TY GOLFNUT, maybe you will open some eyes up with what your saying ,us puting in real money and alot of people playing fake monies just given too them. sid:

People saying the games were legit are LOL.

Would you deposit money on a poker site right now knowing they weren't going to segregate funds and know they were going to allow some players to play with phantom deposits, then on top of that not have funds to pay for your balance if you choose to withdraw??

If you answer yes you are an idiot.
If you answer no, then this is why full tilt defrauded you into depositing on their site.

Almost as old as the "deposit versus balance" debate is the "ponzi scheme" debate. According to wiki, "A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation."

Full Tilt and poker are not investments. The reason there was not enough money to pay us was because of piss poor management or outright theft or both - neither of those qualify it as a ponzi scheme.

And, for the sake of argument, even if they did think it was a ponzi scheme, that doesn't mean squat as far as giving back original deposits versus current balances. It also doesn't mean squat as far as paying back full balances. The reason that people don't get all their money back in actual ponzi schemes is because there is no money to give back. In this case, all the money is there.

Phatty,

Did you answer the question yes or no?

Your question is stupid and proves nothing. If you deposit money at a bank and it gets stolen, would you deposit there again if you knew it was going to get stolen? Does that mean you shouldn't get repaid your money from a bank when it gets stolen? Of course not.

We don't live in a world where you can predict the future on things like this.

The bottom line is that our money WAS stolen and has now been recovered and we should be paid back ... in full.

No.

Yes.

No

FYP

You answered no. Therefore you wouldn't have a balance to segregate if they hadn't defrauded you into depositing on their site in the first place.

I think we're going to get back pretty close to full balances (no points) after a period of time longer than any of us would like.

That said, the argument that we have to get back balances because the DOJ would have to pay more out by doing something else is incorrect. There are many arguments for why we will get balances, some of which you touched upon, but the DOJ having to go into their pocket for more money is not one of them.

Similarly, the argument that what the DOJ does with our money is tied to what happened with ROW players is not compelling. That's the kind of flawed thinking that led to the misinformation that our money would be repaid pretty close to when ROW players were repaid.

I think of it like a stock brokerage. If you or I bought shares of Apple and lost part of the investment due to AAPL dropping in value (and not due to actions of the brokerage itself), would we be able to recoup the loss if we found that the brokerage had financial issues? Similarly, if AAPL increased in value and the brokerage legitimately purchased the stock on our behalf, would anyone expect to lose that profit?

It's amazing that you can look at this thread after not reading it for a month and still see the same people arguing opinion on whether we will get balances or deposits back from the DOJ. Do you people ever get tired of talking about the same subject that an opinion on doesn't matter ?

Think you're comparing Apple and oranges.

That's true.

The point here has been more that the DoJ would not feel basing this on deposits would be better for them than basing it on balances.

It's compelling primarily because DoJ authorized this for ROW player restitution.

How has the ppa sat down with the doj and not asked the question if they are going to pay balances or deposits? I

I'm not interested in dissecting the nuance of every argument. The main reason we bring this reason up is to show how utterly ******ed it is to think this would be an option. The real reason people won't get original deposits is because that's not how a poker site works. On a poker site, you deposit money and you either win more or lose it. You get back what you made of it and if you lost it all, you lost it all. End of story.

I disagree. Everyone played on Full Tilt poker together. ROW played against US players. There has been precedent set for the case with Stars and Full Tilt. Stars, with permission from DOJ, gave both US and ROW players full, current balances, not original deposits. Stars, with permission from DOJ, can give ROW Full Tilt players full, current balances. That's 3 cases - Stars ROW, Stars US, and Full Tilt ROW. We're only now waiting for the last, final case: Full Tilt US players. While it is true, we don't know how it's going to be handled yet, anyone with common sense and a brain should see the right, fair, common sense way to handle it (and the way it's been handled already 3 times) is that all US players get their full balances.

Believe what you want to believe. Use whatever reasons or logic you want or don't want. That's what I'm going with.

This argument is flawed. We weren't BUYING anything. We were depositing funds with the assurance that they were segregated and safe. They were not. We paid FT rake for the service they provided, part of which was holding the players monies. We were defrauded into depositing onto the site. You said yourself you wouldn't deposit on a site now knowing this.

If they bank steals the money, it is insured by the FDIC and I will get it back. FT was the bank and THEY stole the money.

Yes, PPA has asked and has recommended that remission be based on balances. DoJ has not yet issued guidelines on how it will be handled. I will definitely post that as soon as it is available.

You made an investment in each hand you played. Just because the site had issues doesn't mean the players at your table have to give you back the money you lost at the table.

Which is why we're fighting to get what is rightfully ours -- our balances.

Before you start typing more nonsense on your keyboard, don't forget that the DOJ has the money. Yes, if the money was stolen, not insured, and gone forever then maybe you'd have a point. But, the DOJ has the money. And in my opinion, it's not a coincidence that the the DOJ has the money, rather, it was by design that the deal was structured so that there would be more than enough money to pay everyone back just like they have made sure everyone can be paid back full balances in the 3 other cases related to Black Friday - Stars US players, Stars ROW players, and Full Tilt ROW players.

Aside from giving permission to use PokerStars.com to facilitate payouts, DOJ had nothing to do with Stars paying back ROW or US players. Stars could've stiffed us with ZERO recourse from the US DOJ.

Many players with a balance never deposited a penny.

Any business at any time can stiff us like that if you want to be literal. I'm not entertaining any hypothetical on IF they could have stiffed us. They didn't.

I seem to remember playing on Stars, having a good time, and then I saw a big DOJ logo on their web site one day (Black Friday). At that point, I couldn't log in anymore and Stars reached an agreement with the DOJ to pay US players back. If you want to try to rewrite history, be my guest, but that's how it happened. Stars could not pay us back until they reached that agreement. And they DID reach that agreement.

Not sure why you quoted my post then since that was the only argument I was addressing. I dont usually try and support my point of view by using demonstratively incorrect arguments, but to each their own.

Also not sure why the rest of your post was angry with me. I dont have your money and I sure hope they pay out balances

We're trying to shut up trolls with this "deposits" and "balances" argument and then you come behind us and say "well, uh, technically that's not a reason blah blah blah". I'm not sure what your argument is anymore. If you want to engage in this microlevel speculation, that's the response you're going to get back.

Presenting incorrect arguments isnt usually a good way to quiet trolls. Im sorry you are angry at me that you made a poor supporting argument.