This really isn't a complicated issue and I can't believe how absurd some of these posts are, like the one two above me by john voight.
Separating the individuals from the "brand" is kind of ridiculous. Did Enron cheat, or was it only the individuals associated with Enron? Can anyone really provide any kind of evidence to support an argument that the current "management" and "ownership" has come completely clean on this? Of course not. In fact, we can't even verify their statements that it's new "ownership" in the sense that the money is now going to a completely different set of people then were in control during the years of cheating that took place.
UB and it's current/former or whatever ownership has done nothing more then is absolutely the bare essential necessary to maintain the valuable brand that they developed. At the very least, they have covered up the full extent of the cheating in order to maintain the UB brand. And, because they have done that, there's really NOTHING that can be done to change that at this point. Anyone who tells you differently, including my friend Joe, has either been duped by the UB hard sell or is being disingenuous (at best).
What they did was allow an investigation by a gaming commision with strong financial ties to the past and future success of UB, and have claimed that they turned over the info to the proper "authorities," which I'm guessing is something along the lines of:
This doesn't even begin to address the Ante up for Africa shadiness exposed by Admo. Why anyone would want to be associated with Annie Duke, Phil Hellmuth, etc. is beyond my comprehension.