+ own the two biggest brands in the poker industry, which did cater to two different sets of players, with the funds to promote both heavily, as well as having the two biggest known brands in the US with the DOJ on-side (if not even giving their blessing that is rumoured) for if/when the US market is re-opened.

Plus the fact that people talk about how "little" FTP made before - Pokerstars know what they're doing, and have run Pokerstars very profitably for many years - they won't jizz money up the wall or on ridiculous dividends like previous FTP did - so they'll run it as profitably as can be, and that would be very.

I don't think buying FTP would give PS any leverage over DOJ (I can't imagine it) and it would have little or no impact on the settlement of PS's other problems. PS's continuing to do business in the US after being warned by DOJ/FBI not to do so, probably means that current management will never be allowed to operate independently in the US.

Sorry, but you're mischaracterizing this. PS cannot actually buy FTP without DOJ agreement and permission. So no, a PS purchase of FTP doesn't given PS any "leverage over DOJ". Frankly, there is no one and nothing on the planet that has leverage over DOJ other than the President of the United States, and certain congressional committees.

The rest of your reasoning on why PS would want to buy FTP carries some logic (and is all stuff we hashed out here two weeks ago...)
But no, nobody in the poker world has any leverage over DOJ with regard to the present situation whatsoever.

They did not steaL money and nor should they return the money. They were issued dividends in good faith and/or paid to represent the company.

The persons you want to go after are the ones who approved the dividends. What they did was illegal and they can be held accountable in a court of law.

Those who were sponsored pros, well its like a hired employee, only they got paided alot more. I would be surprised if Tom Dwan did anything.

Someone should email Ifrah and get the real scoop.

By the way I disagree with every last one of you who say the pros should pay back the money they earned for their promotional work. Should NBC and the Travel Channel and Espn pay back advertising fees? What about Dundler-Mifflin providing paper products and printers should they return the money? How about anyone who got rakeback or special prizes or benefits? All of these were obtained above board through legal transactions. I realize there are probably few circle pairs that overlap less than those who understand how businesses work and those who like to play poker but be serious.

I look at Tom Dwan and Galfond the worst of the bunch of so called employees. If they knew nothing why offer their own cash When saying Ill put up this much of my money that Full Tilt is good. If they knew nothing they should have kept their mouths shut. Also I have yet to see them post that money????

If I owned Pokerstars I wouldny buy Full Tilt at all. It just makes me the new bad guy not honoring the deposits

You are 100% right. The DOJ have their own motivations most which are not currently clear. Things like seeing the FTP brand be functioning is certainly nowhere on their list. It may happen as s means to an end but they could care less if FTP ever comes back and in fact would likely prefer it stay gone for good.

If the DOJ could get most us players money back and FTP just dies and row gets nothing back I think they would be okay with that in principle.

People just need to realize that in the scheme of things the DOJ has no interest in FTP being reborn. If they can get enough of what they want they might trade it but right now they hold all the cards. No other governments have really even stepped up so really the doj can do whatever they want.

I think some people don't believe the doj would be satisfied liquidating what they can and keeping FTP shuttered forever, but I think they would be okay with that.

So you are young, ignorant and wrong. Your position is completely invalid.

at what point is ftp forced into liquidation?

Well said. It has nothing to do with "getting it" or "not getting it". There are people at the top who "received" (stole) money and were behind this whole fiasco, who should clearly be held accountable. There are people at the bottom who've received money who clearly should not be held accountable. (Expecting even a random secretary or the janitor who last cleaned the FT office to return their paychecks is absolutely ridiculous.) Somewhere in between, the line needs to be drawn. I would personally draw it at the people who had no knowledge of the stuff behind the scenes and were under the impression that they were just receiving a normal paycheck (obviously it's difficult to prove who knew what, but not really relevant). If someone draws the line a little lower, that's fine and I have no issues with that. But the sentiment that anyone who's received a single cent from FT should return said cent is way off in my opinion.

herp derp

edit

hahaha!

You're 0 for 3. I said nothing about the legality, although I think even that depends on where exactly the money was scooped from. I think it was one big pot, so it can definitely be argued that they were paid directly from stolen funds.

I think it is morally wrong to keep money that you know was stolen, especially when you were paid that money to encourage people to sign up to be stolen from.

The janitors are obviously much less culpable than someone like Jenn Harmon. Also I'm pretty sure she was a part owner?

Levels of culpability:

1. Owners who knew what was up
2. Owners who didn't know what was up
3. People who were "loaned" ridiculous amounts of our money and who were somehow able to withdraw it before the site was closed.
4. Employees who authorized "loans", who mismanaged the accounting, and who lied about the state of the site.
5. People who were paid absurd amounts of our money to shill for the site and who traveled the world freerolling courtesy of our bankrolls.
6. Grunt employees who just kept things running.

I draw the line of hate between categories 5 and 6.

The ****ing csr's and whoever ran the full tilt store can go suck a dick as well though.

sick multi quote aggo

so missed this thread .................. or did I ?

when will this sheeeeeeeeeeet ever end

almost hope to hear that it's all over so i can fnally move on .... returned stolen $$$'s or not ....... **** the doj and all the ftp dickheads

Dear god. It seems there are people who actually come here still to do nothing but complain or troll.

I can see the e-jousts are back in full futile effect as well. As much as I love what the internet and this forum can bring this thread has to represent some of the lowest lifeforms on earth. I pray for all of us, and may god have mercy on our souls. Or something. Oh wtf am I saying this has killed my ability to feel emotion. BRING BACK MY MANIES YOU SAD INCOMPETENT TOADS.

/rant

I'm sorrry

Here's an article that seems to support the "PS buys FTP assets and gets a "clean" bill of health to partner with a big US casino operator to enter the American market" theory:

Here's an article to look at, I'm not sure it adds anything but summarizes a lot:
http://www.lse.co.uk/FinanceNews.asp...rs_with_a_past

IDK of course, but earlier in this thread there was talk that if deals for purchase fell thru then BR was the next step, but who knows for sure WTF is going on now if anything!

What suspect is more likely is that PS will be allowed to "license" their software to a US based organization to start. That way PS is "punished" by not being able to enter the market, yet they can make some money. The games will be intra-state at first. Over time, I expect that the US will allow players from different state "skins" play together like the Merge network.

The only way PS gets back in the US is by selling out to an existing US gaming company. Nobody has access to that kind of cash at the moment.

The first article link seems to be incomplete, this one has the whole article:

http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/0...e=economicNews

It's so tilting that people think Galfond worked for FTP. He wasn't a sponsored pro on FTP. I still don't know why PG made that statement when he has no affiliation with FTP.

Never knew that always thought he was a sponsored pro?