1- Lock does not have audited financials. Therefore any evaluation of the business is basically impossible. A mainstream financial institution would have no interest for this reason alone, never mind they are an essentially rogue enterprise in the eyes of the DOJ.
Even someone shady couldn't rely on their word without good accounting books.

2- The key question is if and how much of players funds have they spent? If the cash on hand and operating profit is significant, it would be possible for company insiders and surrogates to do just that. Of course, then the price will get pushed up past .33 as it become obvious what was going on. If Lock insiders thought they were a viable business, wouldn't they have had their friend, neighbors, and relatives buying up Lock on the cheap for months??? Since the price is steadily dropping supply still out numbers demand. Not a good sign that a turnaround is imminent or that anyone has faith in this entity.

You guys don't understand how bad this is. Lock has to make a ton of money just to cover their operating expenses. Also, no way in hell they can get credit. Are you kidding me? Who is going to lend to a rogue insolvent company that is losing money every day?

I would invest if the CEO resigns and they bring somebody competent on board to steer the ship.. Maybe someone professional like Howard Lederer or Annie Duke...cough cough...

Large financial institutions of which we are familiar with would not extend Lock credit, I know that. But there are struggling financial institutions (struggling in the sense of future business) on smaller scales who might, especially with deals put in place where the financial institution would receive X% of casino profits, etc. There ARE deals out there where companies without actual audited financials receive lines of credit, that's all I'm saying. I don't care if they get a line of credit from the mob. I'm not saying they can go to Wells Fargo and ask for a loan, that's an absurd notion.

And obviously all of this is in regards to Lock being a legitimate business. While there are signs pointing to Ponzi Scheme, and there are similar tendencies, it wouldn't make sense to continue to payout players (even on a small scale) if this were a Ponzi Scheme, given the estimation of little future incoming NEW cash. My opinion is that they wouldn't be paying ANYONE $2K withdrawals at this point if they weren't at least forecasting new money on a larger scale to come in. They'd only be paying like $150 withdrawals and other small amounts to show their "legitimacy" if they were a Ponzi Scheme.

As far as it not making sense for them to buy up funds in the marketplace, that's absurd. Is it ethical? No. There are plenty of legal reasons why companies cannot buy up their own stock when it drops in price on public exchanges. But we're not talking about a publicly traded company here. We're talking about an online poker company, one who won't even have their own books audited, one who doesn't have ANYONE enforcing them to HAVE TO in order to operate in general. Do they play by normal rules? No. Waiting 7-8 months to payout some players their OWN earned money is way more unethical to me than buying up your own funds at 1/3rd of the cost just to correct your debt and help your players and your financial situation out.

Heck, the latter actually sounds quite ETHICAL when you consider that the ONLY reason they would even buy up the funds in the first place would be to erase the debt. Using ACTUAL cash to purchase their funds with their players in mind sounds pretty good. Is it admittance of their funds being valued below 1:1 value, yes. But regardless, it would result in a win for everyone across the board. It's a clear win for Lock's financial status. and for those who want to quickly sell their bankrolls at a decreased discount.

My overall opinion of Lock? I think they got in over their heads with expenses and at some point used player funds. It probably become a pattern and a continual habit to tap into player funds unfortunately to cover expenses that they forecasted to easily replace. And then at some point, they must have realized they miscalculated and that they screwed themselves hardcore, but that they're trying to continue running a legitimate business moving forward as they once did. I think they made bad financial investments (in expansion, Fair Play Tech., Pro contracts, etc.) and they're paying for it now in reputation from using the funds towards said expenses, just like we as players are paying for it in wait-times. But in my truest opinion, they've had bad times now to the point where if they were a Ponzi moving forward, I think they would have given up already from a pure profit standpoint. Figuring out a way to decrease withdrawal wait times is their only savior in my eyes.

They don't have enough money to buy funds @ 30 c

This is probably very close to the truth. Bernie Madoff did not start out as a Ponzi scheme in the purest sense (Ponzi= no actual business behind it). He had a legit business, made money at first, suffered losses, reported phony gains, tried to double up to make up for losses, the market turned against him big time, and then it was impossible to recover, so he became a Ponzi scheme with phony account statements et al. Yet, he was sending out withdrawls right up until he was shut down.

The problem for Lock is if and how much player deposits were spent? If they did not spend player $, there is no problem. If they did, it becomes a matter of how much. Do they make enough in new deposits and rake to cover the current withdrawls and replenish any deposits that were spent? What do the current facts indicate to you?

1- Fewer people looking to deposit.
2- Traffic seems to be way down, so rake has to be down
3- Withdrawls and wait times are increasing

Those 3 things seem to answer the question. Not to mention the lack of transparency, pros jumping ship, lack of communication from management, poor service, and fund rates declining to .25. Amirite?

That's pretty much it. If they did tap into player funds at one point, regardless of whether or not they were absolutely certain on being able to replace it immediately, how much is the total now. I know this is all speculation anyways, but it would suck if there was a decently high % of dead money on the site right now. Because if there is, then Lock is just slowly raking away nonexistent money that was already used, and if at all the new deposits are being used immediately to pay out other players or other expenses, then the % of dead money never gets any brighter.

And yes, I realize Ponzi's have paid up til being discovered, but I think Lock would be paying out smaller withdrawals to show better withdrawals in # and less in $ if they were going under. And their retreat to Portugal a matter of months ago would seem like an extremely weird waste of money.

I believe that if they continue going on this path and it takes them another 6-12 months to clean up withdrawal times, they would have already done too much damage to themselves to recover value as a preferred site. People can and will forgive if they decrease wait times on withdrawals. But that opportunity to keep existing players and gain everyone's trust is slowly being closed. So if it's money, fix the withdrawal times with some sort of borrowed money (other sites, some sort of network, etc.) if the plan is to run a popular site in the future.

Yes, this is where I think most people speculate where they are at. Once you make that first decision to (if) tap into player deposits there is no turning back. It becomes easier and easier to do the next time, and its like a tire rolling down hill. FTP had 5% of player deposits on hand when they were shutdown. Ongame had 31% on hand when they were bought out.
Here's why I think they are in deep doodoo. 2+2 forums are referenced all the time in poker articles. 2+2ers probably represent a small percentage of Lock's backlog. But 2+2ers represent the largest most vocal voice. Look at the reports and how many people are owed and the value. Its chump change in the big picture. Yet they CAN NOT clear it! 6 months and people are still waiting. Why? If I'm Jen Larson, I payoff 2+2ers within weeks of the Portugal trip. I clear the backlog, everyone has evidence things are turning around, I have my paid media shills write nice articles about Lock, I have my dbag pros hype the site, lock funds go back up to .80, and I'm back in business retaining and attracting new customers!!! Yet they haven't done it. Why?

you're delusional. NOBODY is gong to lend to or invest in Lock in their current state. You'd have to be a complete idiot to invest money with Lock right now.

And companies do buy up their own stock when it falls in price... like all the time.

Problem is that your assuming that Lock has a viable business and just needs to get out of this whole before it can return to greatness. I am asserting that Lock has no viable business and no amount of buying up discounted funds can make then profitable long term. Obviously I could be wrong bc we dont have much info but that is what the signs are pointing to.