I have been inundated with calls from all the poker media sites regarding this, so it's easier for me to respond in one place. Obviously, 2+2 has become the main place where people discuss online poker so I'm posting here. It would be nice if everyone who owes money discusses it openly so there is a better chance that they will make good on their debts and the money will end up in the pockets of players with balances on FTP.

My statement to the press and the poker community:

I borrowed $400,000 to play on Full Tilt a few years ago, before PokerStars had high stakes games. I didn’t pay it back, hoping that some people who owed me and had money on Full Tilt would pay me there so I could use that against the debt. (I'm only owed about $150,000 now). I have assumed when this case is resolved, the DOJ will allow methods for dealing with debt to FTP.

Tapie Group contacted me last week and asked if I would pay them directly. Their attorney offered me the opportunity to pay in installments so I could have a chance to use money owed to me. He even offered me the opportunity to discount my debt if the US players don’t get paid in full. I told him that I have never paid less than I owe on any debt and I would rather wait until the DOJ establishes a fund for the US players. I don't believe my debt has any impact on the sale to the Tapie group as they have alleged. I was concerned about taking money due to US players and giving it to the Tapie Group because it is understood that the Tapie Group won't be the one paying the US players. On the other hand, I realize that the total debt counting other players is substantial, especially because I would include in that tally any money taken from FTP once it had become insolvent.

Here is an excerpt from the letter I sent to their attorney:

“The consensus in the poker community is that all money owed to Full Tilt or taken by investors after the company became insolvent should be used to pay back player’s funds. If I were to make a deal with you it would look like I had turned my back on the best interests of the American players.

Even though the terms are easier for me if I deal with you and it will fulfill my legal obligation, I have to see how things work out with the DOJ and try to make good on my moral obligation to the US players. I assume at some time in the future the DOJ will establish a pool of funds from Full Tilt’s assets that will be used to pay off some percentage of the player balances that are owed.”

If the FT GBT deal goes through and you still have not paid the debt the debt will move to FT2 controlled by GBT. This would still be who you owe the money to. Even if you then pay the DOJ it would not settle this debt.
You do not as a creditor have discretion over who you pay, so just pay the debt.

Andy, well said.

I would think that depends on what assets GBT gets, and what obligations of the former FT they are responsible for. They may only get non-US assets and non-US obligations. If I was in Barry's shoes I would prefer the money be added to a pool of money used to pay US players. I certainly wouldn't pay GBT a dime before a deal was made and knew the details, and certainly wouldn't pay current FT.

GBT offered to discount the debt. This is a possibility where Barry could pay GBT a reduced amount if the US players aren't paid in full (assuming GBT was entitled to anything), and pay the remainder to a pool of funds set up by the DOJ. That way he could feel he paid his full obligation as well as make GBT happy. So waiting to see what develops is probably the best option. Paying now will not get US players paid any sooner and may reduce the amount of funds available to them.

Acording to every report on the deal I've seen, the DOJ would be responible for paying U.S player, then all FT1 assets would got to GBT. This would include the debt. And GBT would not be making a fuss about it if the debt was not part of the deal.

Barryg1 is correct in stating that he owes the debt to FTP, not GBT. He's absolutely right in not paying GBT and in fact, is too kind to them in his response. GBT does not own FTP at the moment. Any payment to GBT doesn't relieve the debt owed to FTP. He'd have every right to tell them to go **** themselves for now.

Given how loosely FTP run everything else, it is unlikely there is any type of formal agreement between barryg1 and FTP. It is likely a, "here's the money, you owe us, but there's no interest or principal payment due on a schedule." As such, he doesn't have to do anything in the short term. That said, he doesn't have the right to determine where his money goes. He owes the full $400k (minus any balance in his account). While he may be owed money by others on FTP, that is a loan that is his business to collect.

If he wants to negotiate a plan where he pays money off more immediately in return for certain guarantees of how it would be used, that's fine but actually futile. Money is fungible. Whatever money he pays simply reduces the amount of money FTP has to spend in one area. If they negotiate with the DOJ that they have to ship $80MM to the US, then their shipment drops to $79.6MM with his payment. They'll use the extra $400k somewhere else, just as if he just gave them the money without restriction.

THX - that's the point!

The whole thing is embarrassing and shows that GBT is such a joke. But it's no wonder, if you know the 'tapie clan'.


@ MadeInPolanD:

you don't get it, ey?

FTP lend Mr. Greenstein money, which is a pretty standard deal between a 'casino' and a 'vip guest'. That's all. You don't know the details of the arrangement, so your post is just hilarious.


edit: i'm really looking forward, what the DoJ/GBT will do with all the players who abused the problem, that FTP couldn't charge their bank accounts for a while. A lot of them own FTP also money, since they "deposited", played but never paid!

Barry, the loan didn't just come from US player funds, it came from ROW player funds as well.

You have an obligation to all those who have money tied up on the site not just US players

I don't understand why some people think that CustomerA owes an obligation to CustomerB to pay their debts to CompanyC.

Are there any other businesses/situations where this sort of expectation exists?

Josem,
I don't really like the idea of generalizations like that. I think it's pretty clear why some people think that Barry owes it to the players to repay this loan. It's because he has a moral obligation to repay loans in general; he was loaned this money from a company that robbed us; and if the people in Barry's position choose not to fulfill their obligation, it might prevent us from being compensated in an even remotely reasonable way.

There are of course tons of comparable situations where such an obligation exists.

This news is actually pretty tilting.

Did you not make arrangements for how and when to pay full tilt poker back? It's ok to pay debt back through friends who owe you money if agreed, then you go on to use the 'I must oblige the us players' card. So caniving, first you want other people to pay your debt to the company and then obviously that isn't working so you come out with something as absurd as obliging the us players. Don't you realise that tapie would hold the debt and being in control of ftp would have an easier time paying back than you? DO you realise that Tapie has agreed with the doj to buy full tilt? Of course you do, but you are just trying to be conniving, stalling and avoiding your debt and slowing down the players getting paid back and the site being up and running again. At least that is how you are making it to appear.

Ofcourse you may wish to hinder the success of ftp coming back being a stars employee aswell? DOn't come out with more moral bull$****. You owe money, pay it, that is moral.

I dunno. If I owed money to my cell phone company, then one day, service on my phone stopped, but then later I got a letter saying, "Hey, um, sorry about your phone, we're not the company who sold you your phone, but we're thinking about buying the company, and we heard you still owe $100 on that phone. Can you send us $100?"

Ummmm.... no?

IMO Barry is right not to send money until GBT has legally acquired the rights to his debt. What is he supposed to do if he sends the money, then the deal falls through?

this is pretty maddening:

Everyone: GBT doesn't need Barry to send the money right away, they want him to sign a contract saying that he'll pay once the deal goes through.

Andrew

If he legitimately owes the money why would they need such a contract, unless to supersede another deal (such as with the DOJ) ?

And does the deal to buy FT really hinge on this $400K (or $250K)?

Since he's indicated that he's willing to pay what he owes, and even turned down an opportunity to pay less, his decision to essentially "wait and see" what develops is reasonable, imo.

Perhaps it is because you have information that wasn't shared with the general public.

Note that in Barry's comment there is no mention that GBT put in a clause that this would only take place if GBT acquired FTP and in fact implies that immediate payment isn't even necessary. We can only go on what Barry told us. If you have inside sources that are telling you differently, perhaps you could enlighten the proletariat as to who else received these letters and what the offers were?

This should give further insight:
http://www.igamingfrance.com/full-ti...e-scenes/26186

found another article on that matter on pocketfives.
http://www.pocketfives.com/articles/...ipated-587150/

One key piece of information that no one has presented is actually how these loans are structured, especially for the FTP owners. Suppose that the loans were secured by the ownership position in the company. Then Mike Matusow and Dayanim could both be telling the truth from their perspective. From Matusow's point of view, he's paid off the claim by surrendering his ownership since that is what secured the loan. GBT argues that the DOJ now "owns" FTP and Matusow has to put up something else (cold hard cash) to secure or pay off the loan.

I'm pretty sure that Matusow had no ownership in FTP. I'm also pretty sure that these loans didn't have any terms besides "Hey.. loan me $x million" "Ok, cool."

If you think FTP loaned money to people with no terms or written agreement you are crazy. Mike can claim he owes nothing because likely FTP breached their deal with him for failure to give him sponsorship money.

I believe Matusow stated in his book that he passed up an opportunity to be part of the group that owned FTP.

Yes, to preserve 500K for sports betting while he was in the hoosegow so he wouldn't go out of his mind from boredom. That's what I recall from CRing the Devil, anyway.

Almost as crazy as to full tilt crediting players accounts with deposits but never withdrawaling the money from their bank right....

Barry,

I tried the same reasoning with Citibank. Here's my letter to them.

"Hi Citibank... I borrowed $400,000 from you...and I'm gonna pay you back... but ONLY if I like how you will disperse the money to other customers.

Yeah that's right. I wanna dictate the terms of the repayment plan.

I KNOW I should mentioned this to you when I "borrowed" the $400,000 in the first place, but then you probably wouldnt have given it to me.. right?"

See how rediculous it sounds when you take yourself out of the equation?

you also took full tilt out of the equation. everyone who has money in citibank can walk into the bank and get it.