LET'S TALK ABOUT BONUSES...

THE SHRINK · Jun 29, 2004

Many insiders and casual gamblers agree with the notion that "bonuses" are killing the industry. In order to keep up with the competition, many sports books who wouldn't normally offer them, end up doing so in order to grow...

Many have given suggestions as to what may work for both operators and players so that gamblers can feel "SAFE" about bookmakers offering bonuses...

Here's my personal belief...

BONUSES should not be given to WISE GUYS, MOVERS, SCALPERS, etc. They really should be saved for RECREATIONAL gamblers ONLY...

One way to solve this crisis may be to limit the bonuses given away to gamblers whose average bet is somehere between 100-200 dollars.

This should be enough of a discouragement to keep the sharper players from entering shops and expecting large bonuses...

THE SHRINK

Dante · Jun 29, 2004

BONUSES should not be given to WISE GUYS, MOVERS, SCALPERS, etc. They really should be saved for RECREATIONAL gamblers ONLY...

I will take one thank you

wantitall4moi · Jun 29, 2004

That should be an easy trade off. But the books shouldn't limit or discourage the ascalping actions either.

If I hit 3 or 4 scalps at a book in a row and build a nice balance then I obviously qualified for the bonus, I take my money out, then go on a bad run at that place, and re up a couple weeks later, win 3 or 4 more staright, qualify for another bonus, and get them for another 10%.

I see why bonus whores love that life. But I am not into that stuff. Call it some ethical reasoning that might be twisted. I don't mind scalping or middling these plays within themselves, but I really don't want a bonus for doing it. But I also don't want them crying when I do.

That is why I use the two places I do, they have never said a word.

lakerfan · Jun 29, 2004

One problem is that you are now not giving the bonus to the players you want most: the square who bets a nickel or dime a game.

THE SHRINK · Jun 29, 2004

Good point Lakerfan, as the number I used in my example was an arbitrary one...

One type of BONUS that doesn't work is because it has NO APPEAL to the majority of gamblers that I speak with...

Giving back 10-15 % on net losses over a lengthy amount of time is comical and insulting to gamblers...

First off, no gambler I know plans on LOSING when they sign up to bet, and no one wants to wait 6 months or so to collect on losses...

THE SHRINK

TheGeneral+ · Jun 29, 2004

Bonuses are never a problem until a player wins. The easiest solution is for books to just pay them and then can that player if they are worried, but to take a guess he is to sharp because he won is laughable to me.

JimFiestSux · Jun 29, 2004

The only BONUS I look for is being paid very quick and on time! All other bonuses mean absolutely to me! Ask your local book for a bonus see what you get!!

marc · Jun 29, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by THE SHRINK:
One type of BONUS that doesn't work is because it has NO APPEAL to the majority of gamblers that I speak with...

Giving back 10-15 % on net losses over a lengthy amount of time is comical and insulting to gamblers...

First off, no gambler I know plans on LOSING when they sign up to bet, and no one wants to wait 6 months or so to collect on losses...

THE SHRINK<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Definitely true. DOn't know of anyone whose ever copllected on one of these. Not only do you have to wait six months, but you have to give thema certain amount fo action. I think FF for instance requires at least 1 bet per week. So if you blow out after 5 months lets say, you are screwed because if you don't have the funds to give them action in month 6, you won't qualify for the net loss bonus.

Personally I think 5 dmes system makes the most sense. once the csomter has given you the action, give the bonus.

What I'd really like to start seeing are books offering more free wihtdrawals based on the amount of action you give. take a book like vwager for instance. They will give a guy who bets $100 a month the same free monthly withdrawal as they do the guy who bets $30,000 a month. That doens't make sense to me. Give everyone 1 free withdrawal, and after that for every X number of dollars in action, you should offer an additional free withdrawal

drunkguy · Jun 29, 2004

I like betCBS's plan...you can take upfront bonus, reduced juice, cash back on action, etc...YOUR CHOICE

the probably all balance out to the same thing, but it makes the player feel "in control" because they get to choose.

Reduced juice/cash-back on action is way better for the book than the upfront CASH bonus IMO

JimFiestSux · Jun 29, 2004

With Carib you get 10% back on casino losses and 4% on horses every Thursday plus unlimited free transactions through PPATM! To me thats a good bonus!

TOW · Jun 29, 2004

Excellent thread, tricky subject. Bonuses are a funny beast to deal with. It all really boils down to the strings attached. In fact even a seemingly generous 20% becomes harmless if the proper rollover is tied to it.

Another important factor is the cap. Cash strapped operations offer unlimited caps. Good books cap their bonus offers to low maximum amounts ( 500 for instance ).

Players should always avoid posting up if a bonus offer is too generous and there's no cap to it on top.

D2bets · Jun 29, 2004

Trying to classify gamblers and then discriminating based on an imperfect classification is a bad system. As far as average wagers...how would that work for a new signup? It wouldn't. Too many confusing rules for bonuses is bad. Keep it simple.

The best way to limit bonuses is don't make the bonus unlimited. Maybe limit the bonus to the first $1,000 deposited. Or give a lower % above that. That kind of thing. Don't give unlimited 20% bonuses.

How about:
Initital Deposit 20% on First $500, 10% between $500 and $1,000 and 5% thereafter up to $5,000 with a 4X rollover
Reup Bonus 5% up to $2,500 4X rollover

Very simple and should not hurt the book.

Dante · Jun 29, 2004

D2... great post

krackman · Jun 29, 2004

"Many insiders and casual gamblers agree with the notion that "bonuses" are killing the industry"

BULLSHIT!!

This topic comes up every six months or so(usually after someone is slow paying or goes under) I for one think bonuses have very little to do with someone that does not know how to handle money or run their operation. Why is it that a book cannot give 10% to someone on initial deposit and then 10% on re-ups if they lose when they are not paying agent fees which can be as high as 60% sometimes?

If credit books can survive for decades giving out huge agent fees then my little 10-20% is not responsible for "killing the industry"

Fishhead · Jun 29, 2004

KRACKMAN- I agree 110%!!........as I have stated so many times in the past.

RIOSHILL · Jun 29, 2004

Nice Thread Shrink

OMNIVOROUS FROG · Jun 29, 2004

Bonus money is peanuts. It's like chumming for fish, with cheap bait. Where do the large dollars go? Here, advertising. Some on free contests. To the agents, like Krackman said. When you start thinking you can seperate who gets bonuses and who does not you create a real can of worms. Who has got a bonus from Pinny lately. And some shops offer bonus/reduced juice, copying Pinny, in a low juice offering. None of this will matter if the exchanges infiltrate. What it will all come down to is how low of a hold can you operate on and be profitable. I think instead of limiting the sharp's bonus money we should ask advertisers to reduce rates? Best Wishes...OF

jerseymike111 · Jun 29, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by krackman:
"Many insiders and casual gamblers agree with the notion that "bonuses" are killing the industry"

BULLSHIT!!

This topic comes up every six months or so(usually after someone is slow paying or goes under) I for one think bonuses have very little to do with someone that does not know how to handle money or run their operation. Why is it that a book cannot give 10% to someone on initial deposit and then 10% on re-ups if they lose when they are not paying agent fees which can be as high as 60% sometimes?

If credit books can survive for decades giving out huge agent fees then my little 10-20% is not responsible for "killing the industry"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A 10% bonus with a 10% reup..that a players gets only if they lose all their first deposit with a $500 max should not hurt any book.
Funny how the credit players are the ones that always state that the "bonuses are killing the industry"
Post up players want either a bonus or a free 1/2 point or reduced juice...

Phaedrus · Jun 29, 2004

See also:

How important is a bonus to you?

As I said there, bonuses lure in a ton of n00b and idiot money -- without which noone of us would get paid.

Phaedrus

Dante · Jun 29, 2004

by Phadreus

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>bonuses lure in a ton of NOOB and idiot money <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OUCH!! im glad I can contribute