[QUOTE=ZeckoRiver;38539316]

Lock allows him to use 200% bonuses unlimited to shill for them....the only way it can be explained...maybe he can run multiple reload bonuses at a time?...200% rakeback?..he claims he cashes out...for the life of me I can not figure it out...and 2p2 I received my warning to troll this dude...but this makes no sense...sharkscope is inaccurate McCormick?...by how much?..$500, 5,000?...80,000?...wait...is 200% rakeback even enough to cover those losses?...and maybe he does cash out..but deposit far more

Ty for that clarification. So if you say we processed 80 western unions for the month the doj will be able to pinpoint your processor. By that logic a detective looking into western union processing wouldn't be able to check processors and amount of western union it processes and do appropriate detective work. Someone from govt agency could've shut you down by deposting and following the money and you come up with that crock.

Sharkscope is almost dead on for my Lock account. I know that McCormick has taken the cash alternative for most of his monthly rewards. One month was over $10k for him. This money will not report on Sharkscope because it isn't tracked. So his profit is made when he takes first place for rake chase. If the reward/ prize is +ev then it makes sense for him to go after it. Even if he looses 8k if the prize value is 10k he profits 2k.

What rakeback % does sharkscope calculate in? I guess 0% right? If my total losses are 61k according to Sharkscope, well, i can tell you my rake paid on Lock is far and beyond more than that 61k. If then i get somewhere around 100% RB grand total (with promo's etc. Lock Lotto, maybe it's a little less than 100% tho but still)

.. you get my point, say my rake paid is 100k (it isn't, just making up a number) then at 100% RB my profit would be 39k on the site.

I'm guessing the grind for glory prize is what puts you over the 100% RB mark. Otherwise you would simply be receiving your fee back, and either winning, breaking even, or losing based on variance.

Side note..... you must have wagered well over 1 million dollars by now lol..... its actually really surprising negative variance hasn't devoured your bankroll haha

I think the point is that you're a donator willing to put in volume so Lock probably wants you to continue to play in order to keep LHE games going.

I'm certainly not going to be spending time defending Mccormick, but I will say one thing - if your overall losses (before rakeback/rewards) are less than your rake paid, you're not a donator.

Agreed. Yeah it's comical. If you're going to abuse him at least be right. Profit is positive if rakeback > rake paid + money loss

He's working the system as well he should

Honestly who cares about Mccormicks profits, when is this happening? All we have gotten is Shane back, and hes back to debating facts and non facts, lies and stretched truths, and "chasing things up".

Lock has not delivered on their promise, period. After this "cashout blitz" itll all be back right where it started. Obv. they are only processing more cashouts now after basically sending none for 6 months.

Looking forward to this. When will it happen?

Well at least you don't have to wonder. The new rep made an appearance made a statement that things are moving into a brighter directions and disappeared. Everyone is right back to were they stared from with Shane telling bold faced lie after bold faced lie.

still nothing

So what exactly would change if 3+4 would be put in place? At least right now we know who we're bashing on. New Lock rep would take 3 months just to settle in and to clear his inbox.

I rather keep Shane despite many things he might or might not have done. At least I know who I'm dealing with, got my own opinion about him and I know how to reach him.

New Lock rep would be... dunno who the fk he is, dunno how to reach him and for all I know he would just repeat what management tells him so pretty much give the same answers Shane is giving right now.

For all I care Shane is as good as any new rep Lock could bring up. Only advantage (for them) would be that the new guy could stall time easier cause obviously he would need some time to get an overview of the current situation and chase it up with the cashier manager. And of course... start a new excel sheet from scratch or make space on the board for new post-it's.

In the end the new rep would then quit his job cause he can't handle the preassure and da-daaaaaa Shane would have to make a return.

The problem fundamentally isn't with Shane, it's with the information Shane is authorized to give out. It doesn't help that he's a smarmy, tone-deaf douchebag, but that really just compounds the true problem.

Exactly so what changes would people expect (on the short run) with a new random rep showing up on this forum? It sure wouldn't mean that one week later the backlogs are cleared or the guy making statements like:

"Well, you know I hate to say this and I'm also not meant to say this but we did actually lose about $500,000 of player funds due to the crisis in Cyprus and (but don't tell anyone) Jen actually dipped into player funds for another Mill. But anyway, we're recovering and though some will get hurt we will at least continue on improving ROW cashouts cause we need to pull out the US market"

Does anyone really thing something along the lines of the above would happen if there was a new rep?

I think that since the majority of Lock's problems have happened "on Shane's watch", people just have a negative view of him. I don't blame Lock's problems on Shane, but he's been very unreliable at best. He's been saying "Next month we should see an improvement in cashouts" for the past 9-10 months in which we've yet to see any improvement. He all but lied about the Portugal trip, then justified it using a play on words. He gives people a false sense of hope by putting them on a "priority list" or "chasing it up" for them, of which i'm not sure it's been proven to make difference at all. He also goes missing for a long periods at a time and only responds to a select few posts when he is participating in the forum. I understand there's probably little new information that he can provide, but just being present and admitting it would be more reassuring that not being active at all. Having said that, I understand responding to posts on twoplustwo is probably a very small part of his responsibility. But I also understand the desire to have a new rep because if you look over the past 10 months' posts and take Shane at his word, you'd have little reason to trust him. People want a rep they can trust even if the rep can't actually do more to resolve the problems at Lock.

Warder, I agree with pretty much everything you said.

All I'm saying is that I believe a new rep wouldn't change a thing and just repeat the same things Shane is saying cause that is what "management" wants to be said if the rep likes it or not.

I also think that we would destroy the new guy within a week. Shane has grown the skin one needs to keep up. New guy would get ripped to bits the moment he makes his first post

See it that way... Shane's own rep can only get better lol.