If a Lock player loses 1k to an Intertops player, then Lock has to send 1k to Intertops to square up.

They typically do this at the end of the month, it's called reconciliation -- a skin might owe 6 figures to another skin by this time, for example, depending on who wins and who loses over the course of a month.

Lock doesn't have the money to square up, and hasn't made any reconciliation payments in 6-8 months, allegedly. AdamEve and ComeOn have either shut down or restricted cashouts because the network owes them this money, but Lock has been stiffing the network for months so they are ****ed.

So would this be absolute proof that player funds are NOT segregated from Locks and proof that Shane is lying on this topic also?

I believe so.

There's 0% chance that player funds are segregated and 100% available, imo.

3 different skins have been complaining for months about Lock owing them money. AdamEve, ZetPoker, and ComeOn. All of them have been hurt financially, by having to either shut down or apologize for not allowing any cashouts.

Shane says they're all lying.

Iirc Shane also has a different version of events than the Intertops rep on a few subjects.

Actually, whether they have funds segregated or not (and I generally do not believe anything that Shane thing says), that really should not impact the reconciliation issues, because if they are keeping all Lock balances segregated then they cannot touch those to make these other payments.

Here is what has been happening in general:

Lock spent a lot of money and effort attracting a lot of players early on, because assess in the seats are needed for the games to fill up. Even on Pokerstars where games start all the time, I joke that the reason they do is because a 9 man sit and go is really a 2-3 man sit and go with 5-7 regs sitting and a couple droolers joining a game that is nearly full. In contrast, non reg games ($7 90 man KOs for instance) can take hours to fill on Stars.

Lock did everything it could to steal players from other skins when they were on Merge, and when they joined Cake they put in place promotions that would have fit well in the good old bonus whoring days. People could make well over 100% with all sorts of bells and whistles and casino clearing and a ton of people joined the party.

Lock attracted more donks than skins like adameve (mainly hard core grinders), and they also attracted people who could break even at the tables at best yet make money from the rewards.

The other skins tended to have better players (with a smaller player pool) so at the tables Lock players would lose quite a bit to those on other skins overall each month. To make matters much worse, once Lock money started dropping a whole ton of chip dumping took place from Lock to skins with better cashout abilities like Intertops.

The chip dumping was not tiny. If one looks at the high stakes transfer thread one can see certain people bought a ton of Lock money over and over, so the chip dumping alone was likely in the healthy 6 figures until it was stopped.

Cake is the owner of the network so they are the ones that facilitate the monthly settlements and when the bill to Lock started to grow faster and faster (due to all the forces above) Lock simply stopped paying. How much do they owe Cake at this point? I am not certain, but if the line was put at 1.5 commas in the figure I would take the over.

The Fair Play experiment was put in when the chip dumping was rampant and it was not a fix to the problem at all, and the fact they pitched it as a way to protect weaker players is pretty amusing. That was more likely Cake calling the shots than Lock, and Cake has a history of some pretty bad choices in the past.

Their tweaks obviously did nothing but piss off players who had no idea what was going on day to day, and that was starting to cost them business, so the final step is what we see here - Lock essentially segregated in the games where large player losses can happen to those on other skins. They are not worried about the net effect of the 4 NL games...

I really am not sure what Lock can do at this point, and while I am annoyed that all of this happened, I do understand why they have been quarantined and long term that is probably best for the network, though certainly those who stay with Lock will have a good chance of losing all value to their money.

If I had to pick a number for Lock funds being segregated I would take about 20-25%. Intertops is 100% segregated and secure. I have no idea on the other skins.

I do wish the best of luck to those choosing or forced to stick with Lock Poker. I do not blame the pros for starting to look out for themselves (and if people think these are the first ones to sell off large chunks of money they are solely mistaken), though I also understand frustration toward them for pitching this place as well. Those that remain pros will have that stuck on their resume, when now is the time they can still escape with some dignity.

It isn't a matter of "frustration" about Lock pros continuing to promote Lock. Its a matter of them being scum for knowingly trying to dupe people into throwing their money into a black hole. That goes far beyond simply looking out for their own best interest.

As I said, those that stay with Lock and continue to promote it, even when a deposit means losing 75% of ones money right away, will always have that as a mark on their resume.

Look at how things turned out for most of the old Tilt pros, most will never get a promo deal again, and the same will be true for Lock Pros that stay with this sinking ship to the bitter end.

Eventually the US will get its act together and online poker will mature into the business it has always needed to become (it exploded way too fast before it was ready due to Moneymaker), and we are already seeing that in how Stars is so much more of the company now than it was pre-Black Friday.

There will be another poker boom, a more realistic one of proper natural growth and fewer TV shows of D-celebs playing bad poker, and the smart public pros of today should be thinking ahead of what they need to do to be ready for that environment as well. Staying with Lock Poker is not a good idea in that regard.

That's why I don't worry about calling people scum, because in the end the marketplace tends to work things out.

Full Tilt was a lot different than Lock, because it wasn't a sinking ship that could be seen from miles away. Everything has been laid out pretty easily for people to see, and most of these Lock pros simply don't give a ****, or at least not enough to personally inconvenience themselves.

Also, If a site has all player funds, it can make its payments to the network for player funds lost to other skins. It would also be able to pay its ROW players.

If the funds are kept properly, one also needs a healthy float to cover the day to day (or monthly reconciliation) costs; it is not a matter of having exactly how much the deposits are aside.

Full Tilt for months had people depositing without having money deducted from their accounts. Many of them chip dumped to ROW players who cashed out. That's more than a red flag, that's a dude holding a football size red flag filled with the pattern of thousands of other dudes waving more red flags (different shade so they can be seen...)

Full Tilt had a bloated pro roster that they paid a ton of money to, while I am not sure how much if anything these Lock guys make being a "pro" for Lock Poker.

I will not pretend that I knew all the details of Tilt ( I infact did not know about the "free" deposits" at the time), but I do know in the months leading to Black Friday we reduced the number of players backed there from dozens to literally a few (one who really wanted to get his Ironman bonus...) because something felt wrong with how they were running the business. It made "no sense" just as how Lock runs their business makes no sense.

The difference with Lock is that it is much smaller, and people have more of a history of this type of thing to relate in Full Tilt. I initially saw Lock as an arrogant version of the Cryptologic network at first (too many benefits and it eventually had to fail) - which did not make sense to me in terms of how they would survive long term, so I avoided them.

The pros have nothing to do with how Lock is run, but I agree they are accountable to being associated with them, especially moving forward, and I see there are threads that are about that as well. I assume the information is public anyway as to who are the pros, and people can judge them as they see fit.

Assuming that the rest of the world isn't lying, Lock is behind many many times more in payments to the network than whatever their day to day costs would be. That's been the case for months, so its clearly not just a matter of them having the money, but not having enough on hand.

You're right that there were a lot of bad signs with Full Tilt, but they were also a juggernaut for years and a very high traffic site. I think most of the pros were genuinely surprised to see them collapse. If that's not the case, then it just makes those Full Tilt pros scummier as opposed to making these Lock pros less scummy.

Players who are paid but have no power are in a position with both Lock now and Tilt then where they can close their eyes and get paid (though if they get paid in Lock funds...) and rationalize that they are not the ones calling the shots.

Personally, I am fairly indifferent to the pros as I do not see them as much of a problem. I highly doubt that thousands of new players are signing up because a pro spams twitter unless the power of spamming has changed over the years (in the good old days people would spam for signing up a new Party account on the rail at Party Poker - I never understood that).

If you do not like what the pros are doing then it is certainly your right to post about it and start threads about it (within the guidelines of the forums) using whatever public information exists, but not everyone will share in that cause.

In the end Lock Poker will die and the marketplace will adjust accordingly.

Whatever you say. I'm pretty sure that for the vast majority of society, knowingly attempting to deceive people into making terrible investments with their money doesn't fall into the category of moral gray area, regardless of how effective someone actually is at it.

If even a single pro signs up due to these pros tweeting advertisements, a terrible thing has happened.

These pros are knowingly leading innocent people into a scam, and somehow can still look at themselves in the mirror at night.

The worst ones are those that definitely realize it, such as Hubbard and Tiller. The ones who are still bamboozled by Jennifer are more stupid/gullible than shady.

F them.

Where have they complained this?

Adameve Poker(www.adamevepoker.com):

- "Due to many month settlements transfer delay from the network..."

Lock = network?

Come On Poker(www.comeon/poker):

- Not one word about Lock owe them money.

Zet Poker(www.zetpoker.com):

- Not one word about Lock owe them money.

Why they cannot touch those?

If a Lock player lose $1000 to a Intertops player they can touch very well $1000 of his "segregated" player funds balance and send it to Intertops because his balance is reduced for $1000 at this moment.

When I wrote "single pro" I meant "single player".

It was my impression that the same people who owned/operated lock also owned/operated the network. Is this incorrect?

Do you have as well a proof that Cake Poker = Cake Entertainment N.V. is the owner of the Revolution Gaming Network?

pokerscout.com says that Cipaco N.V. is the owner of the RGN and Cipaco N.V. is the company I sign a legally binding agreement when register at Lock.

I understand these opinions and I cannot say that I completely disagree, however not everyone will share the same passion of blaming or being angry at the pros, and frankly my perspective has always been a more general one with regard to Lock Poker existing in the marketplace. Lock Poker has always been a parasite and a badly run company and the effects of that are finally coming to fruition. The role of the pros (even if symbolic) is to me simply a byproduct of that.




Cake owes them and is not paying them, because Lock owes Cake and is not paying Cake. Adameve and zetpoker had threads about it

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...tions-1342588/

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...ouble-1309804/



That is incorrect. Shane even said in detail that Lock had no ownership of the network in one of the Q&A threads recently.


If some people want to believe in Lock or need to believe in them moving forward that is their right to do so, but the market is speaking, and the purest form of that speech (whether you believe what I am writing or not) is the value of Lock money which has been steadily dropping (despite many traders supporting it by buying large chunks to chip dump) and at the .25 to .3 level it is reaching the critical point of no return. As well, most of the Lock games are now quarantined/segregated.

Eventually the market will do what it always does in these situations, just as the human body handles waste products. That is pretty much a force that cannot be stopped forever, no matter what people want to believe is true.

maybe the should add warning to tweets that promote lock . it would not be that bad I mean people still smoke and they have warning labels.

For like the 1000th time, nobody is blaming the pros for anything other than their own behavior. They do not have a predetermined role that they have no ability to deviate from, and some of them actually have had enough decency to stop promoting this company. Its completely absurd to imply that these pros somehow aren't responsible for their own conduct simply because they didn't create the situation that they are in.

The pros are all completely accountable for how they choose to be associated with this company, and as I mentioned it will likely be remembered by the marketplace. I also believe the informed players who continue to support Lock are accountable as well, whether they promote it or not on Twitter, and their cost may not be in public scorn so much as lost resources.

However, I just place both of those as supporting issues to the overall topic.

https://www.comeon.com/terms/

You're right, technically the network owes them, but Lock used to own the network, at least temporarily.

Lock bragged about buying the network when it first happened -- they changed the name to Revolution, they set the promos and bonuses, rakeback, the tournament structures, etc. They were in control.

It's only recently come out that now they have now have 0% ownership of the network, and it probably happened because they are broke and it got repossessed by Cake. That's why I still conflate the two sometimes inadvertantly.

Here's a story about the initial acquisition:

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2012/0...oker-12601.htm

Here's a Lock Pro talking about the network takeover:

http://www.jaredhubbard.com/blog/loc...-cake-network/

You wrote:

AdameEve poker say that the network owes them money.

ZetPoker said that the network owes them money.

ComeOn Poker say that the Cake Poker Network owe them money.

You say that Lock owes AdamEve, ZetPoker and ComeOn Poker money.

Lock Poker say that they dont own the Revolution Gaming Network.

Lock Poker is a skin on the Revolution Gaming Network and ComeOn Poker is a skin on the Cake Poker Network. How can Lock Poker owe ComeOn Poker money while they are not on the Cake Poker Network?
I mean only skins on the Cake Poker Network can owe ComeOn Poker money, or not?

Revolution network = Cake Network.

Lock bought the Cake network last year and renamed it Revolution. (But maybe now that Lock lost the network, it's not called Revolution anymore?)

Read the pokernews link in my previous post.