Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Big News: PokerStars Purchases FTP(?) Cliffs in OP Last update 4/24 1:02PM PT Big News: PokerStars Purchases FTP(?) Cliffs in OP Last update 4/24 1:02PM PT

04-25-2012 , 11:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dirtlad
Who are you with your 7 posts since June 2011? NoahSD deleted this thread, then re opened it when he recieved suggestions that the story might have news. OP may have started it, but no one is denying it, so let us speculate until it is proven unspeculatable.
so how many posts do I need to question something?
04-25-2012 , 11:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gankstar
I agree...but what I'm asking is: How can they say "you operated unlawfully for 5 years" if in fact charges get dropped in the deal, not plead guilty to (even lesser charges)? Or if in fact those who plead out plead to charges that pertain to them, not the company?

I'm probably just asking a silly question...but this whole thing is fairly confusing to me as a non-lawyer.
What is claimed by the DOJ hasn't been proven through the courts. So, if PS and the DOJ work out a deal whereby the claims are dropped or reduced substantially, it doesn't mean the claims were wrong, it just means the DOJ received enough money to prove a point. I doubt that the DOJ wants to go to court, because they may be found to be wrong. I doubt that PS wants to go to court, because it is expensive, and they may be found to be wrong.


Sometimes money does fix problems.
04-25-2012 , 11:42 AM
Sounds like good news for the rumor as I was pretty sure FTP had the patent on this locked up pretty tight

http://www.pokerstars.net/poker/zoom/
04-25-2012 , 11:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Wu
so how many posts do I need to question something?
You needed 8. Congratulations, you may now speculate.
04-25-2012 , 11:43 AM
Diamond flush said some week ago that the best case scenario would be a reopen in late may. Now that all this has happened, is there any chance the site will be up and running before WSOP, or is it a new 7 month wait coming?
04-25-2012 , 11:44 AM
i hate myself still waiting for u
04-25-2012 , 11:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FishNChips1
Diamond flush said some week ago that the best case scenario would be a reopen in late may. Now that all this has happened, is there any chance the site will be up and running before WSOP, or is it a new 7 month wait coming?
this
04-25-2012 , 11:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
Sounds like good news for the rumor as I was pretty sure FTP had the patent on this locked up pretty tight

http://www.pokerstars.net/poker/zoom/

They applied, but the patent was pending.

http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/rush-poker/patent-pending
04-25-2012 , 11:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
Sounds like good news for the rumor as I was pretty sure FTP had the patent on this locked up pretty tight

http://www.pokerstars.net/poker/zoom/
You are like 3.5 months late, now go back to your cage.
04-25-2012 , 11:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NiSash1337
You are like 3.5 months late, now go back to your cage.
+1
04-25-2012 , 11:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NEMplsJW
Pretty sure she did. I will have to look once im at a pc.
I always look out for Diamond's post and she has never used the word 'adamant' in talking about GBT's potential accusation of FTP. Good journalists are very careful in their choice of words. Being patient as their are many steps to be completed for the (now dead) deal to go through, yes. Adamant that the deal would go through, no.
04-25-2012 , 11:51 AM
Is the OP still up to date or has there been more REAL news?
04-25-2012 , 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsNotLupus
Is the OP still up to date or has there been more REAL news?
+1
04-25-2012 , 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsNotLupus
Is the OP still up to date or has there been more REAL news?
No confirmed real news
04-25-2012 , 11:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gankstar
I agree...but what I'm asking is: How can they say "you operated unlawfully for 5 years" if in fact charges get dropped in the deal, not plead guilty to (even lesser charges)? Or if in fact those who plead out plead to charges that pertain to them, not the company?

I'm probably just asking a silly question...but this whole thing is fairly confusing to me as a non-lawyer.
They won't have to say that, while most of the bills that have been proposed contain some type of exclusionary language (accepted wagers from U.S. players after Jan 1, 2007, e.g.) in reality they aren't even required to give a gaming applicant a reason for denying an application.

The Nevada Supreme court ruled:

Quote:
We view gaming as a matter reserved to the states within the meaning of the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Within this context we find no room for federally protected constitutional rights. This distinctively state problem is to be governed, controlled and regulated by the state legislature and, to the extent the legislature decrees, by the Nevada Constitution. It is apparent that if we were to recognize federal protections of this wholly privileged state enterprise, necessary state control would be substantially diminished and federal intrusion invited.
04-25-2012 , 11:57 AM
What this thread really needs is more monopoly related blowjob analogies.
04-25-2012 , 12:00 PM
I'm sure this is already linked, but since it's credible news source and I don't feel like looking if it was already posted:

Wall Street Journal: PokerStars In Talks To Buy Full Tilt Poker

Don't have a subscription?...Me either. So I don't know if there is anything new there. Just another source with an affirmative claim a deal is being negotiated.

Quote:
Under the deal being discussed, PokerStars would acquire the assets of its smaller rival, according to the person. The deal would be part of a broader settlement of a civil case brought by the DOJ against the two companies, the person said.
The person sure has a lot to say for two paragraphs.
04-25-2012 , 12:00 PM
something ive noticed from the OP and from deeb's post. The OP states "both sites back online". PS is online just not in the USA, is this a reference to both being back online in the USA? Deeb's statement made it sound like FTP at least would be let back on. I really wish there was clarification of this.
04-25-2012 , 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcdoorknob
What this thread really needs is more monopoly related blowjob analogies.
Would you settle for a visual aid instead?

04-25-2012 , 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dirtlad
What is claimed by the DOJ hasn't been proven through the courts. So, if PS and the DOJ work out a deal whereby the claims are dropped or reduced substantially, it doesn't mean the claims were wrong, it just means the DOJ received enough money to prove a point. I doubt that the DOJ wants to go to court, because they may be found to be wrong. I doubt that PS wants to go to court, because it is expensive, and they may be found to be wrong.


Sometimes money does fix problems.
But wasn't the shut down initiated by just one Attorney's office? What is to stop another district from doing the same thing?

There are some things that don't quite make sense here. Now that could be do to my naivete on the subject but please help me understand how this could be a serious consideration on the part of PS.

Does the U.S. market have to be open to justify FT's price tag? I would think it would with the rumors of the price tag. Yet, how can those markets be open? The attorney's office cannot just say "OK you can go back to operating now" after all this. After all this, there would have to be legislative action for anything to change. Right?

Is this some kind of conditional deal perhaps? Maybe PS would be willing to pay the players back just for the exclusive rights to buy FT for a set price conditioned on new legislation.
04-25-2012 , 12:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrryjrryjin
I can't believe the 'monopoly' thing is even being discussed.. it's so incredibly ignorant.
Especially with a dozen companies including the major casino players applying for Nevada i-poker licenses. These sites will be open to ROW players where their country does not prohibit it.
04-25-2012 , 12:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gankstar
Would you settle for a visual aid instead?

A

Would be an A+ if the price was $700 mill
04-25-2012 , 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gankstar
I'm sure this is already linked, but since it's credible news source and I don't feel like looking if it was already posted:

Wall Street Journal: PokerStars In Talks To Buy Full Tilt Poker

Don't have a subscription?...Me either. So I don't know if there is anything new there. Just another source with an affirmative claim a deal is being negotiated.



The person sure has a lot to say for two paragraphs.
I don't have subscription either. But here's an other credible source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8FP6SS20120425
04-25-2012 , 12:11 PM
If Stars buys FTP does that mean they can just subsume it under their existing IOM license without needing a new one?

      
m