Quote from: tspacepilot on May 21, 2015, 03:53:03 PM

Quote from: goosoodude on May 21, 2015, 03:44:42 PM

Quote from: tspacepilot on May 21, 2015, 03:36:38 PM

Quote from: WhatTheGox on May 21, 2015, 03:29:43 PM

So basically... they could scam? but they haven't? atm ive been very happy with my dealings at dadice. Is the problem because they have investors people feel be more transparent? or that every dice site should be transparent about bankroll?

It started because they were taking investors. However, they've closed that program now so it would seem that everyone has had their say here already and we should probably just see what happens. Several folks have expressed the skepticism that because they refuse to show their funds, they may not actually have them. However, dadice has stated that he's not going to bow down and do exactly what people tell him to do just because they demand it. I can see both sides having merit. I also don't like being told what to do.

Dadice has been growing and working well, they aren't going to prove their bankroll. I think that's what this all adds up to

I would disagree. The numbers simply do not add up for DaDice. The amounts being wagered at DaDice are simply not enough to cover their marketing costs of at least 8 BTC per month. Take a look at the marketing costs of DaDice verses that of BitDice or even PrimeDice. Bitdice is spending less then 2 BTC per month on marketing and they have a much higher volume. Even stunna only spends around 10 to 15 BTC per month on PD marketing and he has by far the largest BTC volume of bets.

AFAIK they have not forced their investors to divest and withdraw their investments so their current investors are still at risk.

Right, but their current investors are also grownups, right? People can decide for themselves how to manage risk in their lives, with their money. I think you guys are fine in having pointed out this controversy, but what more is there to say now? As I said above, it all adds up to the fact that some people want them to prove their bankroll and they are not going to do it. People can draw their own conclusions from these facts. In the end, time will tell who was right. Right?

I think the same could be said of their other potential investors. I would argue that just because they are not allowing new investors to invest does not mean they are no longer accepting investor money.