Couple of things to note here:
- the first two "reviews" (by mdarowiche1978 and laka44) are nearly identical.
- player complaint from Arizona should probably be dismissed as I'm pretty sure they don't allow American players (most casinos don't)
Now that those are out of the way, let's first address this 7.4 Rating that is WAYYY too generous given my previously mentioned red flags.
This is simply a lightly reskinned Goldwin, which has a 3.5 Rating here.
Both have the same operator (Gladiator Holding NV) that I've never heard of, yet Goldwin claims that they have no sister sites.
Oddly enough, BetMaximus appears to operate on the old 365/JAZ license that Goldwin no longer displays.
Just to add a little more fuel to this fire, West Casino (the former Goldwin's MGA-licensed sister) is still being operated by GoldWin LTD.
Something is not right here and I believe that the rating should reflect that, as a 7.4 is far too high for the amount of red flags this throws up.
Hello.
if you can prove reviews are fake, please follow any supportive evidence right now to community@casino.guru
You know, we just can't reject the review because it feels similar - we need to have proof because we must explain the rejection to the player. If you aim to help with that, we're here.
Its safety index is explained, and I'd like to point out that user rating is not involved in the safety index - it's kept separately because it will never be 100% proven.
If you come across details about any casino you want us to know about, feel free to use this form:
I can assure you our Data Team appreciates every lead you have. So, don't hesitate. Finding decent information specifically for freshly established casinos is not an easy task.
Additionally, this is the only complaint we got, and the player was not interested in cooperation, so there is not much to find out:
🤷♀️
I appreciate your insight and will be here for possible follow-up.
Did you actually look at the two reviews in question? I never said whether I thought they were fake or not, just that they were nearly identical.
They're not positive reviews, so they're not paid for by the casino, but even an UNtrained monkey could tell that there's a definite connection between the two posts.
Regarding the player complaint, I understand why the player didn't cooperate: it's because he lives in a country that the casino doesn't accept registrations from.
"The player from Arizona.." was all I needed to see. They don't accept Americans. Very few casinos do.
The "Let me know" button is useless. I've submitted many corrections using that link and the changes either never happen or it takes an unacceptably long time.
I'm not sure I understand the safety rating, however. GoldWin and BetMaximus are identical casinos by the same operator. There's no denying that, although their live chat somehow expects us to believe otherwise.
So let's this .. I run a casino. It has a bad rating here. I open a new casino, identical to the one with a bad rating, and it receives a positive rating. How? Shouldn't the rating reflect the risk factor? I'm all for giving people a chance, but when an operator with a shady reputation decides to open a new casino, I believe the rating should take into account their history.
Few people read the terms and conditions (which they SHOULD), even less read the footer of a casino homepage to find out the operator and licensing information.
Even here, visitors have to click "read more" to find out who the operator of any given casino is.
I don't pretend to know all the behind the scenes dealings, but I can spot a paid advertisement when I see one.
My review of BetMaximus was rejected for warning players to be careful. At least that's the way I understand it.
I come here try and help my fellow players avoid crappy situations where they don't get paid. Most of my knowledge is from first hand experience playing at probably over 100 different casinos at this point.
Licensing and operators are things that should be discussed on a site like this. I've said that before and I'll say it again.
Casino Guru was started to educate players and promote transparency and positive casino experiences. At least that's what I thought, anyway.
More and more, the lines separating a paid advertisement from an actual review get crossed, transparency gets clouded, and finding REAL information gets increasingly more difficult.
Anyway, I'm done rambling. Not sure what the original point I was trying to make even is at this point.
Maybe I'm just expecting too much these days. Review sites don't actually exist; only affiliates do.
I actually did, of course. I agree that both look more or less the same.
But try to think about it from your point of view, just for a few moments:
Unless we have 100% certainty that the user review is fake, we won't reject it. What would you send to the players, and to which one? Further, what would be the reason for rejection?
"Dear player, I'm sorry for rejecting your review, but it almost looks the same as the other one; hence, I'm now rejecting yours."
I'm not trying to look smart; this is our daily user review activity. I just reject someone's review because I feel it's a good decision. I need to be 100% certain; frankly, players are not obliged to explain their expressions to us.
Do you know what happens quite often? A player takes the previous user reviews as a kind of prescription, especially if he shares the same or similar experience.
Maybe I lost the context, but I can assure you that there is not a single paid feature or rating presented on the site. Maybe you can help me with that?
We traded easily to get wealth for fairness and dignity. You have no idea how much money we are offered daily to alter even the slightest value. Of course, we don't do that.
The gambling world is not just a black-or-white place, and I can assure you that our efforts to keep the user rating as clean as possible are almost unmatched. Here comes the decision to keep the user rating completely out of the safety index calculation. User reviews are mostly unproven, meaning they are less reliable. On the other hand, reviews fill up the gap between aspects we count among worth calculation and users' experience, which we can evaluate and hence can't be calculated and used.
There is no link between the affiliate part of this project and any ratings. I'm going to share a secret with you simply because I take you for a reasonable and direct person: there are no "review sites"; all of them are affiliate sites. But it does not necessarily mean a bad thing.
I'd say it always depends on how you approach players and how transparent and willing to support fairness you are.
Of course, we are not perfect, but everyone here is a hard-working, dedicated person, and as a team, we aim to create a more suitable environment for a pastime called gambling.
"So let's this .. I run a casino. It has a bad rating here. I open a new casino, identical to the one with a bad rating, and it receives a positive rating. How? Shouldn't the rating reflect the risk factor? I'm all for giving people a chance, but when an operator with a shady reputation decides to open a new casino, I believe the rating should take into account their history."
We do that. Immediately upon finding the proven connection. If you miss this information, it probably means we're lacking the proof. (https://casinoguru-en.com/our-casino-reviews#related-casinos)
"Few people read the terms and conditions (which they SHOULD), even less read the footer of a casino homepage to find out the operator and licensing information.
Even here, visitors have to click "read more" to find out who the operator of any given casino is."
You may be right. Believe it or not, for this, we have a team called the UX Team. Sadly, the latest tests and the fact that most players use mobile devices to access our site limits the space available for important information significantly. May change the page in the future.
"I don't pretend to know all the behind the scenes dealings, but I can spot a paid advertisement when I see one."
Well, which? There are none.
"My review of BetMaximus was rejected for warning players to be careful. At least that's the way I understand it.
I come here try and help my fellow players avoid crappy situations where they don't get paid. Most of my knowledge is from first hand experience playing at probably over 100 different casinos at this point."
No, the reason was quite simple: "Hello and thank you for your review. Frankly, I'm forced to reject it. Please review just one casino at a time, not the whole group. You can always write another genuine review on the other casino as well, just keep those reviews separated as those casinos are separated as well. Thank you for your understanding."
"Licensing and operators are things that should be discussed on a site like this. I've said that before and I'll say it again.
Casino Guru was started to educate players and promote transparency and positive casino experiences. At least that's what I thought, anyway.
More and more, the lines separating a paid advertisement from an actual review get crossed, transparency gets clouded, and finding REAL information gets increasingly difficult."
Well, we're offering a neutral space for such debates. Browse this thread if you like 👈 Just don't expect administrators to provide legal advice; we deal with fairness instead of law.
The law is very different across the globe, yet a fair approach is international and easy to maintain.
I feel you are disappointed and probably convinced the money has corrupted us.
Sadly, I understand it's hard to believe me because I work for Casio Guru, but I'm glad you took the time to address your concern. I would not call that a rumbling.
Have a good one 💚
Nah, I like you, Radka. I don't think you're corrupt at all. You guys have a hard job to do, and you all do it pretty fairly from what I can tell.
I was just feeling like perhaps the site gets paid a certain amount from an operator to drive more traffic to them. Whether that's in the form of increased commission per new user/deposit totals, "muting" negative replies, or inflating their safety rating under the guise of being a "new casino", it doesn't really matter. It's in any affiliate site's best interest to recommend the casinos who pay them the highest commission. When the new registrations begin to fall off, that opens the doors for the real reviews to begin.
There's not a lot else I can say to counter any of the points you made, but I do have a few questions or clarifications to ask of you.. but that will have to wait until I get home, as I need to make sure I have my information correct lol
P.S. In case you haven't noticed, I'm fascinated by all the behind-the-scenes bullshyte in the online casino world. Sometimes it's more entertaining than actually playing.. well, maybe not if I'm winning lol
Frankly, I have to be short today. Jaro felt ill, and Daniel is on vacation, so I have to run the whole Team dailies on my own.
So, simply put - no, we are not here to backup casino's business, mute negative feedback, or do anything else we may call "biased".
Wherever you are, get back home safely, I'll try to keep in touch.
Additionally, feel free to start your own thread about this topic, I'd say we got far from BetMaximus. 🙂
Sí, este casino es realmente muy similar a Goldwin, bueno, perdí mi bono sin depósito con ellos a pesar de que tenía $80.
del bono sin depósito llegué a esta cantidad y luego a 0 🙂
Oh that is terrible. Unfortunately, not something unusual in the casinos. Sometimes players are up sometimes down. 😕 Even thou casinos always win over the players in the long run.
Anyway, besides this bonus you like the casino or not much ?
Si estás hablando de este casino, lo más probable es que no
Si hablamos de los casinos como entretenimiento, lo diré francamente: mucho menos que antes. Creo que todo depende del enfoque del juego, y sería mejor aprender a percibir las tragamonedas como entretenimiento.
It is ok not to like some casinos and maybe other ones like little bit more, right? I like your point of view, just see the online gambling as some kind of entertainment, exactly.👍
Cursos educativos, profesionales y gratuitos para empleados de casinos online que tienen el objetivo de hacer un repaso de las buenas prácticas de la industria para mejorar la experiencia del jugador y ofrecer un enfoque justo de los juegos de azar.
Hemos puesto en marcha esta iniciativa con el objetivo de crear un sistema global de autoexclusión que permitirá que los jugadores vulnerables bloqueen su propio acceso a los sitios de juego online.
Una plataforma creada para mostrar el trabajo que llevamos a cabo para hacer realidad una industria del juego online más transparente y segura.
Un proyecto ambicioso cuyo objetivo es celebrar el trabajo de las empresas más responsables del mundo del iGaming y ofrecerles el reconocimiento que merecen.
