Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close? Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?

03-16-2008 , 04:38 PM
thanks Wordwhiz.
03-16-2008 , 04:45 PM
Good letter Wordwhiz
03-16-2008 , 04:52 PM
ty worldwhiz
03-16-2008 , 04:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by acethiest Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
Ya what a surprise a guy who is paid by other microgaming skins is defending them....
Whether I'm an affiliate or not has nothing to do with the situation. In fact, many of the regular posters here are also affiliates.

You guys are all so anxious to nail someone to the cross you're not thinking clearly... blaming MG and calling on everyone to boycott other MG sites will accomplish nothing.

Give them time to sort out the mess. They have a good track record of backing the players in cases like this.
03-16-2008 , 05:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxInTheHenHouse Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
Whether I'm an affiliate or not has nothing to do with the situation. In fact, many of the regular posters here are also affiliates.

You guys are all so anxious to nail someone to the cross you're not thinking clearly... blaming MG and calling on everyone to boycott other MG sites will accomplish nothing.

Give them time to sort out the mess. They have a good track record of backing the players in cases like this.
I disagree it will cost them money which they wont like
03-16-2008 , 05:29 PM
Ya its obv MG isnt legally binded to pay this cash but with there reputation im sure they will take care of it somehow, but at the moment who can u expect the players to blame? a majority of the players never heard of tusk an were shocked there funds wernt handled by MG or there skin, i think that is some of the frustation players have with MG also.
03-16-2008 , 05:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkr_brat Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
I disagree it will cost them money which they wont like
Cost who money?
03-16-2008 , 05:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxInTheHenHouse Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
Whether I'm an affiliate or not has nothing to do with the situation. In fact, many of the regular posters here are also affiliates.

You guys are all so anxious to nail someone to the cross you're not thinking clearly... blaming MG and calling on everyone to boycott other MG sites will accomplish nothing.

Give them time to sort out the mess. They have a good track record of backing the players in cases like this.

Whether you are making money off them is clearly relevant since a boycott would reduce your earnings and ability to bring in new players. I find it ridiculous that you claim microgaming has no responsibility for the casinos that license their software. Microgaming makes money off of all of the casinos and has direct say in how they run their operations. The fact that microgaming is remaining so tight lipped is also evidenced that legally they do not feel in the clear.

How long are we suppose to wait? I mean what do we do a year from now if we find out that the money is not recoverable? Then do we start complaining or do we just give up? We want information.

Also the past issues with microgaming are very different than what is happening now.
03-16-2008 , 05:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by WordWhiz Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
First draft of letter--probably needs a lot of work. I haven't followed this thread as closely as others, so I cribbed a bunch of stuff from the Cliff notes and tried to piece together as much as I could into a coherent narrative. Please modify/ edit as you see fit and we'll try to get something into sendable form:

Dear Sir/Madam:

I am writing to you concerning a very troubling situation that has arisen on the Microgaming network. A large number of players have had a significant amount of money (approximately $6,000,000 as best as we can tell) frozen, and possibly stolen. The summary of the events is as follows:
On February 15th, the certifying authority eCOGRA announced that it was pulling its "Safe and Fair" seal from a number of online casinos owned by the Tusk group. Despite this, eCOGRA was still hosting jpg images of the seals they were supposed to have revoked (http://www.ecogra.org/certificates/%...nge_Casino.jpg). Most of the affected casinos were reportedly still displaying the seals too.
On February 27th, Microgaming announced that it was terminating its relationship with Tusk due to Tusk's decision to go into liquidation (http://www.microgaming.com/pressrelease_255.php). Twenty eight (28) different poker sites on the Microgaming network use Tusk as a payment processor. Players at those 28 sites (skins) have been unable to deposit, withdraw, or play with their funds at these sites. The owners and operators of the skins have stated that they were not made aware of Tusk's liquidation, the removal of their sites from the Microgaming network, or the freezing of player funds prior to this date.
As the situation now stands, a number of poker players have a large amount of money stranded, apparently in the hands of a company that is insolvent and going into liquidation. We are unaware whether this money actually exists and will at some point be recoverable, or is gone. This has proven very distressing for all players with funds at these sites, as well as the operators of the various skins.
It appears as though the primary malfeasant in this debacle is Tusk. However, based on how the situation has played out, Microgaming and eCOGRA appear to bear a large degree of responsibility as well. Firstly, Microgaming allowed Tusk to operate the 28 poker rooms and various casinos using its software. Microgaming still advertises on its website that poker on the Microgaming network is "an extremely safe game to play. ...[P]layers in the poker network are automatically protected by Fraud Control Systems and client server encryption." Microgaming had a duty to continuously oversee the financial situation of all rooms on its network to ensure the safety of player funds.
Secondly, Microgaming and eCOGRA's regulatory actions in this instance have been insufficient to protect player interests. When eCOGRA removed its "Safe and Fair" seal from various casinos, it did not clarify that the Tusk group was insolvent and days away from going into total liquidation, nor did it advise users that their funds were in immediate jeopardy and should be withdrawn as quickly as possible. (Even if it had done so, this might not have been sufficient, since Tusk was obviously on the brink of insolvency already and would likely have been unable to honor a run on funds at that time.) Nor did Microgaming issue any sort of alert to its players. This would have been especially useful for those of us with funds on the poker sites, since at the time the relationship between Tusk and the various poker skins was generally unknown at that time. The removal of the eCOGRA seal of approval (even if it had been done completely properly) was inadequate warning to protect player interests.
Finally, Microgaming has been extremely secretive in its handling of this matter. Its three press releases have revealed virtually nothing to the public. It has refused to communicate with the skin owners, who have described themselves as "blindsided" by this turn of events, and have been repeatedly promised information on certain dates only to hear further silence. Microgaming also allegedly sent a letter to two of the skins on February 25th suspending them for rakeback violations (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=149), which was made known to us only through a leak by an anonymous insider. The relationship between this letter, the alleged rakeback violations, and the Tusk insolvency is still unclear.
In summary, Microgaming and eCOGRA have failed miserably to protect player interests. Many players have tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars that they may never see again. This is egregious misconduct, constituting at the very least gross negligence and possibly outright fraud. We request a full investigation into both Microgaming and eCOGRA, as well as whatever regulatory or punitive action gives us the best chance of recovering our frozen monies as fast as possible. Thank you for your help.

Sincerely,

Bunch of angry 2+2'ers.
TY
03-16-2008 , 05:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxInTheHenHouse Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
Whether I'm an affiliate or not has nothing to do with the situation. In fact, many of the regular posters here are also affiliates.
it has everything to do with the situation since you are posting with your best interests in mind and not ours. This thread is about how we have money tied up and not defending MGS to minimize damages to your business.
03-16-2008 , 07:01 PM
Just a small observation.

Why are the majority of posters looking to Microgaming to be a 'White Knight'?

Do not the original referrers, ie, the rakeback dot coms bear some responsibility to ensure that they are referring players to 'safe sites'?

Also you might want to review the Tusk financial statements from Mar/06,...they were already 'technically' insolvent in those statements and I'm sure their financial picture improved greatly when the US passed the UIGEA.

As for the liquidation process, having been involved in a number of them, a year plus is what it will take.

The liquidators in Australia charge $75-$125/ hour for secretarial and $300-$450 for oversight in liquidations,....going to cost in the neighbourhood of $400-600,000 for the liquidator alone.

Trust accounts are not mandated in either the laws of Australia or Vanuatu for internet based businesses.

And as Australian law is very similar to Canadian, I would imagine that in order for a 'Trust Account' to actually represent a trust,... the account would have to be 'IN TRUST for Joe Smith' to be valid. An unlucky event that Tusk set up 5000+ trust accounts in order to protect each player.
03-16-2008 , 07:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier_5 Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
it has everything to do with the situation since you are posting with your best interests in mind and not ours. This thread is about how we have money tied up and not defending MGS to minimize damages to your business.
This situation has no direct impact on my business. You know why? Cuz I do my homework, I didn't list any of the affected sites on my pages. I didn't deposit my money on them either. I do the research before I play or promote any site.

I'm posting to try and bring some reason into the discussion. Did you even read my original post?

This is going to take months to clear up... not days!

Attacking Microgaming or the other sites on the network will not have any positive outcome. This industry is suffering enough already. It's actually a huge benefit to the affected players that Tusk was on Microgaming and not running independently like FT or Stars. At least with Microgaming involved, there's a small chance you'll get paid.

Flame away....
03-16-2008 , 07:33 PM
Cuz I do my homework, I didn't list any of the affected sites on my pages. I didn't deposit my money on them either. I do the research before I play or promote any site.

What was so sketchy about the 28 skins that were under Tusk? And what kind of homework did you have to do to find that out?
03-16-2008 , 07:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mellowman307 Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
Just a small observation.

Why are the majority of posters looking to Microgaming to be a 'White Knight'?

Do not the original referrers, ie, the rakeback dot coms bear some responsibility to ensure that they are referring players to 'safe sites'?

Also you might want to review the Tusk financial statements from Mar/06,...they were already 'technically' insolvent in those statements and I'm sure their financial picture improved greatly when the US passed the UIGEA.

As for the liquidation process, having been involved in a number of them, a year plus is what it will take.

The liquidators in Australia charge $75-$125/ hour for secretarial and $300-$450 for oversight in liquidations,....going to cost in the neighbourhood of $400-600,000 for the liquidator alone.

Trust accounts are not mandated in either the laws of Australia or Vanuatu for internet based businesses.

And as Australian law is very similar to Canadian, I would imagine that in order for a 'Trust Account' to actually represent a trust,... the account would have to be 'IN TRUST for Joe Smith' to be valid. An unlucky event that Tusk set up 5000+ trust accounts in order to protect each player.
Hi,

Given that you seem to know the liquidation process very well do you have any suggestions for how players should procede? We are being kept in the dark by microgaming/tusk/other skins. Are players suppose to sit around for a year? Are you suggesting we pretty much give up hope?
03-16-2008 , 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMcStacks Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
Cuz I do my homework, I didn't list any of the affected sites on my pages. I didn't deposit my money on them either. I do the research before I play or promote any site.

What was so sketchy about the 28 skins that were under Tusk? And what kind of homework did you have to do to find that out?
My research involves looking at player attendance, T&C's, financial information, player feedback, etc, etc. In the case of Tusk's sites, I didn't see any room on the network that stood out from the bigger and more established rooms Microgaming offers. There was no "red flag" but all these rooms were just too ordinary and too small to offer my players anything new or better. Look at most major affiliate sites and you'll see they thought the same way. Mellowman307 hit the nail on the head as far as the financial situation goes ( a couple of posts up the page). When the UIGEA was passed, it was a sure bet many smaller rooms were going to devastated so it became more important to be very selective about the rooms we choose to play and/or promote.
03-16-2008 , 08:10 PM
I do not believe anyone is being intentionally kept in the dark.

Liquidations are very very very slow processes and extremely expensive to conduct.

The liquidators will be in contact with ALL creditors including the players to verify balances etc.

If Tusk's financial picture in 2008 is similar to the 06 statement,... I think the player's will see approximately 50% of their funds returned.

However, no monies whatsoever will change hands until the liquidator has a full picture of how the company sits and as I've said this will take TIME.

Last edited by mellowman307; 03-16-2008 at 08:20 PM.
03-16-2008 , 09:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mellowman307 Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
I do not believe anyone is being intentionally kept in the dark.

Liquidations are very very very slow processes and extremely expensive to conduct.

The liquidators will be in contact with ALL creditors including the players to verify balances etc.

If Tusk's financial picture in 2008 is similar to the 06 statement,... I think the player's will see approximately 50% of their funds returned.

However, no monies whatsoever will change hands until the liquidator has a full picture of how the company sits and as I've said this will take TIME.
I know it would take a long time to get the money. But how long do you think /estimate would take to know how much money if any would be return to the players?
03-16-2008 , 09:59 PM
Quote:
Dear Sir/Madam:

I am writing to you concerning a very troubling situation that has arisen on the Microgaming network. A large number of players have had a significant amount of money (approximately $6,000,000 as best as we can tell) frozen, and possibly stolen. The summary of the events is as follows:
On February 15th, the certifying authority eCOGRA announced that it was pulling its "Safe and Fair" seal from a number of online casinos owned by the Tusk group. Despite this, eCOGRA was still hosting jpg images of the seals they were supposed to have revoked (http://www.ecogra.org/certificates/%...nge_Casino.jpg). Most of the affected casinos were reportedly still displaying the seals too.
On February 27th, Microgaming announced that it was terminating its relationship with Tusk due to Tusk's decision to go into liquidation (http://www.microgaming.com/pressrelease_255.php). Twenty eight (28) different poker sites on the Microgaming network use Tusk as a payment processor. Players at those 28 sites (skins) have been unable to deposit, withdraw, or play with their funds at these sites. The owners and operators of the skins have stated that they were not made aware of Tusk's liquidation, the removal of their sites from the Microgaming network, or the freezing of player funds prior to this date.
As the situation now stands, a number of poker players have a large amount of money stranded, apparently in the hands of a company that is insolvent and going into liquidation. We are unaware whether this money actually exists and will at some point be recoverable, or is gone. This has proven very distressing for all players with funds at these sites, as well as the operators of the various skins.
It appears as though the primary malfeasant in this debacle is Tusk. However, based on how the situation has played out, Microgaming and eCOGRA appear to bear a large degree of responsibility as well. Firstly, Microgaming allowed Tusk to operate the 28 poker rooms and various casinos using its software. Microgaming still advertises on its website that poker on the Microgaming network is "an extremely safe game to play. ...[P]layers in the poker network are automatically protected by Fraud Control Systems and client server encryption." Microgaming had a duty to continuously oversee the financial situation of all rooms on its network to ensure the safety of player funds.
Secondly, Microgaming and eCOGRA's regulatory actions in this instance have been insufficient to protect player interests. When eCOGRA removed its "Safe and Fair" seal from various casinos, it did not clarify that the Tusk group was insolvent and days away from going into total liquidation, nor did it advise users that their funds were in immediate jeopardy and should be withdrawn as quickly as possible. (Even if it had done so, this might not have been sufficient, since Tusk was obviously on the brink of insolvency already and would likely have been unable to honor a run on funds at that time.) Nor did Microgaming issue any sort of alert to its players. This would have been especially useful for those of us with funds on the poker sites, since at the time the relationship between Tusk and the various poker skins was generally unknown at that time. The removal of the eCOGRA seal of approval (even if it had been done completely properly) was inadequate warning to protect player interests.
Finally, Microgaming has been extremely secretive in its handling of this matter. Its three press releases have revealed virtually nothing to the public. It has refused to communicate with the skin owners, who have described themselves as "blindsided" by this turn of events, and have been repeatedly promised information on certain dates only to hear further silence. Microgaming also allegedly sent a letter to two of the skins on February 25th suspending them for rakeback violations (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=149), which was made known to us only through a leak by an anonymous insider. The relationship between this letter, the alleged rakeback violations, and the Tusk insolvency is still unclear.
In summary, Microgaming and eCOGRA have failed miserably to protect player interests. Many players have tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars that they may never see again. This is egregious misconduct, constituting at the very least gross negligence and possibly outright fraud. We request a full investigation into both Microgaming and eCOGRA, as well as whatever regulatory or punitive action gives us the best chance of recovering our frozen monies as fast as possible. Thank you for your help.

Sincerely,

Bunch of angry 2+2'ers.



TY Wordwhiz!
03-16-2008 , 10:02 PM
I think it will take a good part of a year before the liquidator is in any position to guage the full extent of whats owed to whom,... barring any legal challenges that may slow up the process.

If,.. and only if the financial picture is similar to the 06 statements the players should see approximately 50% of their balances returned.
03-16-2008 , 11:00 PM
WOW WORD WIZZ IS A ****ING LEGEND!!!!!!!!!1111111
03-16-2008 , 11:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxInTheHenHouse Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
My research involves looking at player attendance, T&C's, financial information, player feedback, etc, etc. In the case of Tusk's sites, I didn't see any room on the network that stood out from the bigger and more established rooms Microgaming offers. There was no "red flag" but all these rooms were just too ordinary and too small to offer my players anything new or better. Look at most major affiliate sites and you'll see they thought the same way. Mellowman307 hit the nail on the head as far as the financial situation goes ( a couple of posts up the page). When the UIGEA was passed, it was a sure bet many smaller rooms were going to devastated so it became more important to be very selective about the rooms we choose to play and/or promote.
It doesn't appear you offer rb so why would you offer these sites? It has more to do with that then anything else. That is easy to see. The 2008 award winner for best poker affiliate on CAP has one of these sites listed...
03-16-2008 , 11:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mellowman307 Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
I do not believe anyone is being intentionally kept in the dark.

Liquidations are very very very slow processes and extremely expensive to conduct.

The liquidators will be in contact with ALL creditors including the players to verify balances etc.

If Tusk's financial picture in 2008 is similar to the 06 statement,... I think the player's will see approximately 50% of their funds returned.

However, no monies whatsoever will change hands until the liquidator has a full picture of how the company sits and as I've said this will take TIME.
Player balances are verified by the Tusk software and MGS also knows what player balances are. They are not going to contact players to verify numbers. Also, Tusk was a service provider. They have very little assets and creditors to contact. This is not where near the extent of the process you say it is. I worked for a Fortune 500 company that went through this process and it took 1.5 years. The scope of this is tiny.

Are you trying to strike fear? What is your motive?
03-17-2008 , 12:18 AM
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
03-17-2008 , 12:23 AM
Mustbeblufin , I am not trying to srike fear.

I have been involved in numerous involuntary liquidations as a Canadian Banker.

ALL parties with any balance owed to them have to agree that the balance is correct.

It is not up to the liquidator to accept the Tusk balance.

The liquidator will cover his ass, therefore every player will be contacted by the liquidators, and at the going rates in Australia, minimum $75/hour for secretarial and $300+/hour for supervisory work the cost will be enormous.

You've been involved in one liquidation,...I've been involved in hundreds,... I do know of what I speak!

There was a definite lack of 'real world' experience in the posts and thats the only reason I've added any comments,... realism not fear mongering.
03-17-2008 , 01:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mellowman307 Battlefield Poker and 27 other Microgaming skins to close?
Mustbeblufin , I am not trying to srike fear.

I have been involved in numerous involuntary liquidations as a Canadian Banker.

ALL parties with any balance owed to them have to agree that the balance is correct.

It is not up to the liquidator to accept the Tusk balance.

The liquidator will cover his ass, therefore every player will be contacted by the liquidators, and at the going rates in Australia, minimum $75/hour for secretarial and $300+/hour for supervisory work the cost will be enormous.

You've been involved in one liquidation,...I've been involved in hundreds,... I do know of what I speak!

There was a definite lack of 'real world' experience in the posts and thats the only reason I've added any comments,... realism not fear mongering.
And if players don't accept the balance then what? MGS would be the official "record keeper" as they are the ones who facilitate transfers across the network.

I am willing to bet this is far cheaper than you say and takes alot less time.

      
m