PremiumTradings seized 153,355€ of me ( 66k+87k)

[Optional]

This is outrageous! We, the people should fight against such scams, we should make every bookmaker to have an automatic system that will reject the bet if payout exceeds the daily limit, there is no question about that.

All you are suggesting is protecting people who do not read the terms of service.

The rest of us don't want to be 'automatically limited' to winning no more than 50k per day as we may want to place multiple bets or parlays to win that amount several times and do not want to be prevented doing that to protect dumb ass individuals who want to cry like babies about the terms they agreed to.

[Grumsi]

Do we have a number of how many bookmakers is operating right now? 20? 100? 1000? 10000?

A shill will say that most of them are fair and their T&C are there to be protected against multi accounting and bonus abuses, what a joke! A real picture is totally opposite, most of them are pure scam and those that can not be labeled as scam yet, are just the ones that could turn into a scam over night! So in my opinion they are all rotten eggs and they are serving us those rotten eggs for years, it is time to pressure every bookmakers and regulators or change them, make them know that we know all is a scam!

Otherwise it is time for new bookmakers to rise, bookmaker who will listen and know how to be profitable without scamming winners! All those bookmaker we know now are scams, some just need to show thier faces yet. Noone should be trusted!

This industry need a complete new start, a revolution! Everything in this industry is a scam, bookmakers, regulators, casinos... you name it. And who can change all this? We can, and we will!

[Optional]

most of them are pure scam

those that can not be labeled as scam yet, are just the ones that could turn into a scam over night!

in my opinion they are all rotten eggs

All those bookmaker we know now are scams, some just need to show thier faces yet. Noone should be trusted!

Everything in this industry is a scam, bookmakers, regulators, casinos... you name it.

Um ok.

[MaxShalamar]

All you are suggesting is protecting people who do not read the terms of service.

The rest of us don't want to be 'automatically limited' to winning no more than 50k per day as we may want to place multiple bets or parlays to win that amount several times and do not want to be prevented doing that to protect dumb ass individuals who want to cry like babies about the terms they agreed to.

I agree that people doing these sort of volumes would be mugs if they didn't read the T&Cs at least a couple of times but one of the disputes in this case is that the terms were changed without the knowledge of the customer but there is no way of proving that either way


@ Grumsi - yes there have been a few dodgy scammers acting as bookies but TBH we have a hell of a lot of info to base a decision on whether to use a bookie or not so if someone is wise they will either avoid a bookie with a few bad reviews or at least wait until there is sufficient data on them - at the end of the day WE are the ones who make the decision to use them or not - read reviews and ratings and a bit of common sense when choosing a bookie

[kkkkk]

i cant repeat myself, that all everything but the exchanges should not be used.

all bookmakers wins when you lose, doesnt matter people say they win on margin. cose it hurts then if somebody makes money from them.

however people still uses bookmakers

[piterp]

Terms and condition is legal contract and both sides are obliged to respect so if bigger bets are not allow that premium tradings should not accepted them from player but they prefer to wait when he made profit and after steal money from him

[dealer wins]

Terms and condition is legal contract and both sides are obliged to respect so if bigger bets are not allow that premium tradings should not accepted them from player but they prefer to wait when he made profit and after steal money from him

That is impossible for them to implement as the bets are being placed directly with the bookmaker (In this case Pinnacle) who dont have this facility.

Nearly every bookmaker has maximum daily/weekly/sport specific winning limits, its up to us to be aware of those limits.

[piterp]

You right- But is one big difference here bookmakers checking every bet before accepted them for make sure that they are not above limit

Premium tradings even if is unable to implement this that not make them free from responsibility for own terms because rules are same for both sides and they should offer alternative solution for limits issue but they offer only money stealing for player

[dealer wins]

Bookmakers dont check such things in my experience, they will gladly accept stakes that if won would put you over their limits as it is basically reducing the odds you are betting. They will also strictly adhere to the max payout limits if you do win.

[MaxShalamar]

That is impossible for them to implement as the bets are being placed directly with the bookmaker (In this case Pinnacle) who dont have this facility.

Nearly every bookmaker has maximum daily/weekly/sport specific winning limits, its up to us to be aware of those limits.

The difference is that PT aren't even voiding the portion of the stake that takes the winnings over the £50k .. they are keeping that portion of the payout from Pinny for themselves

[Alfa1234]

How is that different as every bookmaker with win limits does the same thing?

[Optional]

How is that different as every bookmaker with win limits does the same thing?

It's a little different as PremiumTradings actually make a real profit from it whereas a book is just avoiding a higher loss.

But they do say it plainly in their terms that this is what they do.

[Alfa1234]

True, but the end result for the client is still the same.

[ace7550]

A sportsbook putting something in their terms and conditions doesn't make it ethical. It just makes it so they can argue their point.
We have come to a point in the sports betting community where we will accept just about anything from a sports book so long as it's in their terms and conditions.
While it is obviously important that you read the terms and conditions of any site many of them are long and some are confusing.
Taking a wager and knowing you wont have to pay it because you have a payout limit in your terms and conditions is unethical. If you aren't going to payout on a wager then don't take it in the first place. Lower your limits. Don't hide some clause in your terms and conditions and then pull it out of your ass to fu*k your customers over later.

[Optional]

A sportsbook putting something in their terms and conditions doesn't make it ethical. It just makes it so they can argue their point.
We have come to a point in the sports betting community where we will accept just about anything from a sports book so long as it's in their terms and conditions.
While it is obviously important that you read the terms and conditions of any site many of them are long and some are confusing.
Taking a wager and knowing you wont have to pay it because you have a payout limit in your terms and conditions is unethical. If you aren't going to payout on a wager then don't take it in the first place. Lower your limits. Don't hide some clause in your terms and conditions and then pull it out of your ass to fu*k your customers over later.

I suspect it was designed to protect them from taking more than a 12500 daily loss from the 25% they held here and this case was just an extreme example. Which they did agree to redress to the tune of almost 200k.

So I think it's a bit unfair to point and say they are obviously unethical. I do agree that the fairest way to handle this and still manage their risk would be to have a term that says something like daily winnings above 50k will attract a 25% deduction though.

[ace7550]

Wouldn't it be reasonably easy for them to set a limit so that the system doesn't allow you to place a wager that wins you more than they will pay?

[tsty]

It says on the PremiumTradings rule page that they keep anything over the 50k/day.

so when was this put in place?

as posters in this thread have noted that it wasn't even in place last year nor was in his contract

how can you randomly just start adding clauses out of no where without notifying the client?

Any sports book that takes any bet and does not honor it is more than unethical! It's fraud! Plain and simple!. If there is a eager max. The computer program should have it incorporated! What other reason would the system allow it? The only reason it's allowed is to scam people and there is absolutely nothing we can do about It! You can't go to Vegas and place a bet higher than they would allow??? Buy online you can?? Wtf??? Lol same with online books not honoring bets. In Vegas they validate every bet that they accept. But for some reason online book make up all kinds of excuses! That unethical, it fraud, it's disgusting. Putting it on us to read terms and conditions is totally shady too. You have a max pay out. Then don't allow there to be a possibility of more. Complete non sense.

[tsty]

Pinnacle did accept it and pay it

The trading company that placed the bet on behalf of OP however is a different story

I have no idea what that means. I bet using a storybook I get paid via sports book.

[Optional]

Wouldn't it be reasonably easy for them to set a limit so that the system doesn't allow you to place a wager that wins you more than they will pay?

I guess. But in real life if you decide to put $1000 on Ricky Fowler 50/1 to win round 1 of a golf tournament, do you really want to then be barred from betting anything else that day?

But I'm not sure how an agent like PremiumTradings could implement that when clients are betting directly on different books anyway.

They just need to make sure all clients are well aware of the limit.

[Viking78]

This is scam or not????? Please help

[Alfa1234]

Any sports book that takes any bet and does not honor it is more than unethical! It's fraud! Plain and simple!. If there is a eager max. The computer program should have it incorporated! What other reason would the system allow it? The only reason it's allowed is to scam people and there is absolutely nothing we can do about It! You can't go to Vegas and place a bet higher than they would allow??? Buy online you can?? Wtf??? Lol same with online books not honoring bets. In Vegas they validate every bet that they accept. But for some reason online book make up all kinds of excuses! That unethical, it fraud, it's disgusting. Putting it on us to read terms and conditions is totally shady too. You have a max pay out. Then don't allow there to be a possibility of more. Complete non sense.

Sure you can go to vegas, place a parlay at odds 10 000 000 to 1 and they'll happily take it. They won't pay you out more than the max payout of their terms though. It's like that in every betting shop in the world.

Pinnacle did accept it and pay it

The trading company that placed the bet on behalf of OP however is a different story

You don't know what you are talking about. The client placed the bet himself, the "trading company" had nothing to do with it. All they did is provide him with login details for the Pinnacle website. They have 0 control over the bets that guy placed with those login details.

[ace7550]

Any sports book that takes any bet and does not honor it is more than unethical! It's fraud! Plain and simple!. If there is a eager max. The computer program should have it incorporated! What other reason would the system allow it? The only reason it's allowed is to scam people and there is absolutely nothing we can do about It! You can't go to Vegas and place a bet higher than they would allow??? Buy online you can?? Wtf??? Lol same with online books not honoring bets. In Vegas they validate every bet that they accept. But for some reason online book make up all kinds of excuses! That unethical, it fraud, it's disgusting. Putting it on us to read terms and conditions is totally shady too. You have a max pay out. Then don't allow there to be a possibility of more. Complete non sense.

There is something we can do about it. Play at top rated books. I don't think an A+ book would do this.
One other way you can avoid this situation is to not keep over 100k in an online sportsbook! That is a lot of money and I would be uncomfortable keeping that kind of money in a sportsbook even if they are rated A+ by SBR.

[ace7550]

I guess. But in real life if you decide to put $1000 on Ricky Fowler 50/1 to win round 1 of a golf tournament, do you really want to then be barred from betting anything else that day?

If Fowler wins then I wont get paid on any of my other bets right? Then yes, I would like to be barred for the rest of the day. Who would want to make a bet that they aren't going to get paid on if they win?

[Optional]

If Fowler wins then I wont get paid on any of my other bets right? Then yes, I would like to be barred for the rest of the day. Who would want to make a bet that they aren't going to get paid on if they win?

A person who thinks Fowler is maybe a 20% chance of winning that day and is prepared to take the risk.

A square whale.

Someone who bets like a madman without really expecting to win.

Personally if I used PT then I would not bet to win more than 50k a day on anything but some people will want to and many will not want to be limited if they do make a bet like the Fowler one.

I don't think it's a very good rule for PT to have but it's not so out of order to be considered inherently unfair IMHO.

[Optional]

This is scam or not????? Please help

They have been in business for years dealing with many high stakes players and as far as I am aware have never had a serious complaint about them before.

I don't like the 50k limit rule and I feel like it not being on the website is a bad oversight but considering they agreed to pay the OP almost 200k over and above the rules limits I don't think it's fair to use the word scam.

[Alfa1234]

Keep in mind a lot of their clients do not have this rule. If you are considered sharp, your Pinnacle limits will simply be lower (about 35% of regular account limits) and they will opt not to take a stake in your bets.

[Grivas_Digeni]

Sure you can go to vegas, place a parlay at odds 10 000 000 to 1 and they'll happily take it. They won't pay you out more than the max payout of their terms though. It's like that in every betting shop in the world.
You don't know what you are talking about. The client placed the bet himself, the "trading company" had nothing to do with it. All they did is provide him with login details for the Pinnacle website. They have 0 control over the bets that guy placed with those login details.

#1 That's bullshit and completely unjustified in a world where most people can't even divide 150 by 25 without using a calculator. Use T-E-C-H-N-O-L-O-G-Y, don't use excuses to (partially) free roll suckers. It's a swindle, that's what it is - in every betting shop in the world.

#2 Omer and PT had a relationship, a business together. Their business was allowing Omer's player(s) to lose their money using Pinnacle lines. As it happens in every walk of life, everyone is happy as long as business is thriving. Everybody trusts everybody. Everyone is everyone's best friend. However, after their cash cow won several bets in a row - DOING THE SAME THING he did when he lost - their sand castle crumbled. ROI is not realized. Investors aren't happy. Lawyers are now needed. T&C are now being read closely - because who needs to read the fine print when the player is losing anyway and everyone is getting paid?

What happened here is old as world. Which brings me to a conclusion: if I ever become an agent like Omer, I will have to get to know my partner (PT or whoever else) really, really well. Basically, for my business to thrive, I will need a) my player(s) to lose and be solvent, b) pinnacle to pay and remain solvent, c) my partner to act in my best interest. It's my job to find profitable players, and Pinnacle with their sharp minds and deep pockets are likely to be there forever. The weak link here remains the people I partner with, who will be my best friends when days are sunny, but whose actions may become unpredictable if when things go bad. It's like making a bet in Vegas together with your buddy, money shared, on a single ticket. Do you trust him to let him keep the ticket and if you win, give you your share?

I will have this PT-like company vetted thoroughly, probably meet the boss in person. I will have Plan B for the rainy day, even if it means going out of my way and expending a lot of effort and money that, when things go well, may seem unnecessary. I will let them know that I'm always looking for open communication and if there is a potential problem, I need to know immediately so that keeping a good relationship with my players is easier. Finally, I will always be looking for new, better partners, but have my current partners by the balls - legally speaking. Because this is a zoo, my friends, and I don't want to be at the bottom of the food chain.

[betakos]

All you are suggesting is protecting people who do not read the terms of service.

The rest of us don't want to be 'automatically limited' to winning no more than 50k per day as we may want to place multiple bets or parlays to win that amount several times and do not want to be prevented doing that to protect dumb ass individuals who want to cry like babies about the terms they agreed to.

If the rule is rather impractical and cannnot be monitored by the imposing party (like the 50k rule) then it's invalid, that straightforward from a law point of view.

Furthermore we don't know what exactly (and if he - unless you got access to their database) he clicked on. If the webpage stated read the altered ruled and included just those who were altered/added, then ok but if the included the all the rules without highlighting those who were altered (as they suppose to do) then he has a strong case in his hand.

[betakos]

They have been in business for years dealing with many high stakes players and as far as I am aware have never had a serious complaint about them before.

I don't like the 50k limit rule and I feel like it not being on the website is a bad oversight but considering they agreed to pay the OP almost 200k over and above the rules limits I don't think it's fair to use the word scam.

Can you explain why they confiscated the remaining balance of 87k. Did it fall on the same rule (won 87k in a day) or they just took them because they wanted to. Because if it's the second case, then the answer is YES they are scams.

[Alfa1234]

Can you explain why they confiscated the remaining balance of 87k. Did it fall on the same rule (won 87k in a day) or they just took them because they wanted to. Because if it's the second case, then the answer is YES they are scams.

Post #139 adressed this in detail.

[betakos]

As far as the 87k it doesn't.

[Optional]

Furthermore we don't know what exactly (and if he - unless you got access to their database) he clicked on. If the webpage stated read the altered ruled and included just those who were altered/added, then ok but if the included the all the rules without highlighting those who were altered (as they suppose to do) then he has a strong case in his hand.

PT sent a database dump that showed the full text of the updated terms warning that was shown to people as they logged in and a screencap of their admin system showing the date/time/IP Omer apparently clicked accept.

They are confident this the legal way to update terms and that a court would accept it and their evidence of when it occurred.

Can you explain why they confiscated the remaining balance of 87k. Did it fall on the same rule (won 87k in a day) or they just took them because they wanted to. Because if it's the second case, then the answer is YES they are scams.

Post #139 adressed this in detail.

As far as the 87k it doesn't.

I thought I had, in some detail. But in short, PremiumTradings position is that Omer broke the 199k settlement agreement and they should be able to withhold that 87k as they believe Omer owes them the 199k back.

Omer's position is that the 87k is from unrelated betting account balances belonging to his clients and should be treated separately to any dispute about the agreement and 199k payment.

[omer87]

I did nothing to disrupt the deal.....