typically the advantage is not been created on the rules they implement, but rather on how people play or gamble. This shows how reliable it is even if they offer zero house edge on some of their games.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

Even with 0 house edge I am pretty sure they still make money, just because we are humans and we have flaws. Most people want "one more bet" or want "just a little more" until the losing run comes, that's just how it is.

By the way, a "normal casino" also doesn't have 0 house edge games. Every game in a physical casino has house edge, may it be the 0 in roulette or any other games.

No, not really. If someone plays those 0% HE games, it doesn't matter whether they bet more or less.

What's more, from an accounting point of view, MetaWin loses money on 0% HE games, because in terms of the game itself, the profit is 0 (as is the loss), but in a profit and loss statement, you have to take into account the cost of setting up and running those games. The thing is, it more than makes up for it with the profit from other games. From a business point of view, giving something away for free usually works very well to increase traffic/sales. And in this case, I'm sure that 0% games are a good attraction to increase the total revenue of the site, including games that do have an HE.

I have to disagree. In the long run the "person" with the bigger amount of cash will win on a 50/50 game. A casino has basically an "endless" amount of money they are risking, since the money is just a number on the screen. The player on the other hand will go broke sooner or later, unless he gets lucky and finishes being up. Since we know human nature many people won't stop on time and likely lose or give it all back, 2% house edge or nothing.
0% house edge has no impact on the result of the game, just increases the winnings by a tiny percentage. People will lose no matter what if they don't play careful AND get lucky, that's just how it is. If a player will lose at dice with 2% HE he will also lose at 0%. And as well all know, winners are much less than losers, otherwise this business would not be so profitable.

So having more funds available is also some sort of house EDGE if you know what I mean.

[shield132]

No, not really. If someone plays those 0% HE games, it doesn't matter whether they bet more or less.

You and I had a discussion about that a few weeks ago. Mathematically, 0% house edge means that over a long gambling session (million bets), the user doesn't lose money, nor gains money and their capital stays the same but I believe that their impulses can affect the outcome of the result and even in the case of 0% house edge, most of them will lose their whole capital. For example, if players play with a martingale strategy, they'll lose money, despite the fact that the house edge is 0% because the casino has a higher bankroll than you and they also set a limit on max bet and max win. If you deposit 1 Bitcoin and play with 0.00000001 Btc, then after a million bet, you'll still have 1 Bitcoin on your balance.

[Vaculin]

The 0 house edge games are all originals. They have dice, limbo and others:

Thanks mate, i wasn't able to explore these games yet as I'm mostly into slots

Even with 0 house edge I am pretty sure they still make money, just because we are humans and we have flaws. Most people want "one more bet" or want "just a little more" until the losing run comes, that's just how it is.

By the way, a "normal casino" also doesn't have 0 house edge games. Every game in a physical casino has house edge, may it be the 0 in roulette or any other games.

If that’s the reason, then they’re not consistently profitable. If the flaws aren’t consistent, the results won’t be either.

I know they still make money from it, but I’m pretty sure there are other reasons behind it, not just what we’re seeing.
Anyway, not like I’m gonna ask the admin about that lol.

[Russlenat]

So with all of those  typically the advantage is not been created on the rules they implement, but rather on how people play or gamble. This shows how reliable it is even if they offer zero house edge on some of their games.

Casinos don’t really have an advantage in games with zero house edge, the name already explains it. They also won’t go bankrupt because they can still set limits, especially for gamblers who are chasing. So technically, they don’t lose and they don’t win, it’s basically 50–50.

The trick is, once players get bored with those boring zero-edge games, they eventually move on to other games. And that’s where the house edge kicks in and where casinos actually make money.

So in the end, it still works in the casino’s favor. It’s more of a marketing move, but casinos benefit anyway.

[Mahdirakib]

~ Maybe they could make those 0 HE games count at least a minor percentage to the rewards, even 10% only would be nice I think. 0 though is a bit harsh but that's only my personal opinion of course.

Users will start to use the wagering strategy heavily if MetaWin team give rewards for the wager on those zero house edge games. And they have to give everything from their own pocket as they won't generate any revenue from those games in the long run. I think users would still love it if they consider the wager of zero house edge game for rank up without any rewards. BTW, we get $CASINO points for wagering on zero house edge games.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

~ Maybe they could make those 0 HE games count at least a minor percentage to the rewards, even 10% only would be nice I think. 0 though is a bit harsh but that's only my personal opinion of course.

Users will start to use the wagering strategy heavily if MetaWin team give rewards for the wager on those zero house edge games. And they have to give everything from their own pocket as they won't generate any revenue from those games in the long run. I think users would still love it if they consider the wager of zero house edge game for rank up without any rewards. BTW, we get $CASINO points for wagering on zero house edge games.

$Casino have no value though  . And who says they won't generate revenue. You do know that the profit from house edge only comes into play after 10s or hundreds of thousand of bets, not from like 1000 bets or something. Gamblers will always be gamblers. At least 80% lose what they deposit, 0 or 2% house edge, it won't matter since it doesn't change anything of the outcome of the game.
A losing session is still a losing session, no matter the house edge. Be honest, you have more losing or winning sessions on any site? I bet it's losing, and house edge wouldn't have changed anything about that.

[notocactus]

$Casino have no value though  . And who says they won't generate revenue. You do know that the profit from house edge only comes into play after 10s or hundreds of thousand of bets, not from like 1000 bets or something. Gamblers will always be gamblers. At least 80% lose what they deposit, 0 or 2% house edge, it won't matter since it doesn't change anything of the outcome of the game.
A losing session is still a losing session, no matter the house edge. Be honest, you have more losing or winning sessions on any site? I bet it's losing, and house edge wouldn't have changed anything about that.

The house edge only makes gamblers feel safer or worse about a gambling platform they fund their account and bet there. It does not decide their win or lose rates in bets as the more decisive factors come from gamblers themselves, the saying exclude professional and disciplined gamblers. Most gamblers are very emotional and not disciplined with their bet actions, and I completely agree with you that with whichever house edge, most gamblers lose money as reasons are from themselves, and any house edge given by a casino does not change user bet habits.

It's different with experienced and disciplined gamblers but how many gamblers are like this, it's quite clearly that they are only very minority of gambler community.

[ryzaadit]

So in the end, it still works in the casino’s favor. It’s more of a marketing move, but casinos benefit anyway.

Agree, it's mostly marketing.

Plus, to be honest no many people are gonna to stay long in originals game. Either they're losing all the money or just like you said get consistent loses on originals games and moving on to other game.

It's basically a marketing, agree with these. Casino mostly makes money from my opinion on slots games, while these is the one most people are gonna to be play.... some people playing originals but not really long they will switch up maybe 5 mins at least.

[xLays]

Just saw this on metawin x.com account. Insane max win hit $1.5 base bet with x25,000 multiplier on Big Bass Splash.
Total win was $37k. Makes me wonder when it will be my turn to hit something that big on slots.

Guys you can also check this metawin tweet: https://x.com/i/status/2006420954424168853
Just comment any number from 00 to 99 on that tweet. Two winners will get $400 each. Trying luck there, maybe easier to win through metawin x.com giveaway.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

Just saw this on metawin x.com account. Insane max win hit $1.5 base bet with x25,000 multiplier on Big Bass Splash.
Total win was $37k. Makes me wonder when it will be my turn to hit something that big on slots.

Guys you can also check this metawin tweet: https://x.com/i/status/2006420954424168853
Just comment any number from 00 to 99 on that tweet. Two winners will get $400 each. Trying luck there, maybe easier to win through metawin x.com giveaway.

Some people really get insanely lucky, will never be me, haha.

Today is the first time I actually need to contact the support via discord cause for some reason I didn't get the weekly bonus, no clue why. Had 32k wager in the last 7 days. Ok, 23k came from no house edge games but the rest was with house edge. So I am a little bit confused, haha. Let's see how the discord experience is.

Edit: Discord support was pretty helpful. It takes a while to get them to reply but then all good. Weekly hasn't been paid yet, just the timer is off, haha. All good.

[Free Market Capitalist]

I have to disagree. In the long run the "person" with the bigger amount of cash will win on a 50/50 game. A casino has basically an "endless" amount of money they are risking, since the money is just a number on the screen. The player on the other hand will go broke sooner or later, unless he gets lucky and finishes being up.

Not really. What do you call "go broke"? Me depositing $100, playing a 0% game and losing the deposit due to short-term variance is not going broke because next week I will deposit $100 more. The thing is, if I just play 0% games (which very rarely happens, if at all) in the very long run the total deposits and the total wins will be equal.

So having more funds available is also some sort of house EDGE if you know what I mean.

You are simply wrong. A 0% HE gives 0 profit to the casino if we account for the total numbers. Actually, negative return if we take into account the costs as I was saying above.

You and I had a discussion about that a few weeks ago. Mathematically, 0% house edge means that over a long gambling session (million bets), the user doesn't lose money, nor gains money and their capital stays the same but I believe that their impulses can affect the outcome of the result and even in the case of 0% house edge, most of them will lose their whole capital.

The same as above because actually the casino reaches those numbers. An individual may play only 100 times but the casino is playing the 0% HE game against all players so the numbers are so high that the net profit is 0. Negative if we take into account the costs.

The profit comes from the other games, those with a HE higher than 0.

[avp2306]

So with all of those  typically the advantage is not been created on the rules they implement, but rather on how people play or gamble. This shows how reliable it is even if they offer zero house edge on some of their games.

Casinos don’t really have an advantage in games with zero house edge, the name already explains it. They also won’t go bankrupt because they can still set limits, especially for gamblers who are chasing. So technically, they don’t lose and they don’t win, it’s basically 50–50.

The trick is, once players get bored with those boring zero-edge games, they eventually move on to other games. And that’s where the house edge kicks in and where casinos actually make money.

So in the end, it still works in the casino’s favor. It’s more of a marketing move, but casinos benefit anyway.

At the end of the day this is smart marketing move since people would provably like the zero house edge on what they see on their original games. This is also the reason why they made lots of good promotion to their other casino games just like the newly launch one Legend of Tartarus since they want those people got attracted on their other promotion to try everything what they have on their casino. Then eventually that's really how they can earn long term profits with gamblers in their casino. That's why casino always wins right? 

Just saw this on metawin x.com account. Insane max win hit $1.5 base bet with x25,000 multiplier on Big Bass Splash.
Total win was $37k. Makes me wonder when it will be my turn to hit something that big on slots.

Guys you can also check this metawin tweet: https://x.com/i/status/2006420954424168853
Just comment any number from 00 to 99 on that tweet. Two winners will get $400 each. Trying luck there, maybe easier to win through metawin x.com giveaway.

What a great win to start this year earned by that player and amazing that he lucky manage to hit that huge multiplier for just betting $1.5 bet.

Maybe other people will also got a share from the luck gotten by that player and win $400, so will try to participate and who knows people out here will win in their giveaway/

[Mahdirakib]

~snip~ A losing session is still a losing session, no matter the house edge. Be honest, you have more losing or winning sessions on any site? I bet it's losing, and house edge wouldn't have changed anything about that.

I can’t deny that I have more losing sessions than winning ones in the casinos where I play regularly. However, the house edge has a psychological impact on our gameplay. My confidence increases when I play zero house edge games at MetaWin compared to games with a fixed house edge. But I agree that we will lose our balance in the same way in zero house edge games as we do in games with a house edge.

[Russlenat]

At the end of the day this is smart marketing move since people would provably like the zero house edge on what they see on their original games.

If there are statistics to back it up then I’d agree. But honestly I think most people still prefer slots because they’re more fun, there are tons of games to choose from across different providers. And I don’t really think people care that much about house edge, they care more about the overall experience.

This is also the reason why they made lots of good promotion to their other casino games just like the newly launch one Legend of Tartarus since they want those people got attracted on their other promotion to try everything what they have on their casino. Then eventually that's really how they can earn long term profits with gamblers in their casino. That's why casino always wins right? 

That's the beauty of a healthy competition.

[shield132]

Guys, doesn't Metawin have a Christmas logo? I don't see a Christmas logo on the website.

The same as above because actually the casino reaches those numbers. An individual may play only 100 times but the casino is playing the 0% HE game against all players so the numbers are so high that the net profit is 0. Negative if we take into account the costs.

The profit comes from the other games, those with a HE higher than 0.

I understand what you say but I really would love to see the statistics. For example, how many people played 0% house edge in December, how many bets were placed and in the end, how the balance between house and players looks like.
Btw if the statistics show that in the end, a net profit is 0, which means that players' bankroll in general, not individually, stayed the same when summarised, then Metawin's profit will be negative because it costs them money to run the website, run games, run servers, maintain a team of developers to maintain games and fix bugs or add/improve the code.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

~snip~ A losing session is still a losing session, no matter the house edge. Be honest, you have more losing or winning sessions on any site? I bet it's losing, and house edge wouldn't have changed anything about that.

I can’t deny that I have more losing sessions than winning ones in the casinos where I play regularly. However, the house edge has a psychological impact on our gameplay. My confidence increases when I play zero house edge games at MetaWin compared to games with a fixed house edge. But I agree that we will lose our balance in the same way in zero house edge games as we do in games with a house edge.

Like I've always said and will always say, losing is like the normal thing in gambling, this is to say that the games we play are designed for us to lose more than we win, and this make it natural when we lose while winning is more uncommon, valued and celebrated because it's an outcome we don't see often, and we all know that whatever we want that is very scarce to get is always of high value.

Outcomes is generally the same for all games since they all require us to be lucky, and this is for both the house edged games and the zero house edged game. Many gambler find it hard to win games like slot or casino games which are house edged, while many gamblers still find it difficult to also win zero house edged games like sports betting as well, and this is because luck is still a major factor required in this two types of games to win.

[stadus]

Outcomes is generally the same for all games since they all require us to be lucky, and this is for both the house edged games and the zero house edged game.

Still not really, otherwise there’s no difference between games with no house edge and those with a house edge.
When people say we all lose in the long run, that’s because of the house edge. Without a house edge, that outcome isn’t guaranteed.

Many gambler find it hard to win games like slot or casino games which are house edged, while many gamblers still find it difficult to also win zero house edged games like sports betting as well, and this is because luck is still a major factor required in this two types of games to win.

Sports betting doesn’t really have a house edge the way they claim, but the odds they present already have it embedded.
Ever wondered why sportsbooks usually give only around 1.90 on games with even chances, like spreads and totals?

[notocactus]

I understand what you say but I really would love to see the statistics. For example, how many people played 0% house edge in December, how many bets were placed and in the end, how the balance between house and players looks like.
Btw if the statistics show that in the end, a net profit is 0, which means that players' bankroll in general, not individually, stayed the same when summarised, then Metawin's profit will be negative because it costs them money to run the website, run games, run servers, maintain a team of developers to maintain games and fix bugs or add/improve the code.

If running a business leads to negative financial result, it will be harmful for any business and it only can be accepted at begining or any short time during operation. In a long run, no business will accept it and they will have to make big changes for turning negative to positive or they will have to make vital decision to stop that product. Running it for a longer time without big changes that can turn the result from negative to positive, only harm their business more, so stopping it is a must.

If you see a product is available a long time, and there are many users with that product, likely it is profitable for the company.