there should be mediation, amount of mu to be pay % decided, then he transfers the balance

you should be paying something to buy out of the mu (less than 100% of the mu), or let him sell the mu

My name is David. I know this is a brand new account. I play as "jyg4me" on stars, and have been around the husng game for years. I dont grind much these days but I felt it was important to make an account and give my two cents....

This conflict boils down to RISK vs. REWARD

A staker can not take all the reward when his horse wins, and take zero of the risk when his horse loses.

If Moca were to give pay up when he wins, AND pay his makeup when he loses, Campbell-Gee would basically be free rolling.

Moca made a mistake by sending the $7k makeup to Campbell without thinking this through, and Campbell made a bigger mistake by not refunding this money.

well he wanted out of the staking deal and he said, as evident to the email log, '- If at any time I leave the stake voluntarily then the makeup is forgiven'

It was Alan who wrote that and it was good he did because it clears everything up, I think even he can see that. But this is as clear as it gets in my opinion. He wanted out and make up is forgiven. My good will money should be sent back to me unless he is robbing me.

might be true, why didn't you reply that to my first post ha. but yeah if he wrote that term and it's him and only him who wants to quit without your fault guess no MU should be paid although then it's very dumb to let go of 7k~ when a horse is winning and in cartels..
however he should still be able to sell MU imo if he new backer has same terms

The problem with selling me on was political, I had a term put in for political reasons that we both agreed was best for my name in the hu world which was 'no one to find out I was staked.' It also potentially could have got me in a bit of trouble with my cartel allowing a lower cartel member control over me and allowing him to profit from our stakes, we didn't allow cartel members to stake players into 500s so this one was reason I didn't want them to know a lower member was staking me into 500s, it also could have publically been viewed as weak from some people and we both agreed on that on entering the deal, for example being, if he become public to jackstack and jackstack didn't want to stake me it would now be public knowledge that I was a bit under rolled and people could put more pressure on me knowing my roll was lower than people in the 300s. So it was agreed not let anyone know that he staked me.

Yes I read that part, if you guys both specifically agreed about not being able to sell MU for that reason then it's fine (as is basically anything both of you agree to) but otherwise the reason isn't great cause it's essentially saying you are breaking other rules (which now you 'have to admit', since being staked by C-G is also breaking these rules if I understand them correctly). Might be overruled by fact he said make up is forgiven if he leaves, but I think as a 'reasonable' business partner/friend, renegotiating to allow the MU to be sold or bought at a (significant) discount is pretty fair here, especially as you formerly being staked by lower members is already public now

****ty situation because you guys are/were friends.

But after reading the logs it is clear that everything Moca has said is truth and the 7k is his.

There were 2 terms specifically agreed upon:

Makeup could not be sold on to another staker.

If at any time CG leaves the stake voluntarily then the makeup is forgiven.

CG attempted to violate both of these terms.

This is a clear mistake of a backer getting into a staking arrangement he was totally unprepared for.

At the very least mediation needs to happen, otherwise what CG has done should be considered pretty scummy. In my opinion, the entire figure should be returned to Moca. There is a grey area as to what should happen after the makeup is returned though, obviously you guys are past being able to continue any arrangement.

Honestly, because of the uniqueness of the situation & the fact you guys were friends; Moca should buy the makeup (at a significant reduction). Seems fair for both parties.

Well I never bought it out as clear to our discussion, and our discussion on the matter was ended when he stopped the deal and asked for the remainder of his money back.

I sent my money to him being a good friend but then realizing he had benefited massively and I was in a hole and he wasn't actually my friend and had walked all over me, taking no risk, and i end up loosing a bit over $7k when just a weeks ago I was in a nice staking deal where my money was safe.

In relation to breaking rules. I never broke rules in my cartel, but I am sure people wouldn't have been happy, we never had a rule about it. I just felt it would have been frowned upon by other cartel members due to not being able to stake others into our cartel, it was never a rule though.

+1

I thought it was fair offering him 50% but he refused that. I believe that would have been a really really nice deal for the reason; it changed the financial situation due to him suddenly ending a deal in such small make up and with out warning when we were in the middle of discussing the deal.

He didn't want that buy out and he only asked for his money back and I instantly sent.

The fact that I owned that extra $7k, it's my money and strongly believe I decide who it should be with. I thought it should have been with Alan for a moment but realizing it shouldn't be I then decided it should be back in my hands. As the owner of that money, the person who worked hard to get that money. I should decide who it lays with. I decide it lays with me. Please send it back now Alan if you want to continue a mediation on the matter I will be a good person and do so, but please return MY money at least first and we can go from there! You have kept it for long enough now.

will arbitrate if you guys want.

will require you escrow the amount being disputed and my decision is final (i will send money to whoever i think "wins" the argument)

Will ask for an hourly as well (i only ask this because i have arbitrated before, and its usually a mess and takes a long time. also, time is valuable etc etc)


***i read the opening post and nothing else after

lol @ arbitrating for a fee, they already have like 10 ppl in HS community willing to do it for free but it seems like campbell not willing to go to arb?

Think this sums it up perfectly......I guess with staking deals amongst friends at the time there's no real emphasis put on setting up stringent terms and conditions...and neither should be there so it's a shame when things like this happen. (been there myself on a smaller scale)

That being said I think this a no brainer situation and the money should be Moca's.

just offering. sometimes having it "official" makes it easier for both sides to move on.


thanks for replying though primo. your word always means so much to me and everyone else on these boards.

What would be your hourly? and you say it usually takes a long time, how long would you think it takes? also you say your decision is final, so not sure why it should take long.


IMO, Its obv Moca is right, and its its his right to not want the MU to be sold. since he made it clear that he wanted to keep it secret that he was playing staked.

Having sad that, I think is not really fair to your friend to not want to accept or discuss a stoploss, If you guys are friends I think its a bit harsh not wanting to implement a stoploss. Why didn't you want to accept a 50k stoploss? as it seems totally reasonable.

+1 on the top bit.

If you read the email logs, I never rejected a stop loss, I said we can speak about it soon as I didn't have a computer at the time, it was being fixed and wanted to Skype so I could understand more. Also I added in my next email, I will not play again until we are 100% in our deal aka talk about all terms and conditions. So I was keen to discuss it and understand it more. It was then he sent the email saying he had a good investment else with out warning or allowing me to even discuss stop losses with him.

Fwiw I don't have a stop loss on my current stake and moved down from being allowed to play $1,000 games to now playing $200 games and all of my own choice and discussions with my staker on what we both think is optimal. I didn't even loose money in the $300 stakes, but moved down to be more optimal.

In all fairness after reading the thread, it appears to me money should go back to MOCA.

Backer, be a man and do the right thing, after all Greed never goes tooo far does it ?

Yeah your right, you never rejected indeed, he made this offer in his first mail:

- If at any time I leave the stake voluntarily then the makeup is forgiven
- If you lose 50k while on the stake you can either move down to 300s where I will keep staking you, or you can have the option to move to a different stake where the 50k makeup can be paid off from your profit chops on the new stake.


IMO you could or should take this offer if the stoploss is not an issue. I would have snapcalled the 50k stoploss and no MU owned if he stops.

also the situation seems to take way to long, often not a good sign of the intentions of your 'friend'. Any progress or news?

Well I hadn't used a stoploss on any on my own horses, and still don't, we just do what's optimal for both because what is optimal for one is also optimal for the other if good people are in the deal and no alternative motives are in place. I didn't understand fully what it all meant and just wanted to speak with tone over Skype. I more than likely would have accepted the 50k stoploss given I moved down loosing around that to my current staker, but I just wanted to speak with him is all. No, nothing from him still.

this seems to be the case. if this actually goes to arbitration, i think one of the main things that needs to be looked at is the supposed 'buyout' by moca, and whether him sending the money at a slight discount amounts to a sufficient 'buyout of makeup' to end the backing deal and not the return of makeup with a slight discount due to the friendly nature of their agreement.

On discussion of buying out the max offer I gave him was 50% and then it was off the table. He accepted that it was off the table and agreed to take full loss. The money sent was after all was finished with by him. I feel through out I was strongly manipulated in this situation into believing I had wronged him in some way as he told me numerous times I rejected a stop loss when in fact I never. It was then sent in good will after contract had been completed. It was ethically very wrong of him to keep in the first place but also it and very wrong of him not to send it back when asked for.