We all have a good idea who is causing the delay. Like I said in the wee morning hours and I will again.

This is how I see it. The DOJ does not right now give a flying **** if you or the ROW players get paid or not within the next 10 yrs.

Someone HAS TO GO TO JAIL. Not just Bitar but they want Isai .
This is to show the rest of the off shore gaming companies who is the BOSS, The Alpha Dog.

They are going to continue to delay the deal with stall tactics until Isai gives himself Up. They are not going to tell you that.
It's not rocket science folks. The deal could have been done weeks ago but the DOJ does not want to settle looking like a soft pussy.
If it was their main goal to get everyone paid this thread would be closed and we would all go on with our lives and the money in our pockets.

This thread will hit 75K posts and you will still be going back and forth about Court Dockets and How much FTP actually had and this motion and that motion being filed.

FTW - I still have no idea why the DOJ is not going after the Drug cartels and the Terrorists who are actually doing more harm to society then on line poker or gambling.

The one thing that seems to be true to me absorbing all the recent information and discussions is that dealing with FTP's assets is not of primary importance for Stars or the DOJ presently. It seems like there is still a lot of bigger issues being dealt with in the meantime. In the chess board that is this mess FTP's payback issues might be greater than a pawn but probably no better than a knight.

That is one thing people need to keep in mind here that Stars and the Doj are not batting back and forth the shuttlecock of FTP but of the actual criminal and civil cases. FTP player repayment may end up being part of it in the end but do not think for a minute Stars wants to repay FTP players. If they can get what they want without having to do so they will happily tread down that path.

I am not dismissing the importance of FTP player pay back, in fact just the opposite. The amount to pay back players is substantial, the actual value of FTP assets is not. None of this makes me more pessimistic or optimistic but in the stars and doj negotiations I suspect neither side views paying back FTP players as their primary objective. A balance shift in the negotiations could drastically shift that one way or another very quickly.

Reading from the informed people and lawyers here it is not unreasonable to expect this to take more time. Unlike the Tapie deal where the primary focus was Tapie wanting to buy FTP's assets cheaply, there are many other issues here.

i was on vacation the last week.. any cliffs what happend?

I asked him about it, and have heard nothing back. I assume he isn't going to share that information with us.

No need for cliffs, nothing has changed.

I just realized that markksman's networth is the same as what FTP owes it's players.

doj at the last minute : we want isai
Isai: fu, I'm very comfortable spending the rest of my life a billionare in Israel

DOJ gets greedy at the last minute and Isia pulls the plug.

He lives in the Isle of Man.

Us Courts have less than zero chance of enforcing a summary judgement against PS in the Isle of Man.

+1

although if zero chance = impossible, does < zero chance = unpossbile?

Doj can shut down isle of man tt instead

You may be right. Let's invade....

If GBT had taken over FTP. Would it then be possible for the players to play (play, not cashing out) with their whole ballance? Or were you supposed to deposit new money and unlock your old ballance by playing?

iirc the original plan was he'd give you your original balance back, up to $100, if you wanted to play with more, you'd have to deposit.

Or grind NL10 and rebuild your roll from the $100 he gave you, I guess. 0.o

This wasn't directed at me, but the short answer is expected value.

Skallagrim explained it quite well; the threat of summary judgment
Has value to DOJ that goes away if they lose on fugitive disentitlement.

I don't know how DOJ lawyer will operate, but every civil case I ever settled had pages of EV calculations in the file. Guesstimating: if the DOJ judges it's chances of prevailing on fugitive disentitlemen as being in the neighborhood of 50/50 or even 60/40, the threat of summary judgement probably has more settlement value than a ruling from the court. The reason is because of reverse implied odds; if DOJ loses on fugitive disentitlement, it drives down the price of settlement.

So, say DOJ thinks it has a 60% chance of prevailing on fugitive disentitlement, and doing so yields a billion dollar judgment but if they lose, the priceof settlement goes down to Stars' profit from 10 states half the time the judge buys that argument. (grossly oversimplifying). That is 1/5 of stars US profits, and its US operations were about 35% (I forget the exact number). Call that $70 million. The other half the time they settle for, say, $300 million.

In such a case, again i am oversimplifying just to illustrate, DOJ thinks it can win a billion 60% of the time and win 185 million 40% of the time. That means that DOJ values settlement right now at about $700 million, and it would be completely rational to settle before the fugitive disentitlement issue were decided.

Again, I simplified a lot just to create a simple illustration of how one ought to go about valuing a settlement (IMO; this is how I always did it). I left out valuation of several scenarios, and didn't factor in things like the importance DOJ places on jail time for bad guys or the importance it places on making FTP players whole.


this is all incorrect. There is nothing in the statutory language that limits it to US citizens. There is nothing in the statutory language that limits it to people who have fled; in fact, the opposite is true-- the statutory language clearly covers people who have never been to the US and who, upon learning process is issued, decline to enter the US to avoid prosecution.

There is nothing in the statute that limits section b to just domestic US corporations.

As for your "ZOMG, the us could indict any majority shareholder and seize the corporation's assets!" fear mongering, there is a little thing called evidence that stops this from happening.

Don't get me wrong, I believe, especially if waq's post is correct and scheinberg rarely came to the US, that the government has an uphill battle on fugitive disentitlement.

But saying the DOJ has no chance is wrong, and your wishful thinking about the purpose and scope of the act does not qualify as its legislative history, and, in fact, is flatly contradicted both by the plain language of the statute and it's actual legislative history.

Just guessing, but I doubt GBT would have kept a new FTP for a year, before selling all of it or pieces. This is what he does, and does quite well. Buy at rock bottom, sell for a profit soon before the piper plays.

You also know what percentage rakeback (or better; ballanceback) he was planning to give?

nobody know for certain what the GBT plan was. There was a story by ONE person and ONLY ONE person that reported that the deal included only $100 back. It has never been confirmed by any other source.
I will wait until this is all over and see if the DOJ is willing to share the3 truth of the matter.
As of right now only the DOJ and GBT know the whole truth.

I think this was the only way He was going to be able to get the traffic #'s back to Pre Black Friday.
I think it was Pure B.S and somehow I think most were going to get ****ed in the long run.
He should have just repaid the players and rebuilt traffic from scratch.
If he couldn't well to bad for him.
The Us Players would have gotten their money back yes, But the ROW players having to play to get their money back in incremented bonuses IMO was pretty Douchey.
Why should I play to get my money owed to me.
Sorry , Just ranting here a bit and just as pissed as everyone else with all of the crap. I am sure most of you feel like a mushroom too. Kept in the dark and fed nothing but manure.

That's not true. They were talking about cashouts, but it seems you'd had your full bankroll from day 1 avalaible to play with. Altough no one really knows what was the last repayment plan offered by Tapie.

Don't you think the Tapie's would be whining if they wanted to pay everyone back and were refused?

Didn't you see the Tapie Group's communique? Their language was just spin for admitting only micro-stake players would be refunded in the short and middle term?

Let me put it this way. The people that know the answer will not tell you because negotiations are ongoing and there is no reason to put a potential settlement at risk. There are people that think they know, they would be feeling the same, they would not tell you for the same reason.
Anyone that answers this question to you at this time, does not know, but is only guessing to sound like an insider, so probably should be ignored.

Clear as mud?

most players would of been given access to their full bank roll to play with. There would of been restrictions on cash outs based on amount of play. No deposit was required.

IIRC, Once you passed the original unrestricted $100, the balance that could be available for play was based on your track record of what category of play you fit into before BF. If the amount that they put into the available for play column was not sufficient for the stakes you wanted to play, you would have had to deposit to make up the difference.
Some of your restricted balance would become unrestricted based on your "rakeback" and the formula for that was also varied based on prior play. Winnings based on real money you deposited would be unrestricted.

That would be me.
If I could afford to escrow it, I would happily bet you minimum 5 figures that I was right.
Its the truth and you will never hear it from the DOJ.

http://diamondflushpoker.com/2012/04...act-vs-fiction