Is Lock Poker member of the Curacao Internet Gaming Association(CIGA)? - Page 3 - Two Plus Two

I stand by what I stated above....a license in Curacao means nothing as the folks who got stiffed by Aces Gold in 2004 can attest to. There were others that closed shop in Curacao thereafter with no player recourse.

Malta is another joke of a licensing agency (i.e Everleaf, etc..). I think Lock briefly mentioned a Malta license when they were with Merge.

Let's not even tough on Kahnawake.

I am just saying these licenses are BS.

How come you air these critical thoughts here but never with regards to Lock Poker in any of your articles? You even attempt to down talk the problems by claiming there were issues in the past three weeks with processing, yet to this excess it has been going on for by far longer. And if almost all sites that still serve the US use the same handful of processors that run into issues from time to time, why does Lock have the worst track record of all concerning processing times. Can you explain this apart from "oh they have by far the most transactions / volumes"? Because the latter does not work as argument for ROW processing if the funds were indeed fully segregated.

05-12-2013 , 06:28 AM

#52

DonSwanLeon

journeyman

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 388

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Costigan

You're confusing me.

Lock Poker thinks they hold a licence regulated by the Government of Curacao.

Which I agree if they had it, it means nothing. So there is absolutely no chance of player recourse, if Lock Poker does anything wrong.

Alderney, Isle of Man, and Gibraltar are probably the best to have and they do hold some weight because in order to do business in the UK, an operator will need a licence even if they are offshore.

All of the above licencors require that audits are conducted to ensure player deposits are available and/or segregated. The rules vary from one to another.

In going further with the UK, operators will have to submit an application to the government.

The reason I mention the UK is because it has decent gambling regulation and also is a big piece of the market. Lock Poker will not be able to do business in the UK very soon without showing solvency as the UK is extremely strict when it comes to allowing operators to provide gambling there.

Lock Poker is going to need to get a licence from Alderney, Isle of Man, Malta or Gibraltar.

05-12-2013 , 06:49 AM

#53

HammerMan72

adept

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 940

Quote:

Originally Posted by surprised

Argument? Are you joking?

You say things that are:

1) Not true

2) You cannot know

3) You cannot proof

4) You are not able to answer cause 1), 2) and 3)

1) 95% of the things I've said in this thread are certainly true and actually come from years of working in the gaming industry and having a very good understanding of how (US facing) gaming operators (have to) operate.

The only thing nobody can say for sure is where Lock is keeping player funds. However, I stand my point that Cipaco is a shell company and that no matter what actions you take there is no money to be gained from them.

2) I do know fullstop

3) I don't have anything to proof I was just trying to show you how difficult it would be to get your money from an offshore shell company. If anyone has anything to proof it would be Lock by allowing CIGA an audit of their accounts to verify that player funds are segregated which btw isn't even a CIGA requirement in order to operate a online gaming site under a Curacao licence.

Quote:

You are the best proof why Lock Poker can "play their game" with their delayed withdrawals.

-> No knowledge what is going on, no knowledge how the things are working

Glad that you know so much about me, what I do and who I am.

Quote:

-> As I mentioned several times, every player at Lock Poker has a contract with the company Cipaco N.V. and NOT with any domain and NOT with JDB Services.

Tired of answering that over and over again.

Quote:

-> Your answers show more than clearly that you have no knowledge about rights

Spoiler:

THIS!

Quote:

Originally Posted by vindictive27

...I think you need to take a step back and realize that no one wanted to argue with you, that a lot of patience and kind responses were posted in regards to hoping you'd clarify your previous statements as opposed to saying the same thing again and again. You've repeated yourself about the "misuse of player funds.." and in simple logic, it would be fairly difficult and tedious to be able to prove, (what a court would consider to be an accusation), within a reasonable amount of time. And what happens if they did use all the player funds? We would never see a dime.....

Well said!

Last edited by HammerMan72; 05-12-2013 at 06:55 AM.

05-12-2013 , 03:03 PM

#54

surprised

banned

Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 73

Quote:

Originally Posted by HammerMan72

However, I stand my point that Cipaco is a shell company and that no matter what actions you take there is no money to be gained from them.

Do I understand you right that the law of Curacao is not valid for the in Curacao registered shell company Cipaco N.V.?
-> This would mean that the contract I have signed with the company Cipaco N.V. is not valid as well, because a not valid company cannot make any valid contract.

If you are sure that there is no money to be gained from the company Cipaco N.V. although they are owing millions, then there is a good chance to bring them to justice for embezzlement because I´m very sure that the law of Curacao is valid for the shell company Cipaco N.V.. I never ever read that shell companies are free of law!

Quote:

Originally Posted by HammerMan72

Glad that you know so much about me, what I do and who I am.

Cheers!

Quote:

Originally Posted by HammerMan72

However, setting up an Offshore company in Gibraltar is very similar to other offshore countries and please believe me when I tell you that you have no idea how these things work.

05-14-2013 , 01:14 AM

#55

benny622

journeyman

Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 310

Can someone quickly clue me in on why the G911 article is a joke?
Has G911 done some weird stuff in the past??
Serious question. I really don't know the story, just ppl bashing it a lot.
Thanks!

05-14-2013 , 11:55 AM

#56

HammerMan72

adept

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 940

G911 is basically the chosen channel of Lock to publish whatever Jen sees fit. Chris was one of the invited people to the recent retreat in Porto, Portugal and basically G911 "news" related to Lock are worth..

Spoiler:

05-14-2013 , 03:16 PM

#57

Kilowatt

banned

Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 1,101

Someone should e-mail Jen Larson and alert her to Chris Costigan's posts in this thread.

Maybe she will get pissed and stop using his shill site for her press releases.

05-14-2013 , 03:42 PM

#58

4barreledjoe

enthusiast

Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 91

Responding to Chris's posts just give him more credibility than ignoring them would. I don't understand why he is able to come in here and promote his own site along with lock in the first place. Nothing he has to say is news to us in here so it's not like he's offering any valuable information to the forum. He just rambles about the same topics we've been reading about for way too long already.

05-14-2013 , 04:04 PM

#59

HammerMan72

adept

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 940

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Costigan

By pointing out that a license in Curacao is meaningless? Readers of this site need to know that an online gambling license means ZILCH. Alderney and Full Tilt Poker come to mind most recently. This stuff drives me nuts as these licensing agencies are never held accountable.

..........

Lock having a license from anywhere except MAYBE the Isle of Man means nothing. It is a fallacy to think otherwise.

You didn't point that out in your interview with Jennifer Larson by any chance?

05-26-2013 , 09:49 AM

#60

surprised

banned

Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 73

Quote:

Originally Posted by surprised

Cipaco N.V. is correct. The contract is between you and Cipaco N.V., not with the owner of the domains.

-> see http://lockpoker.eu/support/terms/

"These terms and conditions constitute a legally binding agreement ("Agreement") between (a) you, the end user, and (b) Cipaco N.V., a company operating as "Lock Poker" under license 1668/JAZ issued by the Government of Curaçao , and each of its officers, directors, agents, employees, consultants, suppliers, vendors and affiliates (collectively "Company/we/us/our")."

Quote:

Originally Posted by HammerMan72

It's still not correct as that domain is parked and owned by JDB Services NV

Did I understood you right that although its publicised on lockpoker.eu that I sign a legally binding agreement with Cipaco N.V., in reality I dont sign a contract with Cipaco N.V. and instead of that I sign a contract with JDB Services cause JDB Services is the owner of the domain lockpoker.eu?