Poker Orifice
And Still...
Platinum Level
Oh ok.. sorry. I wasn't taking this into consideration -> I'm definitely wrong.
the Styb
Rock Star
Silver Level
Yes, PO, because I really don't care about much else regarding poker than the Fed's twisting the law to suit their own agenda and leaving us without an online fix. Sorry if my concerns are too narrow for your tastes.
Perhaps I should post in the 'Music I'm Listening To Right Now' thread or maybe the 'What I Did On My Summer Vacation' thread, but I have live people to discuss that with. Thanks for your concern though!
Perhaps I should post in the 'Music I'm Listening To Right Now' thread or maybe the 'What I Did On My Summer Vacation' thread, but I have live people to discuss that with. Thanks for your concern though!
tbdbitl
Legend
Silver Level
Hey PO, you as well as I are perfect, without flaws, and have no issues what-so-ever!
JOEBOB69
Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
W\E look if FTP comes back under new management U.S players get paid,non U.S. players get to play that's great.A guy\company thinking about buying a company like FTP right now with the money owed,reputation down the drain,and a gimmick like the Wembley Stadium thing is a....
Hustle a freaking used car dealers hustle i don't know the angle but i know there's one there.
Hustle a freaking used car dealers hustle i don't know the angle but i know there's one there.
LeanAndMean
Legend
Silver Level
This seems to have turned into a thread about Full Tilt. I have as much tied up in Absolute and Ultimate (hundreds) as I do on FT. I hear nothing about the Cereus network. Anybody have an update on what is happening there?
absoluthamm
<==Poker Face
Silver Level
Well, put it this way... Whereas people have some faith in FullTilt coming through and returning funds/reopening and such... there is NO faith that Cereus will do the same. They are more likely to open another poker room in South America with what was left of what money they had and Cereus will just be an afterthought.
Poker Orifice
And Still...
Platinum Level
ah ok. was just curious is all
alaskabill
Legend
Silver Level
The AGCC just released a statement clarifying seizure amounts. The DOJ did not seize 300 million as several have stated.
http://www.gamblingcontrol.org/userfiles/frontpage/FTP_statement.pdf
Further proof that FTP lies to cover themselves and they are ultimately responsible for the shortfall, especially to the ROW players.
Edit see also subject poker story on this.
http://www.subjectpoker.com/2011/10/agcc-331m-wrong-159m/
http://www.gamblingcontrol.org/userfiles/frontpage/FTP_statement.pdf
Further proof that FTP lies to cover themselves and they are ultimately responsible for the shortfall, especially to the ROW players.
Edit see also subject poker story on this.
http://www.subjectpoker.com/2011/10/agcc-331m-wrong-159m/
Last edited:
P
PotluckXXI
Visionary
Silver Level
Let me get this straight
OK so Lederrer, Ferguson and others were using Full Tilt as their own piggy bank paying themselves excessive salaries that wern't justified. In addition Instabill was keeping money that it was supposed to be paying out to the players. It also appears that there were accounting irregularities within Full Tilt that lead to the US Government's investigation. Does this sound right?
OK so Lederrer, Ferguson and others were using Full Tilt as their own piggy bank paying themselves excessive salaries that wern't justified. In addition Instabill was keeping money that it was supposed to be paying out to the players. It also appears that there were accounting irregularities within Full Tilt that lead to the US Government's investigation. Does this sound right?
Poker Orifice
And Still...
Platinum Level
Nope. It doesn't.
OzExorcist
Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
"Excessive" and "unjustified" are value judgements, but you're missing the point, which is that it isn't the size of the payments that made them wrong, but the fact they were paid out of player funds. If they'd paid themselves $1 dividends out of player funds it still would have been wrong.
Full Tilt says that Intabill "stole" the money and was taking legal action to retrieve it, though the outcome of the case hasn't been made public.
Full Tilt accounting irregularities didn't lead to the US Government investigation - unless you classify the activities the US Government alleges are money laundering and bank fraud as "accounting irregularities".
Its "accounting irregularities" (read: deceptions, half truths and outright lies) were a bigger matter in the case between Full Tilt and its licensing body, the AGCC.
Charade You Are
you can call me Frost
Silver Level
Good article: http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-b...lize-online-gambling-to-stimulate-the-economy
Excerpt:
Excerpt:
P
PotluckXXI
Visionary
Silver Level
Well Oz they were paid by Full Tilt, now where the money came from was a different matter, if Full Tilt paid them based on faulty accounting practices outside of GAAP and they were "unaware" of these practices, then they didn't have knowledge of the deception. If, on the other hand, they knew of the actual situation of Full Tilt's monetary issues and were still receiving exorbitant salaries then they did defraud the account holders (IE players). An example is a bank pays its employees even though it doesn't have the funds to pay its employees and return all its investors money.
Instabill said there were "irregularities" in the pay out amounts, and informed Full Tilt. They may have been keeping the funds, but say they received a 5% profit on the funds disbursement and they received $100,000 to pay $100,000 in disbursements then they were justified to keep $5,000 per the contract. It's a simplified example but without knowing the full and actual details we cannot know.
In the accounting world "accounting irregularities" is money laundering and bank fraud.
Charade you are, the argument posted is weak. States cannot control internet gambling. Most of these sites are based overseas, how can a state enforce its own players gambling on a site with players from all over the country and outside the US? States have been given the "right" to enforce gambling within their own borders. This is a federal jurisdiction case. If Nevada had a site run from within the state then it would collect taxes from that site, but a player in Indiana would have to pay Indiana and the US government on his winnings, plus Indiana could "demand" tax revenue from the site because the winnings were earned in Indiana. Now put the site overseas with a native Californian playing in Utah and the Jurisdiction becomes really tricky. It doesn't matter "if" or "how" Utah knows this player earned profit on internet gambling, it's that it was within their borders and they have the right to collect state taxes on the winnings per their state law. Perhaps gambling is illegal in Utah? Can they arrest they player for illegal organized gambling? can they go after the site under RICO?
The federal government has to take control of internet gambling, it sucks for us Americans but each state regulating internet gambling would be a mess.
Instabill said there were "irregularities" in the pay out amounts, and informed Full Tilt. They may have been keeping the funds, but say they received a 5% profit on the funds disbursement and they received $100,000 to pay $100,000 in disbursements then they were justified to keep $5,000 per the contract. It's a simplified example but without knowing the full and actual details we cannot know.
In the accounting world "accounting irregularities" is money laundering and bank fraud.
Charade you are, the argument posted is weak. States cannot control internet gambling. Most of these sites are based overseas, how can a state enforce its own players gambling on a site with players from all over the country and outside the US? States have been given the "right" to enforce gambling within their own borders. This is a federal jurisdiction case. If Nevada had a site run from within the state then it would collect taxes from that site, but a player in Indiana would have to pay Indiana and the US government on his winnings, plus Indiana could "demand" tax revenue from the site because the winnings were earned in Indiana. Now put the site overseas with a native Californian playing in Utah and the Jurisdiction becomes really tricky. It doesn't matter "if" or "how" Utah knows this player earned profit on internet gambling, it's that it was within their borders and they have the right to collect state taxes on the winnings per their state law. Perhaps gambling is illegal in Utah? Can they arrest they player for illegal organized gambling? can they go after the site under RICO?
The federal government has to take control of internet gambling, it sucks for us Americans but each state regulating internet gambling would be a mess.
xdeucesx
Bar Master
Silver Level
I think a state-regulated poker economy would be far worse than federally regulated.
Force all states to accept, if they don't, take away state license's for lotteries, so you can't run one w/out the other
coercive federalism at its finest
Charade You Are
you can call me Frost
Silver Level
Unfortunately any bill that might pass will have an opt-out provision as well as massive restrictions on who can get licenses. Personally, I would prefer the pre-UIGEA status, but that's not going to happen. I favor free markets over tightly regulated ones that just grease the palms of legislators and restrict free trade.
OzExorcist
Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
IMO this is an industry that needs tight regulation. Full Tilt / UB / etc have shown us that it's an industry that can't be trusted to regulate itself.
Charade You Are
you can call me Frost
Silver Level
And Federal regulation did a great job regulating the banking industry and wall street and the credit card industry and mortgages.
I have no problem with some regulation, but restricting Americans to American sites and restricting licenses to only big casinos is nothing but crony capitalism.
Let's pretend the UIGEA didn't pass (pox on you Frist and Kyl). There would have been more sites available to play, more competition, American sites, etc. Obviously all sites would be licensed somewhere. It is then the players choice where to play. And the players responsibililty to read the TOS. The AP scandal may have happened with or without regulation. The FTP fiasco may not have happened without the DOJ's interference (although I will concede their business management was horrible) and they may never have grown to the size they were had sites like Party not pulled out of the American market.
Last edited:
OzExorcist
Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
Actually, you could argue strongly that it was loosening regulations that caused the US financial crisis - Australian banks are much more tightly regulated, for example, and they fared much better. But we're not here to talk about banks...
While I agree that restricting Americans to American sites would be a horrible decision for all sorts of reasons (a point of view no doubt coloured by how much I truly, truly miss having access to American fish and their money), the reality is that legalised online gambling simply doesn't happen in the US without regulation.
billyjustin
Enthusiast
Silver Level
oh i kinda wish they were back, hate the fact i have a good amount just sitting on fulltilt waiting to get played. shoot, waiting to get cashed out. Almost been gone so long, almost don't even care if the sites come back now though, but I do want my damn $$
belladonna05
belladonkin'
Loyaler
Substitute deregulation and we have a winner.
http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/dereg-timeline-2009-07.pdf
Charade You Are
you can call me Frost
Silver Level
More crony capitalism versus responsible regulation.
I will miss all the non-American fish. Seriously, though, it just restricts the player pool and competition and none of us want that. As I said before, reasonable regulation for a license is a given, what I strongly object to is that the legislation will have less to do with what's good for the player and poker and everything to do with appeasing the big casinos and Indian Tribes. I would bet that a state like Washington, where online poker is a felony because they have 27 B&M casinos will opt out of any poker legislation.
Big day tomorrow. The House Subcommitte on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade will focus on the topic “Internet Gaming: Is There a Safe Bet?”
http://www.pokernewsreport.com/house-subcommittee-schedules-hearing-on-internet-gambling-5359
This is the kind of crap we are up against:
http://www.pokernewsreport.com/online-poker-will-kill-lottery-5411
the Styb
Rock Star
Silver Level
No offense meant to the esteemed Governor O'Malley of Maryland, but he's an alarmist liar spinning the situation to suit his own agenda. What a worthless… well, insert your own insult here.
OzExorcist
Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
dj11
Legend
Silver Level
The capitalists will want any new industry to be self regulated. Others will want Government regulation. The Alderney Gaming Commission being offshore will get a little less respect in Congress than the Kahnawake Gaming Commission, based in canada.
What do we players in the US want. Probably doesn't matter what we want, but if we had a voice, WHAT DO WE WANT?
The regulatory agency involved will have the power of the purse. I would think we want that purse to be in the US. Each state currently has a gaming commission, with no apparent federal overview. If we want interstate play, there will need to be an interstate overview. Else the current laws will be intrastate (play only against your state mates, no over the border play).
The big existing commissions (Alderney, Kahnawake) might do for international play, but this new thing will be built up state by state, and they won't have much, if any, say in how state matter get settled.
I for one want global play over interstate play rather than intrastate play.
What do we players in the US want. Probably doesn't matter what we want, but if we had a voice, WHAT DO WE WANT?
The regulatory agency involved will have the power of the purse. I would think we want that purse to be in the US. Each state currently has a gaming commission, with no apparent federal overview. If we want interstate play, there will need to be an interstate overview. Else the current laws will be intrastate (play only against your state mates, no over the border play).
The big existing commissions (Alderney, Kahnawake) might do for international play, but this new thing will be built up state by state, and they won't have much, if any, say in how state matter get settled.
I for one want global play over interstate play rather than intrastate play.