For those that don't want to give g11 page views:

@vindictive27 +1

Your statement about the buzzwords and terms "blacklisted" and "DOJ" is spot on.

I don't recall an instance where the DoJ seized funds and when they found out that they were the players funds that they didn't return that money to the players. FTP can't be used as an example, because player funds were not on hand.

Hypothetically, if Lock were audited by whatever government they pay taxes to wouldn't they have to show the accounting records?

Besides the probability that they have commingled player deposits with paying expenses, they probably have racked up a bunch of tax liability.

When they mentioned they made a profit and planned a trip to Portugal they would have had to file taxes?

Lock Poker is the ultimate rogue company. We have no idea where their headquarters is, we don't know the company's real name, we also don't if the player funds are available and we don't know who they are accountable to for paying taxes on profits.

I dont know how is the law for offshore companies in Curacao but usually offshore companies dont have to make an accounting and dont have to pay tax except an yearly fixed amount independant of how much profit they made.

The responsible company must be Cipaco N.V., Dr. M.J. Hugenholtzweg Z/N, Willemstad, Curacao cause this is the company you sign up an contract when you register at Lock Poker and Lock shows as well a license for the company Cipaco N.V. from Curacao Egaming on their lockpoker.eu homepage.

This. It was in no way an interview. She did not sit down and respond to questions posed to her. This was a statement released in the form of a question and answer.

Which is completely fine.

Regardless of future plans, it's something good to know if you have money currently stuck on there that could end up being like Cereus funds.

No doubt. The main priority should be getting your money off of the site with plans that once that occurs, never return.

Its all very simple or at least it should be.

Really its my opinion that unless they can prove to you or come right out and publicly state that its 100% fact that the funds are segregated, I will assume that they are not.

Again, it should not be a very hard question to answer (or prove ) unless you have to " catch yourself " and try not to lie at the wrong time.

They seize money from processors quite often. Those are player funds, either on the way to the site or on the way to the players. There have been some instances of them giving some back when they bust the parent company, such as neteller, but many where nobody ever got anything back.

There were numerous instances of state governments taking money as well, I remember after black friday there was a seizure somewhere on the east coast and the cops all took a picture with a giant check of stolen player funds, like they just won the lottery or something.

Here it is:



http://odenton.patch.com/articles/co...#photo-6373325

Why on earth does it matter if funds are segregated? Players are just trying to get their money back which is laughable enough. Its not like anybody is going to deposit anymore, so segregation doesn't matter anymore.

Why on earth does it matter?

This is the key issue!

If the funds were segregated, the players could still be paid even if the business went bankrupt. The funds should not be assets of the business. At most, the business should be able to make money on the interest from the funds. That's it.

Of course, all the signs point to the funds not being segregated at Lock. They were probably diverted to Lock's ongoing operational and marketing expenses at minimum, and it wouldn't be at all surprising if a substantial percentage found its way into the pockets of the insiders - as in other cases of rogue sites.

We've seen this all before. We can't be 100% sure, but all the evidence suggests it.

more or restated information is never a bad thing.

Why would lock pay if they went bankrupt?

I personally doubt that Lock would pay if they went bankrupt, and they may already be past the point of no return. But there might be some small chance.

If a legitimate online poker company went bankrupt, and it was operating under a jurisdiction with functional oversight, there wouldn't be much of a problem. The player funds would be intact (because they would be segregated), and the court proceedings would ensure that the funds were available to be returned to players, whether the company was liquidated or continued to operate under bankruptcy protection.

In the case of Lock, these assumptions probably don't hold. Certainly we don't have a legitimate jurisdiction with any kind of appropriate oversight. And all the external evidence suggests that Lock didn't segregate player funds, and at minimum, that their business is in serious trouble. In the worst case, it could be a flat-out scam site at this point. We simply don't know the extent of it.

But the signs are all bad; we've seen it before.

Ecogra does account auditing as part of their egap requirements. One of the requirements is that the company has sufficient cash to pay everyone at all times. Surely lock could use them to do the audit? I meant it is ecogras field after all.

Oh wait... then they'd have to abide by all the other silly requirements like "player protection" "information privacy" and "responsible gaming".

Off topic but fun fact about photo. John Leopold (guy on far left) former County Exec just got out of jail for various abuses of office which also resulted in James Teare (guy in uniform) having to resign as Chief of Police.

thanks for the update!

I'm sorry, but no, it is not completely fine to release an "interview" that is simply a released statement with absolutely no credibility in it's source. An actual interview to me should include video, not even just audio at this point. Because I want proof that Jen Larson is saying these words, and without her reading them. Why does that matter? Because it does, it seriously just does. It should absolutely matter to you who is giving these answers in this so-called "interview". She should be taking this very seriously, and clearly is not.

Seriously then, answer me this - what the hell is the difference between the legitimacy in this statement vs. something that Shane says? NOTHING, is the simple answer. It means NOTHING more than anything Shane has "passed on" to us via this forum.

We have absolutely no substantial evidence to even support that Jen Larson had anything to do with this statement. How do we know that Jen Larson didn't simply pay Chris Costigan to work with her support team to write up the entire interview? Sure seems that way based on how the language in the article matches just about everything else I've seen. It's like if someone comes on to "replace" Shane and they use the same damn lingo and the same damn spelling errors, aren't you going to put 2 and 2 together (pun intended) and assume it's still Shane?

Y'know how everyone is tired of hearing these promises from Lock Support about "you should be in the next batch", "definitely next batch", "next batch is tomorrow", "you're added to the priority list", etc.? Well to me, Lock must have realized they can't possibly tell you anything else via e-mail. To me, this seems like another damn stalling procedure. What's next? "You've been escalated to our Red Alert withdrawal batch"?

"Don't just teach your children to read...Teach them to question what they read. Teach them to question everything." - George Carlin

One thing I think the lock "Pros" are more than likely lying about is that they have to wait for cashouts.

So they give Mccormick cashouts quick but they stiff their team of "pros"

yeahhhhhhhhhh right

Can people get this through their thick skulls yet? How am i supposed to not get mad when people keep spreading these blatant lies?

People who win the Grind for Glory promotions are getting fast cashouts.

I happen to win them every time so far.

Do you see the difference between that and just "me getting faster cashouts"? if you won the promotion, your cashout would be expedited too. It has nothing to do with who wins it.

Lock Poker was a success. PERIOD.

Gambling sites can stall for a LONG time. I mentioned what needs to happen to them but everyone thinks I should be gentle because they don't want me to fluster Lock with our money, they might get upset and not pay us.

They are raking money and don't have to make withdrawals, that's pretty cool! Because we will question solvency and their intentions for a year and still deposit on their site. Jen is very smart.

what a shill website


lock is stealing from everyone we all know it

By the way, if they wouldn't expedite people's cashouts on GfG promo wins, you know what kind of posts we'd get on 2+2 instead, during the horrid cashout times, right?

"oh, Lock is just luring people in to deposit with sick promo's which they don't pay out anyway"

eCOGRA was established back in 2002 by 888.com and Microgaming. A few years back one of the eCOGRA certified Microgaming casinos decided to abruptly shut off "lifetime affiliates" and, despite the public outcry, eCOGRA continued to certify this casino group up to a year. G911 covered this matter extensively at the time. There was a huge outcry from the online casino community.

http://www.gpwa.org/forum/how-does-r...ra-181404.html

So basically eCOGRA cannot be considered an "independent" monitoring agency. They clearly are not.

I will say that eCOGRA has done a lot of good things, more so than the majority of these so-called licensing jurisdictions (i.e. Malta, Antigua, Curacao, etc..). They're just not as "independent" as many are lead to believe.

From AussieDave:

http://www.dodgy************history.net/tag/ecogra/

As an online casino player I have to look at the facts.
• Microgaming monthly slot audits and casino games are audited by eCOGRA.
• eCOGRA is basically owned my Micorgaming.
• The Microgaming slot machine audits combine all of the slots and do not give the RTP for each slot.
• Microgaming receive royalties on the amount of money dropped into each casino.

I understand that and it is a joke of a policy.

Seems they are paying the highest rakers which is a joke. All cashouts should be the same speed. They are obv paying the highest rakers to keep them from leaving the site and to keep the games going. One of their last straws IMO

My point is if they are giving FRIND FOR GLORY guys preferential treatment it would be safe to assume lock "pros" get the same. They did just put them up in a castle for a few days so I would just take an educated guess they cash them out just as fast as guys from GFG

I think players do have a hard time grasping how they can pay out promo winners lightning fast , but cant pay the pros this way. why it sounds untrue ducy