Question:

Shane when will you find time to chase up the ROW cashouts that have been in the tube for +120 days now?

Though I've always received my withdrawals in an somewhat acceptable time and even very quickly in some cases there is a number of forum members in the non-US cashout thread that seek your assistance and who feel like they are being ignored.

Getting their money to them should be one of your top priorities given the statements you've made in regards to increased processing limits and I would love to see those people getting their money.

Edit - Example:

question: why the hell does it take so long to get verified for either wu or checks?

seems like a deliberate multi cashout stalling attempt to me.

I agree that's the more likely explanation than "it takes our team 3+ months to verify stuff".

Yes.

Yes.

And your "generalization" "would" be wrong.............. eyeroll.jpg

Yes I am trying to break this down a little.

Print off request
Carry to desk
Get out pen
look at Excel spreadsheet
Confirm name, address, and amount
Write check mark on paper with "completed"
Find envelope
Lick envelope
Get stamp
Put in outbox
Send to processor

I am still not figuring 3 months, but I could be missing a few steps

Seeing that a lot of the lack of information sharing and surprises are blamed on the "Network" and I could've sworn its been stated before that Jennifer (is that the name of Lock's owner) owns Revolution...perhaps a definative answer as to who own's Lock and who owns Revolution should be given.

I asked once before and was given a smart alec answer of "its been answered many times before" when typing an actual answer would have been less work and faster, let alone more customer friendly.

A few months back, 'Jen' did an interview with g911 in which she stated that the announced purchase of the network last year fell through and that Lock has 0% of the network.

http://www.gambling911.com/poker/gam...ew-051213.html

Thx for that, it was helpful but I'd still like to know who owns all three entities; g911 is (imho) hardly a reliable source and there seems to be evidence that all three (cake, lock & revolution) are actually tied together through ownership. Doubt they'll answer anyways, so I appreciate your post.

This ought to be the next 3-part question posed to Shane in it's own thread titled Q7 (Customer Service):

Lock owns no part of the network, the sale was never completed.

If you would like more details just use the search function its been address a few different times in different threads.

Hey guys, this is the list of questions for this round, does it look good? Anyone want to suggest something else?




I've also got a fourth question which could be seen as a follow up, posted it in follow up thread, but wanted to give you guys the option of having it in the main thread if you so wish, either as an extra question or replacing one of the three above:

I think the question: why the hell does it take so long to get verified for either wu or checks?

Is a bit out of line, perhaps it could be re phrased. Perhaps he could give a step by step answer to "verification" and why it is taking 3 month or more for this process on small simple cashouts. I would assume they don't have to fly in Magnum PI to conduct an extensive background check. So this process should be performed in days or hours, not months.

As an aside, I would suggest that Shane keep going through the existing questions as it looks like he inadvertenly skipped over a few questions. I would hope he would keep cycling through as new responses or follow ups come up.



Question: Could you compare your cash out process to that of Bovada/Bodog.

1- Why are their cash out times so superior (48 hours- week) to Lock's
2- Why do they communicate more closely and more frequently with their customers.
3- Why do people feel their customer experience with Bovada/Bodog is far superior to that of Lock?
4- Why is the owner of Bovada/Bodog more accessible and engaged with his customers than Lock's CEO?

Obv I was gonna rephrase it

I like your questions, I'd like to include them, but I also don't particularly want to remove any of the other questions

Considering the 4 mini-questions following your main question, I'd like to save this for next round and maybe just have one other question from someone else during that round. Sound good?

Of course. Its all good............

Jah - I love the effort and intiative man. No knock on you, but as Shane and Lock continue to show, this is the same march around the same drum, with the same tune and same song/dance over and over ad naseum. Round and round we go until what? What's the end game here? Does Shane, Lock, or anyone here think anything is being accomplished?

I'm to the point now that if weren't for the players here on 2+2 and their support, I wouldn't continue with the Lock portion of my reports. It's clear they want nothing to do with any kind of accountability and would rather scoff, mock, or dismiss - or, in the case of some of Shane's answers, completely bull**** people continually - then try to work with the community and actually improve on anything.

Maybe it's time to push for Shane to stick to PM support for players only. Changing him out for someone else isn't going to make a difference as long as the current environment at Lock remains as it is. This isn't a game for a lot of people and Lock wants to keep treating it as such - fine. I don't have a stake in this like a lot of people do, but that doesn't mean I'm going to stand idly by and watch them continue to screw people who's only fault was taking Lock at their word.

As a friendly suggestion to Shane:

.

1- Although he may have answered these questions in the past, try to consider them new questions and a new opportunity and to answer them as thoroughly and completely as possible. The more information, the better.

2- I realize some information is confidential ($ amounts), but numbers and percentages should be available and should not compromise Lock security in an meaningful way. So lets consider bringing some numbers and statistics to the table when applicable.

3-And any chance Jen Larson would care to weigh in? It would be great to get her perspective at some point.

4- And maybe you could respond to Nutz's reports and compare your numbers to his. His work would seem to represent a statistically significant sample size and cross section of data. So I would be interested in hearing where they are markedly different. Again, I can understand $ amounts could be dicey for Lock, but numbers/volumes/percentages should be doable for you. And a great way for you and your CEO to paint a clear picture for many of us.

Thanks and keep up the good work

Yes, that would be nice...especially #4 above. His thing shows like 69 cashouts pending longer than 2 mos for like 160K or so. Even though that's over 12% of their average traffic, its still less than the 200k per week if the proccessor reduced their volume Shane quoted. So, 4-5 weeks starting....

Questions are up: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...75&postcount=7

Next round we'll have Bictor Vlom's series of questions/mini-questions to start off, and I'm going to backtrack through the first pages of this thread to see if there's any questions that were left out so far, which we can then include.

Shane, could you please give us some information on today's change to the MTT schedule and it's purpose.

Q:
Aprox how much money does Lock expect to recover from this or, how much do you expect in avg to save in overlays?

And:
Why was the change to the MTT schedule not announced?. I'm sure it wouldn't be seen as advertising by 2+2 if Lock would have (for once) communicated this to their players.

Shane when this question has never been answered with a straight answer. You say Lock has no ownership of the network but does the network own part of Lock?

Lock doesn't report anything to the customers. He says that 2+2 is a small percentage of the cashouts, then he says to come here reading new information, he's never hypocritical in the slightest, is he?

Revolution is Cake, the rebrand happened on the launch but with the deal not completed the Cake Network has left the rebrand in place.

The Cake Network owns no piece of Lock, Lock is completely independently owned.

So to recap:
Lock completely owns Lock
Cake owns both the Cake skin as well as the Network (though Jen did mention in her interview about another group stepping in to finance Revolution/Cake but I have no knowledge of that, all I know is that management hasn't changed as I still deal with the same people there.)

Thank you Shane, now can you tell everyone why in the original Q@A thread in post #4 you said you had no idea who owned Cake?

Im not sure if you read that wrong but its quite clear that I have no idea who the group is that was financing Cake after we pulled out I only know management hasn't changed.

Just so we are absolutely clear, I know who management is at Cake but I have no knowledge of who owns Cake.

Ty, maybe ya'all should consider leaving them

So you know Cake owns the skin and network, you know the management at Cake and until recently Lock let everyone think they had bought the network from Cake yet you say you don't know who owns Cake. So let me ask you this, if you do not know who owns the network how can you say for certain it is the same group that owns the skin?