Anybody remember how to access your rakeback information in the Juicy Stakes client? Or is this another room that's done away with rakeback altogether?

We are waiting...

Cashier > My Profile > VIP Status

JS Rep-

Regarding bonuses, I would like to suggest one of the two ideas:

1. Give the players the ability to claim cleared portions of their bonus whenever they choose (as is done on WPN). Some would like to have a big chunk at once and others would like to claim it as they clear it.

2. As the system is now-when a bonus expires, players should be credited the portion of an increment that they have cleared. I have a bonus set to expire tomorrow and won't have time to clear the increment I'm working on. I have cleared about half of the increment, but I was told by support that I won't receive the portion I have cleared.

Hey Ice,

I'll bring this up with the team, particularly point 1.

Point 2 might be a harder sell due to the whole reasoning behind an expiry is to encourage play during that specific period and releasing increments of the bonus would render that aspect meaningless.

Do you feel that the time frame for bonuses is unrealistic to achieve for most players? (not a loaded question).

For now, PM your SN and I'll get your period extended.

Thanks

Adam

Your counterpoint to point 2 makes sense. My only counter to that would be that players will still improve the bonus they will receive by playing. Right now, I'm learning how to play plo so I'm down at 4plo. If I'm looking at needing another 75 fpp to clear another increment with a day to go, I know there is little chance I'm hitting that full increment so I'll just mix in JS with other sites like normal. However, if I know that maybe if I can hit 35 or 45 fpp in a day, and get 2/3 of an increment or something.. maybe I focus more on JS, trying to get tables going and keep games going.

I haven't played enough at JS to know if bonuses are unrealistic. They certainly aren't the worst bonuses, but I don't have any clue how they rate against other sites.. so hopefully someone can chime in on that. However, I would say maybe look at having different increments based on the size of the bonus. Something like, a bonus under $50 or $100 releases in $2.50 increments while higher bonuses are $5.

How many FPP must be earned to release a $5 block of bonus? I can't find that last bit of pertinent info in the deposit bonus description.

https://www.juicystakes.eu/Promos/Po...usDetails.aspx

83.33 fpp per $5

Thanks!

Unfortunately, I No idea about cash numbers to make any site-site comparisons.

It's a healthy 42% rake return for tournaments/sngs. That compares favorably to WPN's 8-22% (depending on initial or reload and other conflicting promos) released daily at $1 increments, but not quite as amazing as Bovada's initial bonus at 60% (incremental blocks). Merge is down to 5% released in $20 blocks on their IDB, iirc. Not going to bother with Chico, since it would take a page to consider all the different scenarios.

I used to play on Juicy Stakes...

First off I won't again...

The reason is that when management was changed-a bonus that I was working on to clear, was never paid out... Just taken away...

The second reason is that both checks I received from juicy bounced...

I did eventually receive my money through WU; however I was also charged by my bank for a courier fee for the second check because of the first (money from a Canadian bank) check bouncing...

Understand, that when a check bounces the bank flags the customer and nature of the check... (a check from Canada for instance)

In total for a $900 check my bank charged a little less than $200. Is juicy responsible for what my bank charges... no they are not (and I have since switched banks) but if the first and second check had not bounced... An argument can be made to say the least...

I play on a variety of sites; a single check bouncing is not worth the risk...

I hope you improve juicy stakes... Me, I've learned my lesson

I'm not defending JS, but believe checks will bounce from all companies for U.S. players, there have been reported bouncings from Carbon and Bovada, they really can't control it. They definitely could of helped you with the extra fees, but you can not dodge this outcome, somehow I have been one of the fortunate ones and have not had this happen to me.

Two out of two... For me that was 100% fail rate.

Perhaps, I have been lucky on Bovada: But I've cashed 3 checks-never had a problem...

Them taking away my a reload bonus (which would have cleared) tells me that they didn't really want my business. And from that I would rationalize that they don't want the sort of customers who actually-cash out their winnings...

I'm not a pro, but generally a profitable player.

As I said: Lesson learned.

Las Vegas Series 2015 satellite is tonight EU time on Juicy Stakes/Intertops. But why do you not promote it? 2 weeks ago same thing happened , we need 5 players to start , only 4 showed up. Buy-in is only $55 , this is a $1500 package to WSOP.

Try to search for Las Vegas series 2015 + Juicy Stakes and there's not a word about it anywhere. But its in the lobby and it starts at 10 pm CET.

Would like to know why Juicy Stakes do not promote this satellite ?

Hey,

Sorry to hear you've been having problems with cashing checks. I think you've unfortunately just run bad with these two - it's thankfully not something that happens to our players too often. Due to the current climate we occasionally have problems with some US banks, but these are thankfully super rare and - so I would like to think you'll be fine in the future, it's not a chronic problem.

Can we PM me the full details? Also let me know what happened in regards to your bonus and I'll get back to you.

Thanks, A.

We're going to be ramping up our marketing strategy soon, so hopefully you'll see us everywhere.

In terms of specific heads up for sattys etc, I'll try and do a better job of coming in here and letting you know what's on on specific days ITT as well as marketing elsewhere. Sorry tonight's tournament didn't run.

Thanks,

Adam

Indeed if you went to bitcoins would be cost free for both the site and players and would increase your traffic. Wpn included it and is a welcome addition for the players. In this day and age should be simple to include alternate forms of cashouts like bitcoins to make things simple and for players not to have to wait 3 months like on other well known sites.

Like, I've said guys, we're looking at Bitcoin :-)

I had a couple checks bounce and I had correspondence go silent.

Can you help me fix this? I also just want the money in my account to play with.

Hey.

Can you DM your sn etc?

Thanks

+1

Well, as a US player, I have accounts and play on the other networks. WPN, Chico, Equity, and Bovada.

I had held off on Revolution, because the #'s seemed so low, but today decided, why not take a look, and see what they have to offer.

This thread is why 2+2 rocks.

I would never had know about how it was that Juicy Stakes came to be, and the issues with past player balances.

I am still pondering weather or not to play here, but it doesn't seem right that these former players with high balances are being forced to play to make withdrawals. That (plus restrictive cashout policy and fees) WREAKS of Ponzi Scheme.

I can understand the new owners intention of segregating player funds from this day forward, and using collected rake to slowly pay off old balances, BUT, you are essentially then using players personal money to operate your business.

In essence, your taking a loan from these players, to operate your site.

At the very least, deals should be made that these players receive MORE than 100% of their money, without any rake generation requirements.

It seems to me these players have already contributed enough to your cause.

How you resolve this situation will matter to even the most low level micro-grinder.

Not many terms get misused on this forum more than "Ponzi scheme", but this is one of the worst examples I've seen. I'm thinking that, given the next passage I quoted, perhaps you don't understand the situation correctly:

My understanding is that they're doing exactly the opposite. According to all of the information I've seen in this thread, when they took over the site, they inherited the debt to these players. They didn't get the money - just the paper balances. So no, they're not "taking a loan" - they're repaying the old owners' loan for them.

That's not to say this situation is great, and I can understand the viewpoint of you and others that this should be handled differently, just as I can see where JS is coming from. But the portions of your post that I quoted struck me as terribly inaccurate, and needed correcting.

There is no "correcting" necessary from my post/viewpoint.

By requiring certain players to generate more rake, before being allowed to withdraw funds they already have on the site is borderline ludicrous.

But as I stated, if the new owners intention, is to segregate funds, and direct rake toward the payback of debt to players.......I can appreciate that, however........in a sense, as I mentioned, this is basically taking a loan from said players......and they deserve to be compensated accordingly. (and certainly should not be required to generate more rake to the site before receiving their money...that which is already theirs !)

And you must have your head in the sand if you cant understand why easy deposit, but overly restrictive cash out policy (like an $85 fee on a $100 cash out request), doesn't WREAK of Ponzi Scheme tactics, of promoting deposits, whilst restricting cashouts, all in the attempt to keep cash on the site.

Cash that is supposed to be segregated and NOT used for operating expenses. Cash that is supposed to be always and readily available for cashout upon player request, no matter what the amount.

I make no claim that this skin or network is such, but stick by my OP.

The player community is watching.

Rereading my last post, I'll just say I didn't intend it to be as condescending as it might sound. I can see some of your points a little better with your further explanation, but still disagree with you on those points for the most part, and I'll leave it at that.

Juicy isn't taking out a loan from the players because the current owners never received the money that the players deposited. They are paying the players out of their own pocket. A Ponzi scheme has nothing to do with this. The term "Ponzi Scheme" is a really overused term in this forum.