Leoventures owning 51% of Casinogrounds forum and streaming platform

[Slotplayer]

1 hour ago, pausefisk said:

I think Leo is smart, getting comission from competitors. Brilliant

Yep, but I guess they rather had those players lose / sign up at their casino instead.

[pausefisk]

13 minutes ago, Slotplayer said:

Yep, but I guess they rather had those players lose / sign up at their casino instead.

Yeah they probably do that aswell. Streamers get bonuses every stream so they dont need to "move on" to get bonuses. "We" need that from time to time, so yeah, most of us play at a number of casinos (i belive). And if we do that trough CG, they might still benefit from it. I'm 100% sure they have thought this true before investing that much of cash into CG. Still i think its brilliant

[Delboy]

I agree with the OP and have to say @LetsGiveItASpin and @Nick have hardly covered themselves in glory through this deal.  Not once have they explained fully to their loyal viewers the full story and we are the ones who made them what they are today.

Leovegas is an ok casino but not even top 10 in my opinion.  It just seems odd that @LetsGiveItASpin streams there and they are the ones buying into CG.

Why not work with a better casino that offers better rewards to the players? LV offers nothing to loyal customers. 

There never seems to be an official reply from the owners of this forum on threads like this! Im 99.9% positive @Slotplayer is the official spokesman for this forum because he is always involved in these threads.

@Slotplayer @Huggehugg would u not like to know everything about the going ons of this forum that you both associate with? 

The loyal viewers do

 

 

[Slotplayer]

I am not the official spokesman for this forum at all. I have never made that claim so unsure where you get that from.

The forum and website or Casinogrounds has not changed at all since the investment by Leoventures. There have been improvements which makes the site better, so if there is more of that to come then I am happy with that!

I think the site and forum are excellent hence the reason that I participate and am happy to be associated with it. I think the same of another forum that I frequent. I don't care about the business side of these websites as quite frankly it is none of my business. 

[Delboy]

30 minutes ago, Slotplayer said:

I am not the official spokesman for this forum at all. I have never made that claim so unsure where you get that from.

The forum and website or Casinogrounds has not changed at all since the investment by Leoventures. There have been improvements which makes the site better, so if there is more of that to come then I am happy with that!

I think the site and forum are excellent hence the reason that I participate and am happy to be associated with it. I think the same of another forum that I frequent. I don't care about the business side of these websites as quite frankly it is none of my business. 

Thanks for the reply

I like this forum too and I also like all the streamers

The proof that CG is pushing LV is clear as day just go to the review page of this forum.  LV has 5/5 and Casumo and Risk have 4/5.  No way in hell is LV better than Risk and Casumo so that alone is misleading.  

Every member of this forum knows this.

[Slotplayer]

1 hour ago, Delboy said:

Thanks for the reply

I like this forum too and I also like all the streamers

The proof that CG is pushing LV is clear as day just go to the review page of this forum.  LV has 5/5 and Casumo and Risk have 4/5.  No way in hell is LV better than Risk and Casumo so that alone is misleading.  

Every member of this forum knows this.

Reviews are always going to be subjective. All three are good casinos, each with their own disadvantages.

[Delboy]

3 hours ago, Slotplayer said:

Reviews are always going to be subjective. All three are good casinos, each with their own disadvantages.

They certainly are but compare the complaints between the 3, LV has the most by a country mile.  Im just saying if Kim and Nick were that bothered about viewers why not partner with a firm such as rizk who offer a load of benefits to players.  LV offer nothing to anybody except a  decent choice of games.

In your opinion is LV better than Rizk or Casumo.  A simple yes or no answer is all I want.  

[Slotplayer]

56 minutes ago, Delboy said:

They certainly are but compare the complaints between the 3, LV has the most by a country mile.  Im just saying if Kim and Nick were that bothered about viewers why not partner with a firm such as rizk who offer a load of benefits to players.  LV offer nothing to anybody except a  decent choice of games.

In your opinion is LV better than Rizk or Casumo.  A simple yes or no answer is all I want.  

My opinion is irrelevant because I don't do the ratings. I prefer the bulk of my play at Videoslots Casino who in my opinion are better than the 3 mentioned.

Leovegas offer fast withdrawals, good selection of games but lacks a customer loyalty scheme.

Rizk has a loyalty scheme but it is crap. Five minimum bet spins on the wheel? You may as well not have one.

Casumo has recently increased their wagering requirement, withdrawal processing speed is hit and miss and were taken off accreditation for a while on a leading casino review website.

[Ki4Life]

On 9-3-2018 at 16:30, Kazommm said:

Hi Ki4Life.

You pose some good arguments. But I'm struggling to understand why the community are so opposed to there being a clear statement of ownership? A subtle asterix  next to the text about sign-up bonuses if signing up with the streamer, that tells the would be customers that CG is owned by LV, would be sufficient.  And/or a logo in the bottom of the CG-page, would also be welcomed.

" but explain to me what a banner/disclaimer should say in your opinion and what would be the main purpose of such a thing. ". Let me turn this question around, why shouldn't there be, why aren't LV proud to show of their ownership in the biggest casino streaming network?

" but I do not see any active recruiting for LV. ". I regard affiliate links, and promotions benefiting those with a Leovegas-account, such as last months Tiki-Hulu competition by Kim, active recruiting.

And the elephant in the room, which nobody talks about: Why would Leovegas invest such a large amount of money in CG, if they don't benefit from it? I'm pretty sure they aren't doing it for "the greater goods".

Hey answering my question with a question of your own, that's not fair  I am sure LV is proud of the purchase but that does not mean anything has to change, like orange banners and LV logos all around. CG was build by and for the slot community and it's power is to provide content and by a gathering place of us slots lovers. I dont think it is in LV's best interest to change this because then it would become a LV sub page which I do not think they signed up for because they could have easily made a LV page on their own. 

Coming back to my question though, do you see banners informing people to be in the interest of the people themselfs? Why is it important for people to know who owns the site? What is it that you want people to be aware of/need to be protected for? Again trying to understand where you are coming from and why this is important to you. 

Lastly affiliate links are pretty generic here, there is a list of a bunch of them. They were here before the purchase and are part of any community forum/site. The priority did not change after the purchase. LV is not your main link and is not overly exposed, people make their own choice what they think is appealing for them. Also promotions maybe more frequent now and could be part of the deal, but the forum has many promotions all being promoted equally. I dont think LV would hold down other casino promotions or developers who wants to use the platform. 

 

[pineapple]

Does anyone think the same as me?

LV invested in, bought controlling interest in CG to make money and only make money.

IMO there is nothing wrong with this. After all this is just a business deal. 

[Kazommm]

2 hours ago, Ki4Life said:

Hey answering my question with a question of your own, that's not fair  I am sure LV is proud of the purchase but that does not mean anything has to change, like orange banners and LV logos all around. CG was build by and for the slot community and it's power is to provide content and by a gathering place of us slots lovers. I dont think it is in LV's best interest to change this because then it would become a LV sub page which I do not think they signed up for because they could have easily made a LV page on their own. 

Coming back to my question though, do you see banners informing people to be in the interest of the people themselfs? Why is it important for people to know who owns the site? What is it that you want people to be aware of/need to be protected for? Again trying to understand where you are coming from and why this is important to you. 

Lastly affiliate links are pretty generic here, there is a list of a bunch of them. They were here before the purchase and are part of any community forum/site. The priority did not change after the purchase. LV is not your main link and is not overly exposed, people make their own choice what they think is appealing for them. Also promotions maybe more frequent now and could be part of the deal, but the forum has many promotions all being promoted equally. I dont think LV would hold down other casino promotions or developers who wants to use the platform. 

 

Coming back to my question though, do you see banners informing people to be in the interest of the people themselfs? Why is it important for people to know who owns the site? What is it that you want people to be aware of/need to be protected for? Again trying to understand where you are coming from and why this is important to you. 

A player has the right to know if he's watching , what I consider, a commercial, or true independent material. How that is so hard to see, I don't understand.

How naive can one be thinking a company pays 30 million SEK without expecting anything in return? And this isn't just coined at Ki4life, but at all the streamers who has participated in this thread.

 

[Slotplayer]

13 minutes ago, Kazommm said:

Coming back to my question though, do you see banners informing people to be in the interest of the people themselfs? Why is it important for people to know who owns the site? What is it that you want people to be aware of/need to be protected for? Again trying to understand where you are coming from and why this is important to you. 

A player has the right to know if he's watching , what I consider, a commercial, or true independent material. How that is so hard to see, I don't understand.

How naive can one be thinking a company pays 30 million SEK without expecting anything in return? And this isn't just coined at Ki4life, but at all the streamers who has participated in this thread.

 

Who has said they don't want anything in return?

[soto]

On 2018-03-10 at 06:08, Slotplayer said:

If you look at the index page of this site, there are a number of casinos listed that are reviewed. Most of these casinos are competitors of Leovegas so you would have thought it is not in their interest for players to sign up there. You would have thought the players rather sign up at Leovegas as far as they are concerned.

Perhaps the value of the site sits at offering the readers a variety of casinos. Perhaps the value of the CG concept sits at offering viewers of CG streamers a variety of casinos to sign up at. Not all casinos are the same and some people prefer one over the others. Leovegas casino is not everybodies cup of tea so to speak.

Once again you answer with a "guess, think, thought, perhaps, probably" post.

Quite funny that @pausefisk then takes this "guess, think, thought, perhaps, probably" post and somehow tries to make it legit:

"I think Leo is smart, getting comission from competitors. Brilliant"

So right now you two have figured it all out right? @Slotplayer continues to answer with yet another "guess" post:

"Yep, but I guess they rather had those players lose / sign up at their casino instead."

so what does @pausefisk do? Sure thing, a "probably, I belive" post:

"Yeah they probably do that aswell. Streamers get bonuses...."

And then @pausefisk ends with "Still I think its brilliant". What is brilliant? Do you refer to @Slotplayer's "probably perhaps" post, that somehow now have turned into the truth about what is happening, what are you talking about?

In reality, none of you have a clue what the short or long term deal is. You're guessing, thinking, perhaps and probably posts won't lead anywhere. Wouldn't this be more suited for a "Everyone guess what LV owning CG deal is about" thread?

I could be wrong, just my opinion.

Like @Slotplayer's latest post... "Who has said they don't want anything in return?". Is it you @Slotplayer that has the answers or what are you doing really? Maybe a better answer from you would be "I dont know sorry, my guess is as good as anyone else"..

[budskap]

12 hours ago, Delboy said:

Im just saying if Kim and Nick were that bothered about viewers why not partner with a firm such as rizk who offer a load of benefits to players. LV offer nothing to anybody except a  decent choice of games.

I get 100% deposit bonus offers from LeoVegas about every month and there's the odd freespins here and there. From Rizk? Barely anything, and the wheel is kind of a joke at this point.

[Kazommm]

To slotplayer and his fellows, please ask yourself this question; Why did Leoventures buy 51% of CG, and not 50% or below. Why was it important for them to be the major stockholder, and not a just a partner? Why did Kim decide to give up control of his firm to LV?

[pineapple]

30 minutes ago, Kazommm said:

To slotplayer and his fellows, please ask yourself this question; Why did Leoventures buy 51% of CG, and not 50% or below. Why was it important for them to be the major stockholder, and not a just a partner? Why did Kim decide to give up control of his firm to LV?

 

Why did Leoventures buy 51% of CG, and not 50% or below.   Money Money Money 

Why was it important for them to be the major stockholder, and not a just a partner?   Control 

Why did Kim decide to give up control of his firm to LV? This is about business 

Kims intentions are good and he would be also mad not to accept the offer 

Maybe not allowed to discuss details of business 

 

 

[Slotplayer]

Ok how about this then: who gives a flying fuck.

I am out of this discussion.

[Kazommm]

1 hour ago, Slotplayer said:

Ok how about this then: who gives a flying fuck.

I am out of this discussion.

You did....

[Ki4Life]

18 hours ago, Kazommm said:

Coming back to my question though, do you see banners informing people to be in the interest of the people themselfs? Why is it important for people to know who owns the site? What is it that you want people to be aware of/need to be protected for? Again trying to understand where you are coming from and why this is important to you. 

A player has the right to know if he's watching , what I consider, a commercial, or true independent material. How that is so hard to see, I don't understand.

How naive can one be thinking a company pays 30 million SEK without expecting anything in return? And this isn't just coined at Ki4life, but at all the streamers who has participated in this thread.

 

Please if you want to have a civil discussion about this please be less subjective in your answers. (please refrain from words like naive or make it seem I am stupid for not seeing where you are coming from). There is no regulation on informing people if something is a commercial or independent material. By not showing does not equal malacious things happening behind people back. There is just no point in doing so, but let us agree to disagree on this matter.

Also I did not state anything about return on investment. What the deal is and how money is going to be made will be a strategic decision between board of CG and LV. It does not concern any of the us users of the form. I am sure it will be a wellthought plan both long and short term. 

One thing I do not expect though is that this platform will turn into a LV playground. People are smart enough to see this through and will leave this platform if everything is focused to generate revenue.

[Craig smith]

I would say good luck to leo vegas taking on the casinogrounds website.  Its a big competitive market out thare and if they have brought more to casinogrounds in there package for the better and good for the people that use the site then good luck to them. I do think there should be a leovegas logo at the log in point because they should be proud of taking control of the site. I dont think they should put up leovegas ownes 51 percent of this website+ they are in control. I dont think that type of message should be displayed as it may discourage people to log on to the site. But yes i think they should be proud of what they have done and display there logo on the log in page.  Having a solid casino backing for the website is very good for its users. Theres stability thare and the site should keep on thriving. Just my opinion on the 51% leovegas question. Craig.

3 hours ago, Slotplayer said:

Ok how about this then: who gives a flying fuck.

I am out of this discussion.

Quite right slotplayer. Good on you man. Not being disrespectful to you but good and funny answer my man. Made me laugh☺??.

[soto]

7 hours ago, Slotplayer said:

Ok how about this then: who gives a flying fuck.

I am out of this discussion.

By the number of people asking about it in this thread, "removed threads" and chat, I would say it seems like there are quite a few who gives a f.

Hope I diddn't offend you, I was just trying to get the point across that the discussion wont lead anywhere before someone with answers joins in.

All the luck with your streaming, cheers!
 

3 hours ago, Craig smith said:

I would say good luck to leo vegas taking on the casinogrounds website.  Its a big competitive market out thare and if they have brought more to casinogrounds in there package for the better and good for the people that use the site then good luck to them. I do think there should be a leovegas logo at the log in point because they should be proud of taking control of the site. I dont think they should put up leovegas ownes 51 percent of this website+ they are in control. I dont think that type of message should be displayed as it may discourage people to log on to the site. But yes i think they should be proud of what they have done and display there logo on the log in page.  Having a solid casino backing for the website is very good for its users. Theres stability thare and the site should keep on thriving. Just my opinion on the 51% leovegas question. Craig.

Quite right slotplayer. Good on you man. Not being disrespectful to you but good and funny answer my man. Made me laugh☺??.

Yes, best case senario would be that they try to make it for the better and good for the people that use the site. But I think that is a highly unlikely though.

In the start of CG the big dogs only talked about growing the community so they, with the built power of the community could bring the absolute best deals for the players. In recent time they have stoped saying this right? Now it's guessing and perhaps again. But could the reason be that they now are owned by leo and that the goal has shifted from trying to get the players the best deals possible to just use the community to get massive affiliate money themself?

When CG grows even bigger over the years, then LV will have even more to say about what casinos that are allowed and what it will cost them to be associated with CG. Lets say the affiliate deal they get for themself makes the associated casino have to pay double the amount for new players, with that overhead they wont afford to make any good deals with the players right?

Looking even further down the line, casino streaming might get banned on twitch and youtube. And CG becomes the place where you watch casino streaming. Then they will have even more power, both over other casinos and the streamers, they could start charging streamers for using the platform etc etc. I know some dont give a flying f, while in my mind the community streamers should really be thinking about it all.

I have many more perhaps, think, guess senarios. And I just cant see any of them beeing for the better good of the players.

This with the total lack of transparency and censorhip about the questions just rubs me the wrong way.

There is nothing bad about making money, for me in this case it's more about how they do it. Before they could use the people for the affiliate money, now with leo I'm afraid people will be used on a whole different level.

If they where open about it all, trust me I wouldn't giva a f either. Even if I don't like leo I wouldn't care. If people just know about whats going on and don't have a problem with it then fine. And even though Leo now owns CG I would be a bigger supporter of CG for them beeing open about it, and maybe on day even try playing at leovegas again.
 

[Skylined87]

A short notice to all participating on this thread, please keep constructive and on topic replies. No personal attacks / trolling attempts will be tolerated (I have deleted last 2 posts as they had nothing to do with the thread). Thanks for understanding!

[soto]

I take it we will never hear from the owners, and when there is just me and a few others that seem to have a interest and posting i dont see why they should care.

I'll leave it with what I would love see happening:

The ton of affiliate money CG pulls in gets devided into a few different groups, just for example:

15% goes to maintaining the site
15% goes to profit for the owners
50% gets devided amongst the streamers*
20% goes back to the community players (without them there wouldnt be any money)

* Devided amongst the streamers would mean some big changes where community streamers gets payed based on the amount of traffic and signups they manage to bring to CG. If it's found that a streamer uses there own affiliate links in some way they get banned and will loose all future income. New streamers would have a great platform to start out with. They would not make as much for each signup, but get more exposure and earn back in that way. When its based on performance the bigger streamers would also make more money as it should be. Sure, they wouldn't make as much as if they take it all I know...

Now, for the 20% that goes back to the community. Maybe somehow based or part of how active the diffrent players are. There could be daily drawings, and people would have a chance to win good prices like $25 - $500 cash. One part of the 20% could go for some weekly spinningwheel where prices range from $100 - $1000, and like a monthly jackpot where first place gets like $5000. All this will ofc be based on how many players CG have and how much they play for. But as seen the big streamers can make $15 000+ a month, so every community streamer combined would generate some great prices.

This would mean that the streamers loose some profit, but as the community grows they would still get allot of money. Meanwhile, the players would get something back for supporting the community and helping out making these affiliate deals.

Like, now they say "Use our affiliate link, you get the same bonus as signing up elsewhere, BUT with our link you will get better and more occuring bonuseoffers". They dont mention any specifics of what kind, how often, value or type though. Personally I still think its up to the casino in question to decide. And I guess this is another subject that they don't want to discuss so we will probably never know. But do really people get more back by using the links atm? Like, if they have made a deal where they said "Hey, if we promote you, our players needs to get at least two 50% deposit bonuses a week", why wouldn't they be able to say that? Again, just seems shady to me.

Anyway, I think it would be great with some sharing of the wealth. Instead of drawing people winning 20-50 freespins, there would be something more of value getting back to the players.

And anyone could build something like this today, its not a question if it would work or not. Somethings would need to be figured out and changed but something simular anyway. The only thing stopping CG going this direction would be the "top dogs" and ofc leo that now owns CG.

I dont think people know how much of a value they are, without them there would not be any big deals. But maybe most people just dont give a f.

So yeah, thats what I would like to see happen, rather then saying what I think CG will become in my recent posts

Cheers!

[SuperSmask]

Hey @soto, looking at how you divided the money CG makes of the website, affiliate etc., to me it looks quiet accurate of what it is. Now I can't say for certain, but I think it's about right.

One thing though, 50% divided amongst streamers is not correct, as CG affiliate links and Streamer links are seperated. They have nothing to do with each other. The owners of CG get the income from the affiliate links on CG, not all streamers own a share in CG and not all owners are streamers. 

On the bonus deal u mention with 2 50% each week, I'm pretty sure thats just too expensive for the casino to do. Don't get me wrong I would welcome it, but its all about numbers.

[soto]

Hello @SuperSmask, I dont think you got my point. The whole post was a example of what route I would like CG to take. But in case you think my example is what CG already is I will try to explain my point of view. When @Huggehugg likes your post and seem to agree with what your saying I might have explained myself bad.

11 hours ago, SuperSmask said:

Hey @soto, looking at how you divided the money CG makes of the website, affiliate etc., to me it looks quiet accurate of what it is. Now I can't say for certain, but I think it's about right.

Ok, so this is the part that I dont get, what do you mean about it "looks quite accurate of what it is". Could you elaborate what you think is accurate. I have no idea of how CG distribute the affiliate money and my post was, as I said just a example from the top of my head.

But are you saying that CG gives back 20% of the affiliate money to the community players? Lets say they have 1000 players supporting them by playing via their affiliate link (think thats counting low). And lets assume that every player deposits an average of 100$ a month (again I think thats counting low).

Depending on the affiliate deal ofc, but lets say they get 50% of the deposit amount of each player. That would bring $50000 a month. Are you saying that 20% of that is going back to the community players in cash prices? That would mean they give out $10 000 each month in cash to different community players. If so then great, I have just not seen it at all.

So please explain a bit futher what you mean about "looks quite accurate of what it is"

11 hours ago, SuperSmask said:

One thing though, 50% divided amongst streamers is not correct, as CG affiliate links and Streamer links are seperated. They have nothing to do with each other. The owners of CG get the income from the affiliate links on CG, not all streamers own a share in CG and not all owners are streamers. 

Well, as I tried to explain, it was a example of which route I wanted CG to take, and that is to give back a bit of the wealth to the cummunity players from the massive affiliate deals they help CG make.

And as I said "Devided amongst the streamers would mean some big changes". With my example the different community streamers would have to get more connected to CG in some way. Where they also would loose some affiliate money by individual player, but would get more back considering the community players they would get access to. Again, it would need to be figured out, and probably change alot, but something in those lines.

11 hours ago, SuperSmask said:

On the bonus deal u mention with 2 50% each week, I'm pretty sure thats just too expensive for the casino to do. Don't get me wrong I would welcome it, but its all about numbers.

Again, I tried to be very clear about my post beeing a example. And as I stated this is another subject that they dont want to discuss, so we will never know. Whatever the deal is, if you tell the community players:

"Use my affiliate link, on signup you will get the same bonus as signing up anywhere else. But if you use our affiliate link you will get BETTER DEALS in the future".

So my question was, what are those better deals thats suppose to bring better deals for the community players? Like what exactly are the community players gaining from using the link? If you say something like that quote, why cant you be more open about what you mean about it?

Keep in mind, without the community players they wouldn't get the speacial deals in the first place. Lets say they earn 50% more then they would have without the community players, is drawing some 20-50 freespins to the players really making up for that? (again, we dont know numbers so just a example)

-----------------

I kind of feel like I'm just rambling, writing these long post  just trying to get my point of view across. And if you think about it, not so much against CG. More like a concern that they might F it up if they dont start to consider the individual community players that really are the cornerstone to their success.

At the same time, this ignore from the ownes. Don't know why I bother really.