I can't tell you the exact amount, but I did lose money. The wouldn't let me trade my VIP points for cash and they got transferred for Tilt points.

sorry about your VIP points, but they didn't steal ur cash. but worst of all u HAD to go to tilt. that's the worst part of all.

back to regularly scheduled program.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...d.php?t=147608

bump, thought this was kinda interesting and didn't get any attention so far.

ya, i asked who he submitted it to. someone just email it to info@igcouncil.org; microgaming is a member. it's a start.

BTW, I sent the letter I posted to ICG and Kawnawake. No response from either yet.

I did as well; no response yet from either.

Can you explain from which source you heard this?

The funny thing is I originally thought funds were held by seprate casinos. But when I started to play for real somehow I got the idea that prima (now MGS) held all the funds.

I mean it just makes sense. And the scenario you describe is exactly why, along with trying to figure out rake, and dealing with cheaters. I mean what do you do when someone uses a stolen credit card and dumps to another skin. Can you imagine all the work that goes into transfering money from skins back and forth??? The idea of having multiple sites storing cash is just plain stupid. It's a shame because I am one of the few players who really like MGS because I "grew up" on their software.

Me 2 laddy's was one of my 1st sites

This is exactly the type of stuff that's pissing people off. We've had people in this thread predict that we'll get all, none, and even 50% of our money back. You say the result will be "very positive." Why do you say this? Hunch? Some inside info?

Don't get people's hopes up with predictions like this unless you're going to back them up.

Also, what about other skins, other than Battlefield?

Does the skins owners are still alive or are they lost in the mist?

Battlefield and RakeReduction are pretty tight. If RR is hinting at "good things", it doesn't take a genius to guess the source. ;]

Unfortunately, with all the bashing, BFP and Red9's etc., just figured they were doing more harm than good and the best policy was to clam up until they could give concrete info.

That really sucks for those of us who don't mind hearing speculation and rumors from 'inside sources'. Since so many here are insisting that they "back the predictions up or stfu!", we now have dead silence from the closest sources who were posting.

Folks in this thread demanded 100% accurate info. Maybe we'll get it in a month or three.

Don't run, HIDE!

I will not leak this persons identity; but this person is definitely in the know.

Hypothetically speaking, Microgaming may have this angle well covered:

1. Microgaming could keep track of how much money each skin owes to the network to cover net losses by its players and Microgaming's share of the rake.

2. Microgaming could insist on immediate settlement if a skin begins to owe too much money to the network. Failure to pay up could result in immediate suspension until the matter is resolved.

3. Microgaming could require each skin to post a security deposit to cover any shortfalls.

4. Most of the money that a skin might owe Microgaming is likely to be Microgaming's share of the rake. Microgaming could simply accept that the risk of losing a few days rake from one skin is a cost of doing business.

5. Microgaming could make up any additional shortfall out of its own pocket as a cost of doing business. Covering the net losses of Tusk players to other network players for a week or two figures to be completely trivial compared to the total account balances of all Tusk players.

6. If all else fails, the poker rooms themselves should accept responsibility for making their own players whole and deal with Microgaming afterward. Casinos and bookmakers are supposed to have reserves to cover occasional losses and many of them actually do.

Summary: Microgaming may well have adequate safeguards to protect other players, other poker rooms, and themselves from problematic skins such as Tusk.

Don't blame Microgaming for your hypothetical scenario without evidence.

There seems to be enough to blame Microgaming for without making things up. They should have taken the lead in promoting proper fencing for player funds, especially after the Betcorp fiasco and well-publicized failures on other networks. They should have recognized that the nature of Tusk's white label branding business creates many more opportunities for fraud and insisted on greater transparency and stricter supervision. They should have recognized the obvious, um, marketing irregularities at certain Tusk sites and dealt effectively with them long before now.

I don't necessarily blame them for anything they have done recently. I suspect that they are as much in the dark as we are. No reason to believe Tusk is being any more forthcoming with Microgaming then with anyone else. Probably Microgaming has no idea what Tusk has done with the money or whether it can be recovered or how long it might take. I think they were negligent in allowing this situation to come about but at this point it's too late for Microgaming to do anything but wait.

Sent them a third mail today. I'll wait and see... Maybe they've become big and cocky?

Im already playing on prima again, and i have 22k stuck on bf.
I dont really blame microgaming, so why would i boycot them.
Besides i like prima, and the games have gone softer over this.

Hello everyone

I have been away on business but am back in the office now. Here is the latest update we have.

We have not had any contact from TUSK representatives for over 2 weeks and so far as yet nobody from MGS has been in touch

Last night we received an email from the liquidators, it reads as follows:

Dear Sir

Tusk investment corporation

We act for Tusk investment corporation (Company No 28453) ("Tusk")

as a direct consequence of the termination of the licences granted to our client by MicroGaming Software Systems Limited, our client has appointed liquidators on the basis that the business of Tusk has now become uncommercial. Our client is disappointed that Microgaming made this decision without proper consultation with our client. In our view and that of our client, the decision is fundamentally flawed both in fact and in law.

Mr XXXXX and Mr XXXXX (i have left them out for confidentiality purposes) have now been appointed by our clients as liquidators of Tusk. Our clients will now leave it to the liquidators to investigate the decision of MicroGaming.
You will hear further from the liquidators or their staff in due course in order that you can deal directly with them in all matters related to tusk.

Hope that helps

Dan

CPTGaming

Also

in reference to this...

Originally Posted by WordWhiz
Silly hypothetical here, but bear with me:

Imagine that on February 26th, the day before this whole fiasco, every single player on a Tusk skin had gone online and lost every penny in their account to other players on solvent skins like Unibet or Eurolinx. Assume that these were all legitimate losses and not chip dumping. What then? If Tusk was insolvent, where would the money come from? When the winning players went to cash out, would they face problems? How exactly does the money transfer work between skins--if a Doyle's Room player wins a pot from a Red Nines player, do the two skins have to do some transaction between them to settle up, or does Microgaming do it automatically?

The underlying point, I guess, is that if you run a network with different skins like MG does, it should be imperative to have 100% of funds available at all times. On any given day, any player on any skin may win or lose money, and if even one skin is busto, players on every other skin may suffer. In short, by letting Tusk play its shell game, MG endangered the funds of every player on the network, right? Seems they bear quite a lot of responsibility for this mess then.

I am led to believe (though I have no evidence to back this up) that the funds were centrally held to avoid matters like this. Before we set up with MPP another operator on a different network quoted us a set up fee AND a $20,000 retainer to act as a buffer between skins on their network to cover skin to skin transfers. This was not the case with MPP...so maybe the funds are centrally held?

When you think about it, the silence from Tusk is almost understandable. Looks like MG februari 27 without warning simply unplugged Tusk. Tusks staff were actually working as usual that day when suddenly MG disconnected them. Tusk communicated before that and had informed MG that they would liquidate the company. MG were not communicating, they just shut them down. Surely MG has responsibility for this mess.

Keeping everyone up to date, like I said I would only post news when I actually HAD news. We now have the liquidators information (As CPT posted).

We tried to contact them 3 times, and all 3 times they said they would call us back. Nothing yet.

We will post more when we have more.

Battlefield Poker

I'd love to know the answer to this.

Do R9 and BFP players have the same chances of getting their money back or will there be a difference between these skins?

CPT, while you do not want to divulge the names of the liquidators, could you answer the following:

(1) Are they located in Vanuatu or Australia?

(2) If in Vanuatu, is there any association with either the law firm of
Gregory Gee Or Palm Corp?