Read the statement more clearly. It doesn't say that FTP had $331M taken, it says it outlined Seizures of $311M....that doesn't mean it was all FTPs player money.

If this were the case they never would have allowed Pokerstars to refund its US customers.

+1

Actually, the AGCC can refer this to the States Financial Crimes Unit (they actually have one). Don't forget that PK has a server farm in Guernsey which falls under their jurisdiction. As I see it they can seize cash, but I dont know if that also included assets or even if they will take this step given the DOJ involvement. Who knows if that will happen....but it is an option.

[ ] AGCC is part of the American justice system

Hdemet,

Why do you think the RoW player database is worth $100 million ?

Because if you had the software and were willing to spend $100M to promote the site you would obtain the same size player base you would retain from the old FTP.

There is no guarantee all the RoW players from the old FTP will continue to play on FTP under new management. And even some of them do play on FTP, they will keep their bankrolls minimum possible which will obviously reduce Cash Flow at FTP.

Me thinks, the new management should start a brand new site from scratch with new name and FTP software. People who loved to play on old FTP will get back to the new site anyway without much advertizing.

*****Disclaimer: A good portion of my following post could be wildly speculative and be missing key info*****

Lets look at full tilts revenue the last 4 years, since that is what we have most numbers for.

450 million paid in dividends.
+119 million if they did not credit players with vapor money that they can now not recover
+331 million seized by the doj
+very high processing fees for getting money off the site (i think somewhere between 7%-15% but i could be way off on this, I'll leave this number out for now but keep this in mind)
+50 million that was still in ftp accounts on black friday

=

950 million dollars in revenue the last 4 years.
-300 owed to players (and we are discounting the fact that a good portion of that money would likely stay online and be raked back to the site, so it's not a total loss)

= 650 million
/4 for each year

163 million in annual revenue.

u.s. players made up ~40% of the player base.

so you are left with ~100 million dollars in annual revenue for operating world wide.

Keep in mind this is the most pessimistic number I can come up with. This 100 million number does not take into account not dealing with large payment processing fees, it ignores the fact that the 300 million paid to players isn't just all going to disappear, as a good portion will probably still play on the site (70% are losers and will give most of their money back in rake).

So that 100 million number is probably quite a bit higher.

And then we aren't evaluating the eventual prospect of getting back into a regulated u.s. market where you don't have huge processing fees, lots more people will be able to easily deposit, you'll be able to advertise more easily, and you can tie a sportsbook to your site.

They also will owe a fee to the DOJ, which can either be paid with the seized assets, or over a long period of time (it doesn't necessarily have to be paid up front). So on a year by year basis it shouldn't affect their bottom line too much if it's around ~100 mil settlement.

So yes there is considerable value in ftp.

^^^ That is basically what I am saying. Starting from scratch with $100M to promote the site is going to give you the same base as spending the $100M to obtain the old FTP clientele - because a good chunk of the latter are gone.

the 128 million number is the shortfall resulting from ftp crediting players with vapor money. only 9 million of that was recoverable. DOJ had nothing to do with that.

That's definitely not true. It is very very hard to gain market share in online poker from scratch. That's the reason that the network model became popular and why the stupid affiliate model became popular, and more importantly, it's the reason why PokerScout's list is mostly composed ofsites with effectively 0 traffic.

If it were profitable to spend 9 figures to start a new poker site (not skins) in the current climate, new large poker sites (not skins) would have been springing up. The fact of the matter is that even many skins that did not have to overcome the problem that it takes traffic to get more traffic and spent lots of money on advertising failed miserably (like Doyle's Room, Victory Poker, etc.) because people often go with the largest names when they choose a poker site.

The question is not whether spending $x on a new poker site is better than spending the same amount buying FTP because there's really no question that spending $x on a new poker site would unprofitable. The question is whehter spending $x on FTP is better than the current alternative high-risk investments.

I just woke up and saw all the misinformation being spread as fact. I don't know anyway to give a rebuttal without sounding condescending so I apologize in advance.

The DOJ has not taken the position that playing online poker is a federal crime. They've taken the position that circumventing a banks effort to comply with the UIGEA is a federal crime.

The DOJ can't say whether or not they will use the funds seized from FTP for remission to FTP's victims until the case has been settled for legal reasons.

The most obvious being that until they win the case there was no crime to be a victim of, and pledging to do so if they do win could be ruled as attempting to taint the jury pool.

Your way of doing things is strange and I think you are confusing revenue with net profit. FTP probably had revenues of about $1B per year. But they were only netting about $100M to $150M per year, and this doesn't include the frozen/stolen/phantom funds.

But a big chunk of the old player base is gone (US players, ROW players who have lost faith in the site/moved on/we). I doubt if they could net more than $50M per year (which would require at least $200M in revenue), and thus, see the $300M debt for player funds as being a deal breaker.

i did not confuse revenues with profit. I went out of my way to say revenues. I don't know about their operating costs.

Just to be clear, the DOJ has definitely taken the position that operating a poker site which accepts real money play from players located in the US is a crime. That position accounts for 7 of the 9 criminal charges in the original Black Friday criminal indictment and forms the major legal basis for the civil request to order forfeiture of the sites' assets.

The DOJ does not take the position that playing online poker on such a site while located in the US is a crime.

Skallagrim

Fair enough.

I just don't consider FTP a "big name" - it's too dirty.

Well, rake is basically the main revenue for a poker site.

Your "revenues" started with dividend payments and listed uncollected deposits. I don't think of either one of those as revenues.

Good catch, the word playing definitely belongs in that sentence.

Not the same figure I was asking about. I was referring to whatever amount it was that FTP claimed the DOJ had seized before BF... 115 mil?

To anyone buying the idea that FTP was oh so close to pulling off a deal that would have made you whole, if only they had been given more time. I ask you to consider that the only two parties with insider knowledge of FTP's books and this investor (DOJ and Alderney) independently came to the conclusion that the only way we are going to get remission is through civil authorities.

We know how much FTP owes us, we don't know how much they owe anyone else. The people who do have that information view the business to be insolvent.

i subtracted from the total what players were owed . . .

ok well you said 128 million originally, which is a specific number alluding to the shortfall.

The AGCC came out today saying the DOJ seized 331 million dollars from FTP. SO that ~115 million number has been modified. Although, the 331 number doesn't include JUST player funds, if I am not mistaken.

they absolutely did not come to this conclusion. The investors had yet to meet with the DOJ, and the AGCC never commented on specifics relating to the investor. They did not say the investor was not real, or did not have the funds, or were not serious. The AGCC just elected to save it's own ass.

The AGCC also found numerous violations so according to what their job is, they had every right to shut full tilt down.