Thanks for taking 2 minutes to do something constructive. Yes we are a well run company and yes player's funds are safe with us. Player security is very important to us. In fact Microgaming or any other external supplier do not even have our player's email addresses, let alone any other personal details..

Hi Harri,

I too know the founder. Great guy..!

Not entirely sure why you think I am being arrogant or hurting MG and Unibet?

I have not said anything to "slag" off either (one of the few who has not slagged off anyone). Have been pragmatic with my responses, simply pointing out some truths regarding what "fuelled" the TUSK downfall. What happened EXACTLY at TUSK with regards to their finances, you and I can spend hours guessing. BUT, the situation arose from what I have said before.
Nothing there to hurt Unibet or MG. (I have only said, from a legal perspective, MG is not responsible for TUSK's liabilities and debts)
I speak to the MG lot regularly but there is nothing we/Unibet can actually do to get this solved. It has nothing to do with us and thus, have no legal jurisdiction to get involved.

I sincerely hope, you and everyone else, gets what is owed to you.

PS: I have never blamed the players for this..! It was the situation (The fuel: rakeback undercutting etc) everyone, unfortunately, got themselves into..!

Doesn't loyalty go both ways?

I am at war with the almighty Unibet "customer service", so I don't think you can help me.
Today they decided they should insult me even more, so you will read all about it soon.
Let me tell you already no company pissed me of so much ever.

Well, you can do what is right and help the players to put some pressure on MG who setup this Tusk trap which was well concealed for the victims. Unibet is definitely affected by this fiasco and its brand is dragged in the dirt because of the association with the MG villains.

Hi Skier,

How MG have handled this is a totally different matter. Something I am not going to get involved in..!

I think its perfectly relevant... also please clarify your repeated comments about rakeback being responsible for the demise of tusk. This is a very serious accusation and would be very irresponsible to say without proof as it would imply that skin owners were responsible for tusks demise. If it is true it changes thigns on a large scale. But from the information I have been provided that does not seem so (read my previous posts).

What was your Unibet alias and i will see what I can do?

May as well try....!

I think it is painfully obvious that the only reason you have gotten involved in this thread is to try to deflect any anti-MGS sentiment away from Unibet by talking in every post about how great Unibet is and all that. Then you tell everyone how their loyalty to Unibet ensures that this can't happen to them if they play on Unibet.

You obviously have an agenda. If you want to really help yourself and Unibet, you would be taking this issue to your bosses and your MGS contacts to and leveraging Unibet's influence with MGS to help us get paid. I GUARANTEE you that if you did that in a transparent fashion and Unibets efforts were obvious to everyone, Unibet would pick up a lot of very high raking players who rake well over $10k/month.

Maybe someone can explain one or two things to me.

What financial difference does it make to MGS how much rakeback the skins give? (ignore the big skins throwing a wobbly and threatening to move away).

What financial difference did it make to Tusk how much rakeback the skins gave?

Isn't the reason MGS imposed the rakeback limits in the first place that the larger independent skins were bitching about how the little guys were taking their business and they weren't prepared to reduce profits to match?

Didn't this start in the first place with anti-competition rules that favour the big guns? Of course the big skins (I'm assuming that Unibet are one of those) are jumping with glee about this whole debacle - they couldn't give a rats behind about the players of other skins that lost their money, just that there's a chance that some of those players will come to them and new players have a lesser choice of skins to join and will naturally gravitate towards them as "names" now that the smaller skins cannot compete on the rakeback front.

It's just business, nothing personal of course.

I'm getting more and more irritated by the focus on Tusk by the MGS shills. MSG forced Tusk out of business and no-one seems to actually care apart from those who lost money. All this piss and wind about investigating the workings of Tusk and where the money went is just that - piss and wind to take focus away from the crooks at MGS. Mind you, it does seem to be working and the few of us left that wouldn't touch any MGS skin with a 200 foot barge pole (even if that skin has a nuclear missile protecting the players bankrolls) aren't making a significant dent in the MGS profits.

Life goes on. We won't get our money back. It's probably time I stopped caring as I was lucky enough to have very little in RCC at the time.

Could someone please post an updated CliffsNotes of the situation?

I'm pretty sure more than one poster in this thread alone could do this. How about if microgaming is ultimately held responsible, Unibet pays 500k to the player purse, issues a strong public condemnation of microgaming, discontinues use of the software and leaves the network.

100 euros is laughable for this challenge. Put up something real to demonstrate your confidence.

Hi Soul,

"I think it is painfully obvious that the only reason you have gotten involved in this thread is to try to deflect any anti-MGS sentiment away from Unibet by talking in every post about how great Unibet is and all that."

????

"Then you tell everyone how their loyalty to Unibet ensures that this can't happen to them if they play on Unibet."

????

I see you read what I wrote.. obviously..

$100 or 100,000,000. It was symbolic.. Let's discuss this again when MG are proved liable..

Besides, even if they were proved liable, knowing the legal system, we are all likely to be over 200 years old before they are.. the lawyers will drag this out for as long as possible so they can milk every penny from it..

Flop,

Could you please address my earlier post. You have claimed that the owners of rednines and battlefield are responsible for the demise of tusk because of their high rakeback. If this is true that would make them responsible for player funds.

I have posted information to suggest this is not the case. Please refute my information or provide some of your own.

If what you say is true it needs to be investigated, if its not true you need to retract your statements.

Sorry - are they held legally in trust for the players in a segregated account or not?

Simple 'yes' or 'no'will do thanx.

"You have claimed that the owners of rednines and battlefield are responsible for the demise of tusk because of their high rakeback."

Where did I write that?

+1.

This is a very telling post on your part.

Considering that discussing MGS's handling of this situation is pretty much the sole purpose of this thread, why exactly are you here then if your goal is not to try to save face with Unibet players and try to protect Unibet's image?

From post #105:

From post #199:


Side note:
Flop, to answer your earlier question to me, I've read every word you've posted here and just re-read most of them. I stand by everything I've said.

This fiasco means that the Risk of Ruin Formula for online poker players has to be rewritten. The "MG factor" must be included.

Todays formula:
Risk of Ruin = e ^ (-2WB / (S ^ 2))

e = Constant (2.718281828)
W = Win Rate, measured in $ pr. hour
S = Variance (has a unit that doesn’t really make any logical sense)
B = Bankroll, measured in $
^ = Power symbol (e.g. 3^2 = 9; 3^4 = 81)
/ = Division Symbol (e.g. 24/6 = 4; 56/7 = 8 )

I'm not much of a math geek so maybe you guys can help me with this. Where in this formula can the new factor M fit? Can the formula below be correct?

Risk of Ruin = e ^ (-2WBM / (S ^ 2))

e = Constant (2.718281828)
W = Win Rate, measured in $ pr. hour
S = Variance (has a unit that doesn’t really make any logical sense)
B = Bankroll, measured in $
^ = Power symbol (e.g. 3^2 = 9; 3^4 = 81)
/ = Division Symbol (e.g. 24/6 = 4; 56/7 = 8 )
M = Probability of Poker company/Microgaming steals the money

???

I dont think your helping Unibet's/microgaming image at all here infact your ignorant i dont care attituide is why the more you say the worse you look. I bet if your boss or bosses knew you were at this they wouldnt be to happy. And the is actual real money involved in this so all you are takin real good by the lot of us.

Hi Soul,

Then you would understand that I have not once said the "owners of...." were responsible... It was the collective activities of all those involved in the whole TUSK etc rakeback mess.. Who you want EXACTLY to hold responsible, I don't know. (Except MG of course)

Make no difference what I say. You will still add 2+2 together and come up with 3.

I understand you have an axe to grind over all this (probably lost a lot of money and yes everyone is sympathetic) but I am not going to waste time coming up with "proof". I and many other operators I know (and NO they are not all on the MG network) believe this to be the catalyst (amazingly we have an insight to this industry) for the demise of TUSK/Skins but it is not up to us to prove it..

That's for the lawyers.. and knowing them we will all be 3,000 years old before they have milked this one for all its worth..

Add to that actively promoting his employer, which is what he's not too subtley doing: "we have a loyal player base at Unibet...bla bla". Not a very edifying attitude, but to be expected from a Microgaming licensee.

I hope a least a portion of players are taking all this on board and relocating their loyalty away from these Microgaming skins. It'll have the double effect of supporting the players and protecting their own funds when the skins start going the way of Tusk.

Hi Pkr_brat,

I have learned my lesson.

Start off by pragmatically trying to explain that MG are not responsible for TUSK actions etc and suggest why TUSK failed (whether you like it or not).. ends up, as usual, in a massive bun fight..! Accusations of this and that etc etc..

I totally sympathise with you all which is why i simply wanted to say that blaming MG is going to be a waste of time.

I guess the answer is to never get involved in these threads again..

I leave this discussion now and promise never to be involved in one again.

Dead-end with no reverse mate.. Going no where.

Good luck to you all and I sincerely hope you all get what you lost..