Why is it BS? It's in their best interest to keep quiet rather than talking to every news outlet out there about the daily progress of any negotiations.

i don't need to contact anyone - i have the proof in my own mailbox that full tilt dollars are not disposable! "Pros" (Cons) exchanging imaginary phantom money don't count as completed operations of real full tilt customers.

I tend to disagree (I think the DOJ would have held their ground and not sold under GBTs monetary restrictions), but I freely admit that's just my opinion and if I turn out to be wrong I wouldn't be particularly stunned or anything.

The GBT deal appeared to be stuck for quite some time. I think GBT kept trying to find ways to force the DOJs hand and was unable to do so, and frankly I think the DOJ is in a position where they are the party who cares the least if FTP gets sold, so they have the least incentive to compromise on points they think are key (of which I hope player repayment is one). So do it their way or get lost.

That's my interpretation of the DOJs position, at any rate.

Yeah, you figured it out. Because no one wants to do business with a paranoid, low post count noob means no deals were ever done before.

Directly proportional to their ability and willingness to make a serious offer that does not constitute trying to buy FTP with existing player balances.

You don't happen to know markksman in real life, by any chance?

yeah better do business with Brad Booth, Eric Lindgren and the other scumbags - they are more trustworthy then those low post count paranoid idiot noobs who always payed their bills! makes sense!

0%

Source?

You can put 1 single story in the hands of 10 people. By the time it gets around there will be a million different versions.
That's why it is called a rumor mill.

Regardless of who it is, companies are not going to negotiate deals especially where millions of dollars are involved in public.

Personally, I think Stars being well aware of what was taking place came in after March 16th and gave the DOJ a better deal. Not only for the players but also to help themselves get out of the proverbial outhouse.
GBT lost cause he dragged his heels over repayment of ALL PLAYERS. IMO.

The only thing we can do now is sit tight and wait.
It's not as easy as cutting a cheque and it's yours. The lawyers have to make their money too.

None. Personal opinion

That's a stupid question,, considering there's no evidence pointing towards any specific percentage likelihood from 0% to 100%.

I don't believe you've ever paid any of your bills, where the evidence of those transactions?

He's just pissed that he can't talk about next week anymore ever since I put this thread on notice for that by asking who was everyones source for 'next week' when it was obvious who it was.

answer me this question.

What is better?:

Money?

-or-

no money?

?

All of americans paid back through remission, and the world paid back after a set amount of time of earning it back through bonuses?

-Or-

nobody gets anything?

The question is irrelevant to anyone but those in the DOJ in a position to agree to it or not.

That said, your question phrased appropriate it goes as such:

What is better, Americans paid some certain % through remission, and everyone else with any more than $100 in FTP accounts promising to pay enough rake to GBT to match their current deposits,

or,

answer to questions still TBD, because the court has not ruled that "settle on ****ty GBT terms or no one gets nothing".

You're complaining about the answers, when you're asking the wrong questions.

What you actually said was that:

• "the DoJ took player money"
• "the funds belonged to players"
• "the DoJ took our money"
• "the DoJ seized large sums of money from the players", and
• "the DoJ scooped up a bunch of our money"

There's nothing there about a mere moral argument. Those are straight factual assertions that the money belonged to players. If it was "our money" or "player money", we had a legal claim to it. If you thought you were distinguishing between a legal claim and a moral claim, you failed in your attempt.

So the local authority is morally wrong to fine Joe $20 when he litters, if and only if Joe owes you $20 and has no other money? I don't think so.

If your argument is that the DoJ is morally (but not legally) responsible for players not getting $40M out of the $330M they were owed, I think it fails on both moral and practical grounds.

Blame attaches to culpability, not mere causal link.

The DoJ's original actions against FTP were essentially identical to the actions they took against Stars. Stars players got their money back. FTP players did not. The difference in these two outcomes is entirely because of what Stars and FTP did differently from each other.

It is not that the money wasn't "technically" the players' money. It "actually" wasn't the players' money. Players had no legal claim to it and little prospect of seeing either a majority of the $40M or a majority of the money they were owed. At best it is money a portion of which could have been used to pay a fraction of the debt FTP owed to players.

There is all sorts of doubt that a majority of it would have made its way to players eventually. Only that portion that was outgoing transfers, net of processing fees, would have gone to players in the short term and the trend in the preveious month was that only a small percentage of incoming or received funds made it to players.

It is said that the DoJ seized/froze about $40M on BF. This seems to be split between incoming transfers, outgoing transfers, and money in FTP's own accounts. We don't know the split, but to pursue the point of the relevance of DoJ seizures, I'm going to engage in wild speculation, and assert that we have reason to believe that deposits were exceding withdrawls just pre-BF, since few withdrawls were happening, and they had to cover ongoing costs. So a reasonable estimate is that of the $40M, $15 was in FTP operating accoutns (to be used for operations) $15M was incoming transfers, and $10M was outgoing withdrawl payments. Processors took about 25%, so only about $7.5M of what the DoJ seized on BF had any immediate prospect of ending up in the hands of players. That's about 2.3% of player balances. Essentially immaterial. The notion that FTP was going to use the $15 in operating and the $15M in incoming to pay players is not borne out by the actual events in the days leading up to BF. The idea that the DoJ could have triggered BF without seizing the funds, and that if they did so, FTP would have immediately made partial playments to players of a few cents on the dollar, is also ridiculous.

The DoJ is not what prevented FTP players from getting paid. The seizure by the DOJ of $40M on BF is not material to FTP players not getting paid.

Hi all,

have been on vacation , but wow a lot of posts since last I was here. There was also a thread that Stars bought FTP. I do not see that post. I guess I gotta start reading this from where I left off, but from the last page it seems as there is no deal with Stars and FTP at all?

Was it all one big level? Hope not.

Tbh, I've hoped for 6 months that readers have pondered this.

I cannot and will not speak for anyone else or another "news" site.
All I will say is that I am very comfortable with my sources, pre, during and after GBT.
I have not altered my parameters on what should be reported.

what i find weird is that I keep hearing that they were ONLY going to pay back $100 (or less) accounts and this covered 95% of all accounts--YET in the 30,000 (or there abouts) posts on this thread alone i have seen maybe 10 people say they have $100 or less on FTP, and have seen at least 100 (probably closer to 200--maybe more) people say they have well over that amount.
seems weird that the majority of posters in this thread are in the minority of people with accounts on FTP

Cliffs.

A rumor surfaced that PS is buying FTP as part of the negotiations with the DOJ. Shortly after, GBT announced their deal with FTP and the DOJ has fallen off the table. PS never denied the negotiations to buy FTP. Here we are about 1.5 months later and nothing has been confirmed or announced. Now you are all caught up.

thank kong man

Why does it seem weird ?

If I had $100 or less...I really would not care, it would be a nice dinner someplace - but not really a big deal.

Instead, I have $2,400 involved and while it will not make a big difference in my life whether I get it back or not, I have been following this thread a lot more closely than I would have with $100 or less involved.

I just think it makes sense that the higher your balance the more you are invested in this thread since it seems to be the only real source of info at the moment as to what the final disposition of FTP will be.

Also I thought there was a thread where Shaun Deeb stated that he had a insider source that indeed Stars was buying FTP and paying back all players and trying to position itself to enter US market again? Did I dream that post? I mean he seems pretty creditable imo but can't find the post, maybe he just jumped on this rumor/level bandwagon?

....that isn't weird at all.

First off, people with no money on FTP aren't likely to be ITT.

Secondly, this is the biggest poker forum on the internet, filled with poker professionals and enthusiasts who are much more likely to be keeping larger balances.

what makes people think they were going to get their money from the GBT deal? From the way it sounded you were going to get a bonus in the amount of your money... lol how is this any better than going to some site and getting high rb%???? GBT deal was absolutely useless UNLESS the clearance rate wouldve been astronomically high