Its all connected just the same. It shows what kind of a regulator Alderney was and what we could/should expect from them. If a regulator doesn't respect the law and allowed sites to operate in places where its illegal or could be illegal then why should we expect them to do proper diligence in any other area as a regulator.

Sure someone was going to license sites that served the US but we shouldn't have expected any regulatory body that did to be nothing more then a rubber stamp for sites to operate.

I agree with your first sentence but in the second paragraph have to agree with Skallagrim re: PS.

The IoM regulation is the best yet, sure it can be improved but I don't think for one minute they put player money at risk more than was possible especially ROW money.

segregated trust funds where the beneficiaries are named members is the best way to protect player money, if all the regulatory environments used this method we'd have a far simpler problem to resolve ATM.

As Skallagrim comments in practice both PS and Neteller members were repaid full amount of their funds as they were both held this way and in case of PS rather quickly imho.

This method is used in far stricter FSA regulations to protect client monies and has a long legally established basis both when a company is facing litigation to be exempt from forfeiture (although not restraint/freezing orders for obvious reasons) and also in bankruptcy are never considered as assets of the trustees.

By the very nature of the activity a trust must exist as the trustee requires access to client money to facilitate play/investement. Regulatory and internal controls can only prevent and catch rogue trustees before they gain position of trust or much damage is done. Once damage is done then it's a matter for the police and likely criminal and civil charges.

I had no problems cashing out on VISA. Moneybookers didn't work thought.

If someone tells Noah something "on the record", he can't tell us.

This is Journalism 101.

I think he's been pretty generous telling us conclusions based on info he has even though he can't reveal the specific information or source.

I was happy that fulltilt was running after BF, becaue I thought if nothing else, they would be able to generate enough revenue to pay us back shortly. As it happened, if they are going bankrupt, it's REALLY ****ty that ROW was able to withdraw from player funds that were legally partly ours.

I think you should take Journalism 101 again.

To be honest if he is told something on the record he can tell anyone. But whatever, loving the moderation.

off*

FYP.

We know what you mean tho, and yes, if he wasnt conducting himself by journalistic code of ethics, he wouldn't be getting any info at all.

Yes, but they need the cash and it would never make sense to give out shares for players balances.

So when does FTP end this charade and officially give up? I don't think it will be too much longer.

illogical is " on the record", he can't tell us

Just j/king - as we need some cheer in here

I could ninja edit but I won't. It wouldn't be nice to deprive everyone of some humor in this situation.

Hey guyz she said on the record instead of off!!!

Anyway, reacting to this

I agree Noah has been very good through this whole FTP mess, but the latest article from S:P (it's not even posted by Noah i think) imo is pretty useless for the readers without more info or interpretation. It's logical that people are seeking for answers about what it means, since we don't know what it means/how it impacts things. I do not imply by that that it shouldn't have been posted, information should flow as freely as it can, just that it's kind of frustrating to read it without having any more info.

Our debat is not about FTP, its about IOM allowing Pokerstars to operate while they were almost surely committing Bank Fraud in the US. We didn't say it, but it goes for AGCC as well.

There are no regulators here who are acting in the best interets of players, they are only first acting in their interests or the interests of their populous. Its a strong statement, but one we believe based on the facts.

Debt for equity if the situation is really bad isn't that uncommon, and because player funds are not segregated player balances is pretty much debt without any priority.

Not that I believe in the solution or anything but if its the only way I rather take the FT shares.

Also ask yourself what you rahter want if FT goes belly up 0.05 on the dollar or shares? provided new managment and plausible business plan with necessary cash injections.

IOM, as I have said before, if the best of the worst.....

Just because PS was able to repay anyone does not mean that that the IOM system protected them - it may just means that PS had that cash reserves to pay. Clearly segregation is better then not segregating. But by allowing PS to operate in fashions inconsistant with the law of the US, they potentially put all player money at risk. We do not know how much money is or was in transit on a daily basis. Nor do we know what the ultimate fall out will be from the current postion that PS has found itself. This is not high integrity regulation and it suggests that IOM is not watching the ship in other ways, but that is just speculation, but seems likely.

PS and IOM would not have faced these issues if as a regulator IOM had said...'hey should you be doing this? It could result in fines, jail, trouble with the US DOJ, etc..' This is not high integrity regulation. We are not taking a stand here on if Poker should be legal - this is for citizens to decide and their law makers to enact law for or against.

Lets not forget that PS is also under a rem action and its owners are under federal indictment and the jury remains out how this is going to play out. We are sorry if people think that because PS was able to pay that this implies that IOM was a good regulator....We just dont agree...its great that because they took this stance players got to play and PS make lots of money, but that doesn't make it right. This is not high integrity - this is a regulator allowing and supporting lawlessness in order to create jobs in its juridiction.

That is just my view here. Offshore regulation is bad, corrupt and in almost all cases is not protecting player interests and allowing operators to operate that are potentially doing things not in the best interests of players.

$0.05 on the $ pls.....the shares are an unknown liability, worth less than $0 each, hence the reason FTP are trying to give away the company and still don't have any takers

sigh, who is the best? Which regulator follows their licencees on business meetings to buy banks?

I have never given anything away for a price before..have you? Isn't that selling?

The news doesn't need analysis with it to be posted. Also a new article seems to be coming soon.

I'd rather Noah not sit on stuff that can be released like this, otherwise some of the uhhh more influenced poker news sites will pick it up and spin it their own way. It's been long enough to where you can look back at some of the more commonly linked news sites here and see some unusual conclusions drawn that benefit one party in the news.

I would take 0.05 in a second because I doubt we'll even get that once this is all over. 25k for 2k anyone?

Well stock exchanges are also regulators but they have a rather small scope that they regulate, beyond that companies can missbehave with the risk of blowing the company up.

In that sense I think IoM might be doing enough as a regulator protecting player funds, upholding game integrity and you can sue PS in court at IoM. As for legality world wide let the company laywers deal with it because no regulator could sort that mess out.

Marketplace had buyers at 0.1 a few hours ago, so might very well get rid of it.

Actually my guess, and it is purely my guess and has nothing to do with anything other than the public information I have read along with all the rest of you, is that FTP was not "illiquid" prior to BF, or at least not illiquid to a significant degree.

But obviously they were at the very least awful close to the line. And so once the DOJ hit them on BF they had no ability to recover, especially since BF also caused them to lose roughly half their income stream (no US rake).

Someday we will all have the actual numbers and will have a real answer.

But the main reason I responded to ledason was not to speculate as to how FTP got itself (and, more importantly, us players) into this royal mess, nor to defend the Alderney gaming commission. It was to defend the Isle of Man gaming commission.

Requiring its licensees to keep segregated accounts in trust for player funds, and monitoring those accounts to make sure all was kept as promised, not only protected players, but also PokerStars and even the IOM authorities. At least that is my opinion on all of this.

Whatever led to Alderney not requiring segregated trust accounts, and FTP not having them, I suspect they both sincerely regret that now. And so do the rest of us, except even more so.

Skallagrim

Just read this article and was wondering what is everyone take on this...

http://www.subjectpoker.com/2011/09/ftp-pro-se/

Tnx!