100 free welcome bonus no deposit required: the three things that can mean

1

Seven words, and the three quantities they could name

Start with the grammar rather than the arithmetic, because the arithmetic cannot start until the grammar is settled. A hundred of what? Nothing in the phrase answers that. A number stands at the front, an adjective follows it, and the noun the number belongs to never arrives. Everything else in the headline is about how the thing is obtained rather than what it is.

Three candidates fill the gap and all three are in common use. The first is money: a hundred pounds of credit, advanced without a payment, with a staking condition tied to it. The second is turns: a hundred spins of a named reel, each at some stake the headline does not name either. The third is a proportion: a match at a hundred per cent, which is how the same number is used in almost every other offer this part of the market writes.

Those are not three descriptions of one thing. They are three quantities of different kinds, and the gap between the largest and the smallest is the whole of what the offer could be worth. This card works each of them at the same published return and under the same condition, so that the only thing varying between the three answers is the reading itself.

The reel for all three is Big Bass Vegas 1000, and it was chosen because its figure is its own rather than the family’s. The studio prints 96.53 per cent on that title’s page claim 74 of the game sheet, a figure shared with no other title in the thirty-six, so a reader who looks up the machine gets an answer about that machine. Its data caps one round at 15,000 times the stake, which at the ten pence supposed throughout here is £1,500.00 the stake is supposed, the multiple read.

The condition is the same throughout as well: twenty-five times whatever the credit turns out to be, staked before anything can be taken out. That multiple belongs to the offer rather than the machine, and is written as a shape this end of the market uses rather than quoted from an account. Holding it fixed is what makes the comparison legitimate, since a reading that came with a lighter condition attached would be flattered by the condition and not by the reading.

One figure of the machine’s decides how long any of this takes and none of how much it costs. Ten pence a turn is supposed here, the lowest total stake the game’s data carries, with its published range topping out at 250.00, and the sentences below say so again wherever they spend it. A reader who sets a different stake changes the clock on every answer in this card and changes no answer in it.

2

Read as pounds: a hundred of them, priced in full

Take the number as money first, since it is the reading that makes the headline worth the most and therefore the reading most worth testing. A hundred pounds of credit arrives, and twenty-five times a hundred pounds is two thousand five hundred of staking, and 3.47 per cent of that is £86.75. Subtract the one from the credit and £13.25 is what the reading comes to.

Set out as the house line, with the rate a slot is credited at written as g:

E = B × (1 − W × (1 − RTP) ∕ g)

The credit is a hundred pounds, the multiple twenty-five, the return 96.53 per cent and the rate one, since the named slot is taken to count at its face. The line gives £13.25, an eighth of the advertised sum and change, and the largest of the three answers on this card by a factor of ten.

Two things about that figure are worth separating, because they are usually run together. The £86.75 is not a charge and nobody collects it as one: it is what a published return of 96.53 per cent says about £2,500.00 crossing a reel, no more and no less. And the £13.25 is an average taken across a very large number of turns, which is the only sort of statement a published return supports, so it describes the offer rather than any evening spent on it.

£2,500.00 has to cross the reel before a hundred pound credit can be touched, which is twenty-five thousand turns at the stake supposed here

Twenty-five thousand turns is the part of this reading nobody advertises. At the foot of the range that comes to seventeen hours and twenty-one minutes at the briskest pace permitted, 2.5 seconds being the shortest a licensed cycle runs RTS 14D. Seventeen hours of deliberate, hand-started play stands between a reader and £13.25, and the headline that proposed it is seven words long.

There is a reason this reading is rare in practice and the arithmetic has just shown it. A hundred pounds advanced to somebody who has paid nothing is a large sum to put at the top of an advertisement, and the condition needed to make it safe for whoever advances it is correspondingly heavy. The other two readings are smaller offers with smaller conditions, and a reader who assumes the largest reading because it is the one the words most naturally support has assumed the one least often meant.

3

Read as turns, where the credit is not the face value

Now read the number as a count of spins, which is how this trade uses it far more often. A hundred turns of a named reel arrive with no payment behind them, and the same twenty-five times is asked before anything leaves. The first question is what goes into the formula, and the obvious answer is wrong in a way that matters by pounds.

A hundred turns at the foot of the published range is ten pounds of face. Face is not what the line wants. What goes in is the expected winnings off those turns, which is the count multiplied by the stake and then by the published return: a hundred turns, ten pence each, at 96.53 per cent gives £9.65. That is the sum the condition then attaches to, because a turn is not a credit until it has been taken and what it leaves behind is what any multiple can be applied to.

Run it through. £9.65 at twenty-five times carries £241.25 of staking, 3.47 per cent of which is £8.37, and £1.28 is what the reading comes to. A hundred turns and a hundred pounds, under one headline and one condition, differ by a factor of ten and a bit. Nothing in the seven words tells a reader which of the two is on offer, and the difference between them is £11.97.

The stake does something here that it did not do in the last entry, and the difference is worth stating precisely. Under the money reading the stake sets the clock and nothing else. Under the turns reading it sets the quantity itself: a hundred turns at ten pence is ten pounds of face and a hundred turns at two pounds is two hundred, which is the whole published range doing its work on one advertised count. The foot of the range is supposed throughout supposed, and the lowest the reel sells, which makes the turns reading the smallest it can honestly be made.

So the two readings fail differently, and a reader can hold both failures in mind at once. The money reading advertises a sum that is real and attaches a condition heavy enough to take seven eighths of it. The turns reading advertises a count that is real and leaves the sum of money entirely to a figure the headline does not carry. Neither is dishonest. Both are unpriceable from the advertisement alone, which is the finding this card is built on.

4

Read as a percentage, where the sum cancels itself

The third reading is the one this trade uses the number for most often of all. A hundred per cent is a match: whatever a reader pays in, the same sum arrives beside it. Written against almost any other headline in this part of the market, a hundred and a percentage sign is exactly what the number means.

Here it meets four words that cancel it. A match of a hundred per cent against a payment of nothing releases a credit of nothing, and the reading prices itself out before any return, any multiple or any stake is reached. The arithmetic is one line long and the answer is nought.

None of that is a trick played on anybody and none of it is a complaint about wording. It is the most useful thing on this card, because it is the one reading a reader can eliminate using the headline alone. The words “no deposit required” are doing real work: they rule out the commonest meaning of the number standing beside them, and they leave the two readings that cannot be told apart without opening the terms.

A fourth possibility exists and is worth naming so that nobody thinks it has been missed. A match could be offered at a hundred per cent with a payment required and a separate no-payment element beside it, which is a package rather than a single offer and is priced on its own card. What cannot happen is a match with nothing to match, and the arithmetic says so without needing any rule to help it.

So the headline resolves to two live readings worth £13.25 and £1.28, with a third at nought that its own words exclude. The span between the live pair is £11.97 and the span across all three is £13.25, which is the sum the advertisement is capable of meaning and is therefore the honest measure of how much the phrase settles, which is nothing.

5

The widest reading carried to a second published return

One more quantity moves the answers and it is not in the offer at all. The money reading was worked against 96.53 per cent because that is what the studio prints for the title this card names. Carry the same hundred pounds and the same twenty-five times to Bigger Bass Blizzard, whose page at the studio prints 96.08 per cent claim 74, and the share held back out of staking rises from 3.47 per cent to 3.92.

On that reel £2,500.00 of staking is expected to cost £98.00 rather than £86.75, and the reading closes at £2.00 instead of £13.25. The gap between two tiles with the same name on them is £11.25, which is within three pence of the gap between the two live readings of the headline. A reader worrying about what the hundred means and not about where the staking happens has been worrying about one of two questions of almost identical size.

The middle column shows how narrow the margin has become. Break-even is one divided by the share a reel keeps, and it names the multiple past which a credit stops being worth anything: 28.8 times on the higher of the two returns and 25.5 on the lower. The offer asks twenty-five. On the first reel that leaves nearly four times of headroom and on the second it leaves half a time, so the second reading of the headline on the second title is an offer standing almost exactly on the line where it stops being one.

Neither figure is a version of one machine or a selection from any menu. Each stands alone on the page of the title it belongs to, and the two builds behind those pages differ in more than their returns: a round is capped at 15,000 times the stake on the one this card names and at 4,000 on the other, which is a reminder that a shared family name settles very little.

6

What the word survives, and the test it never meets

Where money of the reader’s own has to go in before the offer can be claimed, the word is not available to whoever is advertising it. That is a published rule with a published reason, and it is the rule most readers would expect to decide a headline of this shape the advertising code’s own guidance.

Nothing was paid in here, so the word clears that test at the door and the whole of the argument moves to the staking. And the staking is where the rule stops. Under the money reading the condition is £2,500.00 of turnover; under the turns reading it is £241.25. In neither case is any of that the reader’s own money: it is the credit, or the winnings off the turns, going round and round until a counter is satisfied. The test the rule applies is about whose money is at stake, and by that test the word is accurate at £86.75 of expected cost exactly as it is at nothing.

So the honest account of the word on a headline like this one is narrow and worth having. It tells a reader that no payment is needed to begin, which is true and is the thing the rule protects. It tells them nothing whatever about what the offer is worth, which is settled by a multiple the word does not mention and a return it has never heard of. On this card the word is accurate under all three readings and the three readings are worth £13.25, £1.28 and nothing.

A second published rule does more work and gets less attention. A deadline, a wagering requirement and an eligibility rule all sit among the conditions an advertisement is obliged to carry prominently. Omitting one of those, where its absence would mislead, is the breach. The multiple is therefore not optional information, and hunting for it should not be necessary. What no rule requires is the thing this card has spent five entries on, which is a statement of what the number in the headline is a number of.

Nor does anything oblige a return to be published for the machine the staking crosses. That obligation runs to the chances of winning being findable before money is committed, and a return is one of several things that will serve. This family’s returns happen to be printed by the studio on a page anybody can open, which is why every figure on this card exists at all, and which is a fact about this studio rather than a right a reader holds.

7

Which document settles it, and what it has to carry

One document settles which reading is in force and it is not the advertisement. The terms of the offer name the unit, state the multiple, name the games the staking may be done on and set the window it has to be done in, and until those are opened the three answers above all remain live. That is the practical finding of this card: the headline is not a weak description of the offer, it is not a description of the offer at all, and the work of pricing it cannot begin until a second document is in front of the reader.

Two further terms decide more than the headline does and neither carries a number a reader can take away. The first is the rate at which the named slot counts towards the requirement, which this card has taken at its face throughout. At any rate below that the staking rises in proportion while the credit stands still, so a hundred pounds counting at a third would need three times the turnover and would close well under nought. The second is the window, and twenty-five thousand turns is seventeen hours and twenty-one minutes of play at best, so a window of a day is not a formality on the money reading and is a generous one on the turns reading.

So the figures this card leaves a reader with are these. Read as pounds, a hundred of them at twenty-five times is expected to be worth £13.25 after £2,500.00 has crossed Big Bass Vegas 1000 at the 96.53 per cent the studio prints. Read as a count of turns at the foot of the range it is worth £1.28. Read as a percentage it is worth nothing, by its own words. Carried to a title of the family printing 96.08 per cent the first of those falls to £2.00, and the British ceiling on staking would have made it £65.30.