Stock was up 14% on the news, today. I forgot who it was, but a 2+2 poster recently posted that they had recently bought some AYA at $11ish (on Friday or Monday). More insider trading! (Kidding).

Don't worry guys. Online poker is THRIVING!

For the past few months at least, any thread that pertained to amaya, specifically dealing with their stock had a bunch of posts that reminded me of what the old yahoo stock message boards used to sound like. That always made me suspicious.

With pay lol

Lol.

So let's say someone wrongly accuses you of a serious crime someday, that would require your employer to suspend you. A year later it finally gets to court and you're found not guilty. You think you should just have to take the 1 year financial loss on the chin? When you did nothing wrong and were innocent? The ****? Of course he should be paid, you're just blinded by hatred for the man, he deserves due process just like everyone else.

I cannot think of a single instance where a person accusing another of something would require the employer of the latter to suspend such employee (at least not in the private sector I mean). And I don't think it should be considered crazy for someone to not get paid a salary for their work if they are not working. And due process has nothing to do with a private company paying a salary. Just saying.


Of course, obviously, there is likely to be agreements between the company and the employee that consider such situations and provide for what happens.

will first quarter financial result be public april 1st ?

^ No, they are never out that quickly.

I think Q4 came out in March, which was relatively late

That sucks.

I'm no legal expert ldo but...............

No you should be able to go after the wrongly prosecuting party if it's that blatantly obvious that you have been bent over and given one up the proverbial ass.

It is up to the company to judge if it's in their best interests and feasible that you were a party to the allegations and move from there. Not sure how this is any different to any day to day actions someone may make. If they agree on the before-mentioned points I'm not sure exactly why you think this is negligence or worse on the companies behalf. Now why if this is the case should they should pay the person for a leave of absence? The fact that they are actively holding their position for them is more than enough imo when they could possibly even just part ways. You're logic confuses the hell out of me.

Either way he is obv guilty and a massive douchebag so I hope he gets rheemed for this.

I'm not an expert but I think the reason (with a normal company) is that it takes some time for supplier's invoices for the end of the month/quarter to arrive and be verified or customer invoices to be potentially corrected, maybe electricity meters to be read etc. - for example Microsoft (first one I thought of looking up) announced earnings for the final quarter of 2015 on 28 January. Amaya announcing (iirc) on 14 March is then relatively late - particularly as they can read the revenue line directly off their own servers.

Recently though I've been invoicing the subsidiaries of international companies and I'm getting more pressure to email them a PDF of my invoice on the last day of the month or quarter so they can get it in the system right away - though maybe that's because i'm a pipsqueak with very small invoices and they want to get me out the way as quickly as possible before the real stuff comes in.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fools'_Day

The best thing that can happen to poker at this point is if someone purchases PokerStars from Amaya asap.
Otherwise online poker and PokerStars will be lost very soon (and this is not similar to all the countless threads created over years everywhere `that poker will die in next 2-3 years`, this time its very serious if u follow things that are happening). Everyone currently playing online poker will eventually lose credit and interest in playing actual poker if its synonym becomes `casino pit roulette`.
I mean ur CEO is a cheater who makes money cheating his own customers.
Amaya is just a shady greedy business that runs companies to the ground soaking max value each time before destroying yet another company they bought via credit.

On your bike!

And do we consider our money on PS safe?

Innocent until prove guilty...

It is probably a contractual duty (as a result of what I said above). Nothing to do with corporate governance.

This is pretty standard in the corporate world. You can't have someone continue on their role as CEO of a public company while the charge hangs over them as the decline in confidence caused for the company would kill them in the marketplace. Nor could you expect them to find a lesser role for him given that was what he was contractually hired to do which was be CEO (and again as I said that the charges are yet to be proven although on here it seems pretty clear cut that he is guilty).

Anyway, it won't matter if he is acquitted because he will be gone anyway within a short period he comes back as in the corporate world you can't survive this staying on at the same company. There will be a golden handshake to end it mark my words.

Everyone who still thinks he should not be paid or fired is insane. I hate the man just as much as anyone else but there is no reason to punish people for crimes that haven't been proven yet.

If you feel ok with not paying him then post your name and company you work for. See if you're still fine with not getting paid if you're charged with a robbery you didn't do.

totally OT, but unibet's and playtech's numbers were made public in mid february, 888 was even a bit later than amaya and i believe bwin.party hasn't published them yet (but in the last case i guess the gvc transaction delayed things a bit)

tbh idk, what's the standard ... but you have to admit, given the situation it's a bit 'funny' that "paid" was mentioned in the press release ^^

The pay issue is irrelevant, because it's just a face-saving measure, as in "he's temporarily going on leave because this issue is distracting us all right now from the mission of the company, even though we all know he's done nothing wrong (and will be back in due course)."
He's worth hundreds of millions of dollars in stock--the salary is worth a tip, or maybe an evening dress for his wife.

What would be more interesting to know is how much knowledge of and/or influence he'll have on the company behind the scenes. There hasn't exactly been a dramatic change of leadership otherwise.

Well a couple of examples that quickly spring to mind would be an accountant charged with securities fraud, or a teacher accused of having a sexual relationship with a student. Both those examples would require the company to suspend them from their jobs, pending the outcome of the investigation. It would be standard to get paid during this time.

As Kelvis said - what would you think if you were accused of a crime, had to be suspended from whatever work you do...and didn't get paid? It's not like your mortgage payments suddenly cease to exist, and you still need to buy groceries. Suspension with pay is the only reasonable option if the opinion of the company is they cannot risk him staying at his post.

I never joke.

Ok, so if the company pays him for sitting on his ass waiting for the trial, but then he is found guilty, is he going to give the money back to Amaya? Of course not. He's not even working for Amaya so why should he be collecting a paycheck from them that we customers are paying. It's not like this guy is facing any financial hardship

CEOs are fired all the time after being accused of misdeeds and crimes that have not yet been proven. A corporation is not a court of law - it's a profit-seeking enterprise that operates at the behest of shareholders.

I wasn't saying it wasn't standard to suspend an employee in such a case; just that I'm not aware of any law that requires it in any situation.

Exactly.

Firing him or keeping him on for the good of the company is just an opinion either way. It has nothing to do with due process like being accused of a crime. If firing him is deemed good for business then it should be done without reservation about feelings. After all when the shoe was on the other foot Mr. Baazov had no qualms about firing/laying off a good chunk of Stars' staff and effectively firing many of its most loyal customers.