added to ignore list...

LS, I have watched streams from Stones that did not have Mike on them that got cards wrong. I mean, I'm sure he cheated, but the fact that the graphics screwed up is not a slam dunk evidence of co-conspirators. I know people made the arguments you're making in the NVG thread, but they are wrong. It is both easy and common for the graphics to be wrong. One of the old regs ITT played on that stream (without Mike) and I noticed several instances where not only were the graphics wrong, but the announcers didn't notice that the shown-down cards were not the ones the graphics put up and kept talking about the hand as though the graphics had been correct. It was truly amateur hour in terms of production.

My guess (and it is just that) is that the fact that this error could happen was used by Mike and or a co-conspirator or two to deflect suspicion in times when it hadn't really happened, but the errors themselves were def real.

LS is Richard Parker??

Or maybe Asian Nit

Amateur like a fox maybe

I don't think that game moved enough money to be worth getting everyone in on a scam, and i don't think they're dedicated enough to **** up consistently, even when MP's not at the table, just to make their actions when he was seem normal.

Never attribute to conspiracy what can be adequately explained by simple incompetence.

I do think that incompetence made things easy for the (much smaller) cheating ring, though.

As for the "thorough investigation," I think that was just Justin lying to his bosses and everyone else that an investigation occurred. That strikes me as less likely to just be staggering incompetence, though it's possible. I think it's more likely that he was in on it.

MP had some kind of legit business partnership with the casino (dream seat). Not sure exactly what that was, but I'm sure it takes more than just Justin to make a deal like that.

Does it make sense that MP had two separate deals going with completely separate members of casino management? One legit, one not. That's really hard for me to believe.

But even if it were true, it's even harder for me to believe that when the cheating allegations surfaced no one except Justin looked into it. There had to be more than a few people with a vested interest in Mike's reputation, and if they had any sense whatsoever they would have done more than let Justin handle it.

And I still say their statement that the "allegations are fabricated" is a humongous red flag.

LMAO "profit taking" shouldn't be a thing at all

This guy manages multiple billions and spews idiotic statements like this on the regular. Hard to believe

Yup there was a hand where it showed a guy Jim fold the nuts to a river bet and everyone was bugging out. Later when they talked to Jim he said, that's not what his cards were. So yeah they did mess up the graphics on more than one occasion.

Even dumber, there was one hand where somebody called OTR with what the graphics said was a crap hand, and everyone was bugging out that he called and started speculating that maybe it was just a call for information or something. They didn't even notice that the hand he showed down was not only different than the graphics, but that he actually won and got pushed the pot. They were still talking about the hand as though the graphics had been accurate.

Maybe it's a nice way to describe portfolio reallocation to the fish.

we've been over this a bajillion times in the postle thread

rfid cards can't screw up arbitrarily

what can happen is a) a card fails to scan and so it displays one of the last cards scanned instead, or b) another card is accidentally scanned

Not enough break-a-quote-into-eleventeen-parts-and-answer-each-with-a-short-question, imo.

But I also have the olds and can't keep track of alts. I assume everyone I don't recognize on here is an alt of someone previous than I'm just not clueing in to.

GcluelessingeneralnoobG

Slim also doesn't believe in pot control.

Congrats, this thread has officially earned its name as the last 100 post as more or less a tardnado

nope....but you can keep guessing...

Probably so. But if that is the case why not say something like..."Here is a way to take some risk off of your portfolio..." Or we don't want to have concentration in one stock so..."

Profit taking is such a dumb phrase and really makes no sense why some would take profits just to take profits.

This is true

hmmm so you are confirming it's an alt?

Aren't we all? I mean cmon, am I really a King?

No but most likely a Spew??

I was lol'ing but sympathetic until this
and now I'm basically this
...but also still lol'ing

So I just think there is a **** ton of value in the space. Let's say small businesses with $1M-20M in top line revenue. It's far too small for a VC to get involved (unless there is some huge growth story) but it's big enough that it could provide good free cash flow. It can really be in any industry..at some size the industry doesn't really matter. You're just running a business (not exactly but for our purposes let's just say that).

So how to find...that's hard. The obvious answer is to develop a network of accountants, lawyers and financial advisers that could potentially refer you leads. Problem: most accountants, lawyers and advisers are for **** and are as unlikely to bring this up with the clients as the clients are to think about it on their own. The quality ones are a value add that look at it as part of their service delivery.

Ex. I have a client that is in the auto repair industry. They have been in business for ~2 years. Have 4 locations and are trying to do a rollup when they get to 12-15 locations. They will sell at a far bigger multiple as a rollup than they do now with 4 shops. Helping them address the issues both operationally and financially that come with scaling the business is part of my job. Simple example but we are going to transition them to a more robust accounting system within the next year that can enable them to scale. Everything that is done is done with an eye to the exit strategy in essence.

Business broker are almost always garbage. There is generally a reason they have gone that route. It means they don't have the internal succession options and their advisers have not introduced them to the right people. I suppose in certain industries a business broker might make sense but generally not.

So what would I look for when considering helping a client find a buyer. Nothing special

General Business acumen
Responsiveness
Honesty
Integrity
Trustworthiness
Sufficient Capital (maybe)

If I refer a potential deal to someone I expect 2 things to happen:

They call me or the seller quickly (they do what they say they are going to do)
If they aren't interested for whatever reason, they tell me or the seller ASAP.

People that string things along are the WOAT and probably the biggest no-no if/when you are negotiating a deal.

That's enough for now. BTW I probably refer a business owner to a friend, colleague or another client 1x per month to look at something. MAYBE 1 of those relationships works out a year...Maybe. So patience is important too.

I mean he talks funny and can't download an app but pretty much all of this is true. My client was convinced this buyer was a lock in spite of my misgivings and now we are dealing with it. This type of **** happens on the regular.

Not as much as I am.

Aren't you Korean tho?

There is a reason Asian Big Slick is a thing

You mean Vietnamese Aces?

I thought Asian Big Slick was 23s.

Vietnamese Aces...guessing JTs??