I think I am going to send Full Tilt an email to see if I get a response.

Send Santa and the tooth fairy one too eh Kevmode

Why you even in this thread if your going to be negative? Do you even have any money on Tilt? Do you even play poker? What is your deal? I am fine with the discussion and peoples opinions but your getting high off needling me and people who have money stuck on Full Tilt. I actually like Full Tilt and want them to get out of this mess. Full Tilt was my favorite online poker room by 1000% and I want to be able to play on there again one day. If I have to move out of the country to do so then maybe I will. So before you start spewing just wait and see what happens on the 19th.

this might be a terrible idea but could we the players on mass buy fulltilt ?

get it up and running and everyone gets paid eventually

fyp

I doubt there is a significant price tag on Full Tilt anymore. The price of Full Tilt is being willing to take on its debt and legal obligations. Much like when a company is sold for $1, you aren't just buying the company for $1 but rather paying $1 for its company and accepting its millions/billions in debt as your own. In a way the players already own Full Tilt since the lion's share of Full Tilt's debt is owed to us. So tell me, how does it feel to own a poker site?

Kevmode you've avoided this question like the plague.

If nothing good comes out of the Sept. 19th hearing are you going to say "don't be negative, let's just wait and see what happens (insert subsequent hearing date here)"???

In other words you seem to keep positive regardless of what unfolds. If another extension is granted will your optimism dissipate at all or will you continue to be confident that you'll be up and Playing with the Pros in the very near future?

I get the feeling FTP could file for bankruptcy and all of the owners in prison and Kevmode will still be optimistic about the situation in some way...

Fwiw Kevmode I'd like to see everyone paid ASAP and the site back up and running under new, more competent ownership and believe it or not I wouldn't bet against it happening. Eventually.

Constumer [noun]: A player with money stuck on a website. A hybrid of "consumer" and "constipation".

feels pretty ****ty if i currently "own" a share of fulltilt, i have no power, i would have it up and running, wouldn't most of us? fulltilt delayed cause they have been looking to not lose everything they built no? players just want the thing operational to get their current money back.

I'd be happy to stick in a small investment with a gazillion other players and take a punt. They aren't going to throw us all in jail are they?

i admit i dont understand the inner workings of this kinda thing as well as others.

So were gonna pay ourselves?

lol well when you say it like that

get the site up, percentage cashouts over time, whatever works, appoint some wise dude to work out all that ****, fish will be back, games will be good

Diamond_Flush paraphrases from the Alderney eGambling Regulations: Regulation 231 is Titled Recourse to funds held by eGambling licensee. Everything after the bolded sentence is a good paraphrase of the content of part (2) of that regulation. Part (2) deals excusively with what the licensee can do with the funds. It does not address ownership of the funds. Neither the bolded assertion nor words of similar effect appear anywhere in the regulations. I think a careful study of the wording of the regulations can only properly lead to the conclusion that the regulations are ambiguous with respect to the ownership of funds once they have been deposited. I won't include my analysis in this post, but it is available if you want to see it.

It may be interesting to note that part (1) of Regulation 231 states: IOW regulation 231 does not apply if funds have not been deposited directly with a licensee.
Regulation 230 states: It is not absolutely clear, to me at least, that FTP customer funds were deposited directly with the licensee. It appears to be an open possibility that FTP customer funds were deposited with an associate of FTP, and that therefore Regulation 231 does not apply to FTP customer funds.

The regulations are a lot less specific about limitations on recourse to funds held by an associate. All they say is: Quite correct.

It has been discussed writing off debt for a % in the company. It has been discussed why this wouldn't work. Even if it could getting an agreement from the players would close to impossible.

On top of it the US players partly owning a poker company directed probably isn't a great idea either lol.

For those with large amounts, the battlefield/tusk are still waiting for their pennies on the dollar at best which clearly isn't a positive outcome if they go busto.

So it's like wanting to take a ****, but not being able to get it out? Hmmm, I do feel that way...

How many high limit players, or even medium limit players for that matter, gave cash to one of the Full Tilt owners in exchange for Full Tilt dollars to circumvent the difficulty of using an online payment processor?

Now for the more important question. How much of that cash was reported properly?

mmm, good point Sir

How much of it was paid back to the 'player funds' account, or even made it's way back to FTP / PK??

Always nice to get some tax free wonga (Lobster and Craps )

Why? They have had several months to get this business sold, and its value diminishes by the day. I know due diligence takes a while and there are various legal issues that any buyer would need to overcome, but if there is a serious buyer out there then there is no reason for it to take this long. I think it'll be wound up by the end of the year - I hope I'm wrong, but I'm basically writing the cash off that I have on there.

For those asking about the Neteller case, I did some research few weeks ago to settle most of the questions. Best to read for all important differences but AFAIR:

Looking in the rear view mirror – the NETELLER case

It took 6mths to get repaid.
They had a press release in 2 weeks saying how much was frozen.
Money was kept in segregated trust accounts (likely as per e-money Act (UK) regulations).
The two founders were in US custody and co-operated from the start
The claim was criminal forfeiture not civil for the company in the deferred prosecution agreement (DPA).

If I missed anything important then feel free to add to the thread, I can't remember that much from the time - one has to read teh 2p2 archiveserver now.

online poker is ****ing rigged

lets invest your money in guns and ammo instead

i ll not jump off a bridge alone

keep posting, I think you are a total level, but if you are legit and things do work out positively, you will be a legend on 2+2, you have even outlasted genher

genher has turned?

certainly we are all doomed then..

Can I ask, has FTP ever emailed a customer to explain the situation?

Obviously they might reply to a query, but has FTP or anyone repping them actually emailed you with an update on your money since BF?

didnt some blackcard member get some vague repsonce from FT ages ago, just along the lines of we are sorting the issue out please be patient, no real substance

they are too busy living their vegas highlife eating lobster and satisfy bitches with your money - no time to response to emails.

this **** will continue until someone shows them who the **** they play with.