Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is what she won. What you win is determined by what the machine says. If it says $43 million in one place and $6,500 in another (where the machine's max payout is stated), it's one or the other, and nothing more or less.
LOL!! I would bet that the gaming commissions (and the courts) in every state where there is gaming would disagree with you. There was a malfunction. There was no win. Not of $43 million, not of $6,500, and not of any other amount.
Did you read the article?? THE ARTICLE STATES "She was only entitled to her winnings of $2.25". That's what she won! She's not entitled to a cent more! The malfunction was the machine telling her she won $43 mil. Any idiot can tell if you actually won on a slot machine or not. It's not rocket science. She saw an opportunity and tried to get paid out.
Maybe. Or maybe she's a person who all her life struggled to make ends meet, because she is not all that bright or sophisticated, and wanted very hard to believe that she suddenly had 43 million dollars.
Casinos in general, and slot machines in particular, make a lot of money from people like her. All that glitz is a distraction from the ugly truth - that casinos convince people that it is entertaining to lose money.
Those same people could stay home, put loud music on the stereo, and play those same games on their computer and be just as entertained.
I've been dragged into a casino a time or two. I pretty much hated it. It's an ugly business.
So, what do you do when someone malfunctions on a machine with a 10mil max payout and you've set that precedent?
I would not pay it. Since you are a mathguy you can probably understand that paying 6500 to maintain goodwill is more rational than paying 10 million. The casino already gave her a steak dinner. They really had no reason to pay her more than what the single slot spin cost her. They did, so what we are arguing about here is what they should pay to make for their malfunctioning machine.
LOL!! I would bet that the gaming commissions (and the courts) in every state where there is gaming would disagree with you. There was a malfunction. There was no win. Not of $43 million, not of $6,500, and not of any other amount.
What's to stop the house from declaring malfunction whenever someone 'wins' a large amount?
Casinos are a one way street. Why people keep playing is beyond me.
I own my own slot machine, and I can't even win on it!
Playing slot machines is a form of mental retardation and should actually be given a DSM code. I'm not anti-gambling and even play poker as a way to make extra money. But the sheer futility of sitting at a slot machine and ripping up one's savings is utter and complete madness.
What's to stop the house from declaring malfunction whenever someone 'wins' a large amount?
The gaming commission, and the public.
If a casino misbehaves, they face the very real possibility of losing their gaming license. It is absolutely in their best interest to not cheat. And they don't need to.
If a large number of otherwise legitimate large jackpots are nullified due to "malfunction," those that would otherwise frequent the casino will find other casinos to patronize.
If a casino misbehaves, they face the very real possibility of losing their gaming license. It is absolutely in their best interest to not cheat. And they don't need to.
If a large number of otherwise legitimate large jackpots are nullified due to "malfunction," those that would otherwise frequent the casino will find other casinos to patronize.
Pretty simple, really.
Right. The gaming commission is in the back pockets of the casino owners. And the "public" has no clue about the quantity or frequency of "malfunction" declarations.
I would not pay it. Since you are a mathguy you can probably understand that paying 6500 to maintain goodwill is more rational than paying 10 million. The casino already gave her a steak dinner. They really had no reason to pay her more than what the single slot spin cost her. They did, so what we are arguing about here is what they should pay to make for their malfunctioning machine.
But you paid it to the other lady. You paid her the max win under the machine.
So why won't you extend the same CONSISTENT benefit to <name of next person> on a machine with a max pay of $1,000,000?
That's the question the next persons lawyer will be asking you in depositions.
You're response will be, "Well, because $6500 is less money"
It will get ugly from there, but don't worry....you can always take it to trial in front of a whole pile of jurors that hate big corporations and casinos and want to help out a young mom of 4. You can then claim "we don't pay out on malfunctions" but then their lawyer will point out to the jury that you actually have on occasion....but just don't want to THIS time.
If you disagree with this then fine but next time you talk to a lawyer friend mention setting a precendent of paying machine max as "good will" and get their response if you don't see my point.
What's to stop the house from declaring malfunction whenever someone 'wins' a large amount?
-Gaming regulatory oversight.
-Whistleblowers.
-Digital trail.
-Basic statistics, meaning that they price for the large payouts, it factors into them meeting the regulatory payout requirements. If they don't pay on the large ones they'll have to pay more frequently on the small ones.
-The big jackpots are progressives so if they don't pay on a malfunction that means the next person gets a larger jackpot. Please comment on how you would avoid this fact?
Lastly, if caught the repercussions to most of these resort\casino organizations would be BILLIONS in losses...when in reality they don't need to cheat, the odds are stacked in their favor.
Right. The gaming commission is in the back pockets of the casino owners. And the "public" has no clue about the quantity or frequency of "malfunction" declarations.
Conspiracy theories are fun.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You can then claim "we don't pay out on malfunctions" but then their lawyer will point out to the jury that you actually have on occasion....but just don't want to THIS time.
