Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
FTP Discussion Thread (Everything but big new news goes here. Cliffs in OP) FTP Discussion Thread (Everything but big new news goes here. Cliffs in OP)
View Poll Results: Do you want the AGCC to regulate the new FTP?
Yes
1,156 56.58%
No
887 43.42%

07-11-2012 , 06:54 PM
This thread needs DF or similar to confirm or deny ASAP.
07-11-2012 , 06:54 PM
well this sucks....just nothing going right for me these days.
07-11-2012 , 06:54 PM
no reason for Pokerstars to buy FTP unless it meant entry back into the US market.
07-11-2012 , 06:55 PM
My last comment notwithstanding, none of what Mr. Barnes says is out of the realm of possibility.

Also, even if true, none of that eliminates the possibility of settlement prior to trial *at some point*, but goes even further to what I said about the MTD/MTS filings likely meaning no settlement for at least a significant period of time.
07-11-2012 , 06:56 PM
I've been told by some people in the know that the deal isn't dead yet.

I've been told by multiple people that the deal was supposed to be signed Monday. It wasn't. I don't know why.
07-11-2012 , 06:57 PM
<3

Last edited by Kirbynator; 07-11-2012 at 06:59 PM. Reason: just <3, hopefully.
07-11-2012 , 06:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by idun215
no reason for Pokerstars to buy FTP unless it meant entry back into the US market.
No reason for Pokerstars to buy FTP right now, if they truly believe their current motion is a lock. If they were nearly ready to settle at something nearly approaching DOJ's terms, and they eventually lose their motion, they'll very likely take a new look at settlement at that time.
07-11-2012 , 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZBTHorton
I've been told by some people in the know that the deal isn't dead yet.
By this do you mean it's alive but there is truth to the rumor and it's now looking less likely than previously, or that it looks as good as it did before and this rumor is unsubstantiated?
07-11-2012 , 07:00 PM

Spoiler:
07-11-2012 , 07:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by It'sOn
By this do you mean it's alive but there is truth to the rumor and it's now looking less likely than previously, or that it looks as good as it did before and this rumor is unsubstantiated?
I edited.
07-11-2012 , 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZBTHorton
I've been told by some people in the know that the deal isn't dead yet.

I've been told by multiple people that the deal was supposed to be signed Monday. It wasn't. I don't know why.
Isn't dead "yet"?
07-11-2012 , 07:02 PM
whats going on?
07-11-2012 , 07:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulletfb
Isn't dead "yet"?
I wasn't trying to be purposefully obtuse with my wording, don't read anything into it.
07-11-2012 , 07:04 PM
Man, it's getting hottttt in herrrrrrrr......
07-11-2012 , 07:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZBTHorton
I've been told by some people in the know that the deal isn't dead yet.

I've been told by multiple people that the deal was supposed to be signed Monday. It wasn't. I don't know why.
Theh "why" almost doesn't matter now, because all of Monday's filings change the legal landscape and posture dramatically, which was why settlement prior to these filings was key.

There's no reason to rule out settlement now, but the train has started rolling down the litigation track, and the next station is really whatever point the current batch of motions is fully briefed (and possibly argued), but at some point prior to the judge issuing rulings on them.
07-11-2012 , 07:06 PM
On one hand, we just learned that the deal is to the point that it can be signed and completed.

On the other hand, we just learned that it might be being derailed at the 11th hour and ready to collapse.



Prepare your F5 button-fingers folks...
07-11-2012 , 07:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZBTHorton
I've been told by some people in the know that the deal isn't dead yet.

I've been told by multiple people that the deal was supposed to be signed Monday. It wasn't. I don't know why.
This makes a lot of sense. The DOJ's June 29 letter only asked for a week's extension of all of the filing deadlines that the parties just met with their various motions to dismiss and strike.

A week is nothing, and makes it seem like the government basically thought it had a settlement all but wrapped up.

Then, for whatever reason, they didn't get it signed, and the parties had to file their motions.
07-11-2012 , 07:07 PM
where's joey to prematurely blow his load????
07-11-2012 , 07:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpethybridge
It's really hard to say.

Assuming that there is no binding agreement in place as to price of the settlement (which may not be a valid assumption):

It could potentially be really good for players because I think there are a few arguments in the brief that will take the government by surprise, and that might drive down the price of a settlement. (I assume that the government has already priced into its settlement discussions the probability that Stars will prevail on the arguments the government anticipated).

It could be bad for players because if Stars has reason to believe it could prevail on some of its major arguments, it may want to play out the pretrial motions phase of the litigation.

It could be bad for players because if Stars succeeds in limiting its liability to its proceeds of operating in 10 US states (it has several arguments aimed at achieving this result), its liability probably drops to such a small figure that it may lose its incentive* to buy Full Tilt.

*Stars' incentives are likely far more complex than just an assessment of whether Full Tilt is worth the price they would have to pay for it (repaying players). For example, paying $350 million for FTP might be a really bad deal based on its current valuation, but a really good deal if buying FT gets Stars a settlement in which they do not admit liability and are not prohibited from doing business in the US.
As I posted yesterday, if the DOJ is given leave to amend their complaint to liability in the 10 states where they feel PokerStars was in violation of the IGBA, they will be admitting that PokerStars is not illegal in the 38 States without an internet gambling prohibition.

Further, if the IGBA doesn't trigger a UIGEA violation, then a non-internet specific State law likely doesn't either, so I can't see the DOJ not accepting whatever deal PS placed on the table.

James Barnes is now tweeting that there never was any actual deal, but Bitar didn't turn himself in for no reason, and PokerStars is still paying FTP salaries, so that theory is likely just what mine is, a theory.
07-11-2012 , 07:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by It'sOn



Prepare your F5 button-fingers folks...
Good thing its gotten so much exercise in the last few months!
07-11-2012 , 07:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamiller866
As I posted yesterday, if the DOJ is given leave to amend their complaint to liability in the 10 states where they feel PokerStars was in violation of the IGBA, they will be admitting that PokerStars is not illegal in the 38 States without an internet gambling prohibition.

Further, if the IGBA doesn't trigger a UIGEA violation, then a non-internet specific State law likely doesn't either, so I can't see the DOJ not accepting whatever deal PS placed on the table.

James Barnes is now tweeting that there never was any actual deal, but Bitar didn't turn himself in for no reason, and PokerStars is still paying FTP salaries, so that theory is likely just what mine is, a theory.
appreciate your input in this and you are a great poster but 48 states????? I might be missing something - please explain.
07-11-2012 , 07:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mondogarage
Theh "why" almost doesn't matter now, because all of Monday's filings change the legal landscape and posture dramatically, which was why settlement prior to these filings was key.

There's no reason to rule out settlement now, but the train has started rolling down the litigation track, and the next station is really whatever point the current batch of motions is fully briefed (and possibly argued), but at some point prior to the judge issuing rulings on them.
I think your first paragraph is a little overstated; nothing changes the landscape very much at all until the judge rules on the motions.

(If oral argument is scheduled, that could be an important date, because the judge could tip his hand or be seen to have tipped his hand.)
07-11-2012 , 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamiller866
As I posted yesterday, if the DOJ is given leave to amend their complaint to liability in the 10 states where they feel PokerStars was in violation of the IGBA, they will be admitting that PokerStars is not illegal in the 38 States without an internet gambling prohibition.

Further, if the IGBA doesn't trigger a UIGEA violation, then a non-internet specific State law likely doesn't either, so I can't see the DOJ not accepting whatever deal PS placed on the table.

James Barnes is now tweeting that there never was any actual deal, but Bitar didn't turn himself in for no reason, and PokerStars is still paying FTP salaries, so that theory is likely just what mine is, a theory.
Yes but what was reported stated that Isai did not want jail time and DOJ did not agree. So DOJ must feel they still have some sort of case and were not willing to take just any deal.

zero
07-11-2012 , 07:15 PM
We stopped believing people who say the deal is done, yet people auto-believe this guy and his unnamed sources.

Not saying its not true, but his statement was vague (about the deal being dead) and his first tweet sounded like an opinion (about stars just trying to sabotage FTP out of the market,)

Just saying breathe people. Let's wait for some more reliable commentary and keep in mind that zbhorton said it isn't dead.
07-11-2012 , 07:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizzle03
We stopped believing people who say the deal is done, yet people auto-believe this guy and his unnamed sources.

Not saying its not true, but his statement was vague (about the deal being dead) and his first tweet sounded like an opinion (about stars just trying to sabotage FTP out of the market,)

Just saying breathe people. Let's wait for some more reliable commentary and keep in mind that zbhorton said it isn't dead.
QFT!

      
m