http://business.financialpost.com/in...r-shareholders

I think the "distraction of being public argument" doesn't make sense. If anything being private is even more distracting for entities that have to deal with you since there's a lot less transparency.

He probably plans on drastically restructuring the company once he takes it private, and that's probably the only valid selling point to prospective buyers. After all, he's never hidden the fact that he thought the most valuable thing about PS was its registered customer list.

Speaking of which, I really wonder how many of these registered customers are active and whether that number is going up or down...

you might be looking at this the wrong way.

the word "distraction" is putting it mildly and makes perfect sense.

Being public is a massive pain and resource suck for Execs and other parts of company. Also very costly. Lots of ongoing extra attorney and accounting fees. Plus double trouble for AYA as they are listed on NASDAQ in US and TSE in Canada.

Can't be bothered to be honest, but on here 2+2 there are plenty of threads of xyz company seizing players funds, granted some are justified, but it seems there are more instances of it lately.
Without the worry of being hacked also, I only keep $500 - $600 on Stars at the most.
I have had an enhanced security check and passed at Stars but still dubious.

BRM at its best

Sorry if I have missed something or if these are stupid questions but have only roughly been following this thread of late and am definitely not up on the stockmarket.

a) is it confirmed this is happening or is there still a chance that it was nonsense that Baazov has somehow pulled as a strategic move?
b) if unknown how long typically would it take to know? Is there a timeline or window in which one must act after making this statement?
c) If there is said window/timeline and this doesn't happen are there likely ramifications or investigations to check on the actual basis of the original statement or is it just considered oh well it didn't work out?

Again these might be beyond ******ed questions. Just curious

Read the link a few posts up.
Confirmation of a serious plan should come before the end of the month, but it's possible that a higher offer (William Hill is suggested as an interested party) will come in. Or the whole idea is forgotten.

Some updates on the topic

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle29002373/

http://www.gamingintelligence.com/bu...possible-offer

The headline basically tells the whole story: Amaya withholds 2016 financial outlook ahead of potential takeover [by Baazov and management staff].

The financial report for the (disastrous?) final quarter is to be released on March 14th, but there will be no new projections available to the public.

how could the final quarter of 2015 been disastrous?

Interesting. It appears that Baazov, forever the eternal optimist, would rather get creative and buy some time than potentially open himself up to future shareholder lawsuits.

I hope the reports are very disastrous

It's never straightforward and boring with Amaya, lol. Kind of fascinated how this is all gonna play out.

If they were truly mulling this offer, and there were other suitors who might put in competing bids, wouldn't those other suitors be disadvantaged by the withholding of this information? Seems like a tricky spot for the CEO pursuing his own private offer for the company, while restricting information (info he has himself) that would help guide any competing bids from the outside (even from existing shareholders).

I hope the opposite because otherwise Baazov will be able to scoop the company up for cheap. Many CEOs looking to take their companies private have a tendency to produce a "kitchen sink" quarter just before the proxy vote of their tender offer, where they make the company look horrible in order to cajole shareholders into accepting less than the company is worth. But of course it begs the obvious question why the CEO wants to own the company if it's doing so bad.

It's not a tricky spot for him as CEO, but it's a tricky spot for him in his board role though. I'm not sure what exactly is going on with this supposed bid, but it seems pretty clear that there is more here than meets the eye.

I think a more pressing question is where he could get the $ to stage a bid considering the vast majority of his own wealth appears to come from shares received in the original acquisition, and we are talking about a failing, debt-ridden company which is situated in a very difficult market.

That's not a very pressing question.. it's pretty obvious the money is from not having to give the SNE's Lamborghini's anymore.

Am expecting to see a downtrend in revenues in the March 14 report. That could be enough to destroy the share price. All these murky machinations about the management of the company wanting to buy out the company. They can surely only afford it if the share price tanks, which is going to p off the people that bought shares to finance the original Stars purchase. Not going to give guidance? Well we know the guidance is hot air and always strikes an upbeat tone no matter the performance. Seems like a time bomb to me. The numbers don't add up. Time will reveal.

Since they're trying to show the door to SNEs and sharks in general, I'm going to guess they're banking on hockey-stick shaped revenues--down initially and then picking up dramatically when the fishies like me pick up the slack. Except I'm not picking up anything until they serve alcohol and conversation while I play :-)

Sorry to disappoint you, but they already mentioned that their earnings will be at the high end of the lowered guidance. The March 14 report will be pretty boring, everything is already known.

Also, since when is guidance hot air and always strike an upbeat tone? Did you see the Restoration Hardware guidance last week during the call? You should educate yourself before making blanket statements.

I do hope you are short the stock and are losing a lot of money these days

Apols, I meant 'financial outlook' and not guidance, I mean the management interpretation of the future of the business and this is always upbeat.

I neither own nor short stock in this company. If I'm a bit negative it's cos I have yet to see Mr Baazov add value to anything Amaya have bought. With all the Ponzi schemes, sub-prime mortgage implosion, online poker sites failing players, and general hoodwinking and dodginess of these business people', I am eating pop-corn watching this soap opera. I have total respect for what the Scheinbergs achieved, but am not sure the deal they did to get out was any good for the brand or players.

of course not they did what they felt was in their own best interests. can you really blame them?

It wasn't just that, they knew the score. Can you blame them? F*** they would have to be on the downslope of a five day crack binge not to have taken it.


Lets not forget, they probably had a kingly FU fund already stashed in a tropical laundromat for all life's last minute one way gulfstream trips to the happily-ever-after. That's before, independent of and excluding any 2014 valuation. They were jet-set for life if the lights went out any day after probably Jan 1 2006. They got 100 bucks it was pure gravy. Five bills cash? Heh.

Then greed walked in.