“It would be unfair for players who were successful online to be shortchanged from what they have rightly won and quite honestly lawfully won,” Pappas said.

How is it fair if the player that won was freerolling with a phantom deposit? In my view that money was not rightfully won. There is no way to determine which pots were won by freerolling players which makes all the games tainted in my opinion. The player that was playing with his "real money" is the one that was shortchanged.

The best argument against that proposal is that while FTP may have been illegally promoting internet gambling in States where the law forbids it, it's clear in the case of an internet poker site that the legal nexus for the tables themselves is where they are raked, which in FTP's case was a licensed internet card room in Alderney.

So players shouldn't have to argue for balances to be paid rather than deposits, they should be arguing for net deposits to be paid, with lawful (as they were accrued on licensed tables) winnings counting as deposits perhaps even more lawful than the deposits which were made in violation of the UIGEA.

If someone is given a marker to buy chips in a licensed casino, his winnings aren't any less lawful than someone who pays for his chips with cash.

When he tries to cash out, of course his marker will be deducted from his winnings, but that doesn't transform the people whose money he won into victims of the player who was playing on a marker.

if you can confrim your id and address and had no phathom deposits then i would think you have 100% chance of getting your full balance back.

If you can not prvide id to match yout account info then i diukt you would get any money back.

Players with phathom deposits, may end up on a case by case review. They may look into a players history and if all of a sudden they are making big deposiys that never cleared, well maybe no money for them.

it would hurt

And if you had a phantom deposit you will get balance minus the uncleared deposit. The alternative would need digital forensics to try to track down where the phantom money now resides because it was credited and raked and is now sitting in everyones balances in one way or another.

Everyone needs to calm down.

If someone is given a marker to buy chips in a licensed casino, his winnings aren't any less lawful than someone who pays for his chips with cash.

When he tries to cash out, of course his marker will be deducted from his winnings, but that doesn't transform the people whose money he won into victims of the player who was playing on a marker.

The fundamental difference is that a casino giving a marker is taking the risk of financing the players action and the risk of collecting the marker. The players with "real deposits" were the ones taking the risk of the phantom deposits (without knowing) and making them whole in the case of FTP.

Disagree in part. Full Tilt took the risk and the liability. Player balances in total will be honored. The uncleared deposits are a liability on the FT balance sheet which is now acquired by Stars.

The only q is whether negative balances can be pursued.

i wonder if an opportunity to firesale it will be presented to us

they would not need digital forensics to try to track down where the phantom money. Once its lost in a game of poker it would be considered wash money. DOJ would likly review this stuff case by case. someone that all of a sudden is making huge deposits that never cleared could end up losing it all

What do you all think will happen with the cash outs that disappeared? I had at least two cash outs made on/around Black Friday that left my acct, and never returned (nor did I receive them)

Can we expect the DOJ to understand the situation/be judicious enough to give us these funds we are entitled to as well?

If it is based on deposits, and that is a big if, it would be the lower of you deposits or your balance.

i beleive ftp already announced that accounts were credited in cases like yours

Agree mostly with this . Phantom deposits will be a non issue and they aren't going after negative balances.

It is not difficult at all.

Balance minus uncleared deposits equals actual balance.

For some that will be a positive number for others it will be negative.

According to this speculation the big question for most US players would really be:

Will They Get Their Poker Losses Back?

See how obvious it is you will get your balances back.
The amount paid by Pokerstars doesn't cover anywhere near the deposits.


Who knows a better Bigfoot story?

I think we're going to get back balances, but the DOJ can pro-rate if the money doesn't cover the deposits so this logic doesn't quite work.

The Pokerstars deal didnt guarantee players 100 cents on the dollar, it just guaranteed a pool of money against which players can make claims.

I'm hoping the DOJ gives money back to U.S. players by what they had in their FTP balances rather then the deposits they made(?). Because if they are doing it based on deposits, then im screwed, because i only made a small deposit but ran it up to a decent bankroll.

If the DoJ screws us here, im losing ALL FAITH in America. The DoJ was/is set up to protect MY interests...not the interests of people OUSIDE of this country

For ****s sake...wtf happened to this country man.

My point is that the games were NOT LEGIT on FTP. They were on Stars, thats why the balances were honored. All players on FTP were victims of a ponzi scheme according to DOJ. Some won, some lost, the question is who will be paid back...the winners or the losers?

First timer someone didn't claim to be a winner on 2+2. Respect!!!

+1

Also to those saying that the DOJ didn't protect ROW's actual balances... isn't that exactly what they did? That was part of the terms of the settlement with PS, and wasn't a big reason why the DOJ rejected GBT because GBT wasn't going to pay balances back in full within 90 days? It would be pretty ironic if DOJ insists ROW players get their full balances and then screw US payers.

I also don't know why the DOJ didn't just let Stars/FTP repay us... When Stars was hit by BF, the DOJ allowed them to use their main client to repay players, the same way they'd been doing all along even though it allegedly violated UIGEA. Really wish we could have just done that again.

The DOJ was just trying to make headlines. In a ponzi scheme everyone will look like winners when you look at their account balances.

No one has alleged that there was anything illegitimate about the games on FTP, so anyone that lost their deposit received everything they paid for - poker chips/entry fees.

The victims are the players who were either deceived into making deposits that they had yet finished losing or had actually won in the legitimate poker games but were deceived about the safety of their funds into leaving them on deposit rather than withdrawing - or they did withdraw but the checks didn't clear.

Allowing the companies to return US player funds - essentially looking the other way - was not a legal endorsement of the legality of the winnings, but had they stipulated in the settlement that PS was responsible for paying winning players, Scheinberg or anyone else facing criminal IGBA charges could have used that as evidence of the DOJ recognizing the legality of their US business.

tamiller, please stop writing like you know with certainty that the DOJ will only pay back deposits. If you have a written document from them that supports this, please post it now. Otherwise, please admit now in writing and in your tone in future writings, that you are speculating on what the DOJ will do.

Returning player balances does not just return winning players balances, there are losing players who are up as well. It does not comment whatsoever on how the money was won, but rather seeks to return players the money that they had in their accounts. In addition, there is a significant data point that argues the point contrary to what you have been saying and that is that Pokerstars paid balances! Explain how that is not completely contrary to your statements.