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%

10-10-2011 , 10:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hdemet
Well I would then say that if they dont give it up voluntarily then let them be bankrupted and then none of them can ever show their faces in public again or benefit from their ill gotten gains.

However if they falsely declare bankruptcy or can be shown to have hidden away assets then I would assume they would go to prison too for contempt of court.

No free passes for ANY of them as it isnt their money and it never was and they never had any legal right to it.

So the real problem is not in finding an investor but how to claw back the money form the shareholders.

This is where efforts should be directed via legal individual and class actions as they must not be allowed to keep what isnt rightfully theirs.
Actually by law, you can t force someone to return dividends. If dividends were issued illegally, then you sue the person/persons who issued or approved the dividend
10-10-2011 , 11:59 AM
Hdemet,

has anyone you know been successful in this small claims foray? I don't understand why you are saying that we will definitely win?

Max claim on there is 2000EUR
10-10-2011 , 12:02 PM
So no more articles,no more news,no more Ifrah or anything from the investors?info from DOJ,anything????
10-10-2011 , 12:03 PM
The DOJ and Group Bernard Tapie are having a very important meeting in 2 hours. The one where the DOJ tells GBT what they think about letting them prop up FTP for business outside the US.

Not sure how long before we hear anything about how it went, though.
10-10-2011 , 12:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by *******
The DOJ and Group Bernard Tapie are having a very important meeting in 2 hours.

Not sure how long before we hear anything about how it went, though.
Where did you hear this? Last report was that the meeting was scheduled for Tuesday.

BTW I emailed Ifrah this morning he had no update.
10-10-2011 , 12:05 PM
its slowly getting darker and darker......
10-10-2011 , 12:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jweez
Where did you hear this? Last report was that the meeting was scheduled for Tuesday.

BTW I emailed Ifrah this morning he had no update.
Did they change it to Tuesday? My info is 8 days old.
10-10-2011 , 12:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by *******
Did they change it to Tuesday? My info is 8 days old.
The word middle of last week was a follow-up phone meeting scheduled for Friday 10/7 and in-person meeting Tuesday 10/11.
10-10-2011 , 12:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gankstar
I'm not sure anything he said was conspiratorial.
Well -- I agree with you, in principle, but it was definitely conspiratorial.

A better way to put it would be: conspiracies happen. They're not all equivalent to faked moon landings and UFO abductions.

In fact one could make the argument that the smearing of the word conspiracy is a conspiracy in and of itself. It makes it very easy for shady people to run off with all our money, when they keep the unwashed classes fighting amongst each other and ridiculing anyone who has the audacity to criticize something about it.

Some conspiracies are valid (JFK assassination), some have a kernel of truth mixed with a lot of ridiculous speculation and exaggeration (9/11), and others are just complete BS (like the faked moon landing). The word itself does not denote illegitimacy; each case needs to be evaluated on its own merits.
10-10-2011 , 12:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDarkElf
I think you forgot to mention the role of the Illuminati in all of this.

A real bonus would be a tie-in with phony landing on the Moon.
Your abusive ad hominem attack does not mean anything to me. Care to point out what exactly that is in my statement is false?
10-10-2011 , 12:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamiller866
Let me try to express my opinion this way. Hypothetically, let's say the court agrees with these lawyers that FTP doesn't fit the definition of a gambling business. The UIGEA violations are now off the table. The DOJ then charges them with ....
What the DOJ might or might not do in that case, wasn't the issue.
10-10-2011 , 01:04 PM
dunno if this is linked here yet:

http://pokerfuse.com/news/poker-room...-honor-system/

can they go even lower?

“[The AGCC] was aware all along that [player’s] funds had been commingled with [Full Tilt’s] own funds,” but, he added, “Full Tilt had indicated to the DOJ that those funds had been held in segregated accounts.” However, the AGCC was “never concerned about it” because reports received from Full Tilt indicated there was “sufficient cash to cover player liabilities.”

So, they knew all along it was dodgy as hell but were "never concerned about it"????
10-10-2011 , 01:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sakipdsa
dunno if this is linked here yet:

http://pokerfuse.com/news/poker-room...-honor-system/

can they go even lower?

“[The AGCC] was aware all along that [player’s] funds had been commingled with [Full Tilt’s] own funds,” but, he added, “Full Tilt had indicated to the DOJ that those funds had been held in segregated accounts.” However, the AGCC was “never concerned about it” because reports received from Full Tilt indicated there was “sufficient cash to cover player liabilities.”

So, they knew all along it was dodgy as hell but were "never concerned about it"????
Nope, especially when the FTP ToS that you agreed to stated the funds weren't segregated.

ZOMG, FTP took rake from the pot and AGCC aren't bothered by it
10-10-2011 , 01:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by three_dee
In fact one could make the argument that the smearing of the word conspiracy is a conspiracy in and of itself. It makes it very easy for shady people to run off with all our money, when they keep the unwashed classes fighting amongst each other and ridiculing anyone who has the audacity to criticize something about it.
QFT.

It's hard to believe when you look at where Lederer was on BF that he didn't know beforehand what was coming down. There are wheels inside wheels in this thing and the players will be the last ones to be able to unravel it all. But if the point is to make online poker legal here for someone to get $, that's okay, we'll benefit in the end anyway.
10-10-2011 , 01:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hdemet
http://www.courts.ie/Courts.ie/Libra...ndocument&l=en

This is a link to to the Irish small claims online procedure

It doesnt cost a lot and you will defintiely win and then will have a claim on any FTP money that they have and shouldnt take more than a few weeks( assuming Pocket Kings owe the money and not some other sub dic=vision of FTP)

Trouble is you are probably better off going after Tiltware in California and I cant find an equivalent link for small claims procedures in USA online
First of all small claims cases can be postponed. Secondly, you are just wasting FTP lawyer money by doing this and or giving them more rational to sell software and not pay the players back.
10-10-2011 , 01:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prospace
First of all small claims cases can be postponed. Secondly, you are just wasting FTP lawyer money by doing this and or giving them more rational to sell software and not pay the players back.
That's OK. FTP has all the rationale they need to not pay the players back.

They excel in thievery.
10-10-2011 , 01:37 PM
This thread is more tilting than the topic it regarding!
10-10-2011 , 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReflexAction
QFT.

It's hard to believe when you look at where Lederer was on BF that he didn't know beforehand what was coming down. There are wheels inside wheels in this thing and the players will be the last ones to be able to unravel it all. But if the point is to make online poker legal here for someone to get $, that's okay, we'll benefit in the end anyway.
And this is the point where all the conspiracy theories fall apart.

BF happened, and we still have no legislation concerning poker. And many in the casino community itself don't see it happening anytime soon.
10-10-2011 , 01:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gankstar
I'm not sure anything he said was conspiratorial.

I mean, corporations here that missed the boat on the ground floor of online poker obviously like the idea of booting the top sites out of the U.S. market so they can use government laws (protectionism) to take over that market uncontested and monopolize it.

It's protectionism 101.

It's not a coincidence or conspiracy that the UGIEA was slipped into an unrelated Bill at the last minute when passed either.

Who paid for this law to be passed? Surely you don't think laws get passed without in this country without legal bribes (lobbying money). There isn't law passed that doesn't benefit some large corporation at the expense of competitors, and therefore consumers...albeit they are under the guise of "public good" usually. It's rather naive to think otherwise.

How law is passed in the USA:

1. A lobbyist begins legal bribes to lock out competition and hurt consumers by proxy, for their benefit in terms of increased or maintained market share

2. The Congress stalls this legislation for as long as possible to extort as much money as possible from the lobbyists in question (usually both sides of the issue, highest bidder wins)

3. The law is written by the lobbyists via Congressional aids

4. The Congress passes the law, usually without reading it...for plausible deniability come election cycles

5. The sausage is made, and the public is told it makes the water cleaner and air safer, go back to sleep sheep

What about that is a conspiracy?

There is no doubt there is move on to "regulate" poker...but not to make it legal only (what we all want)...but to allow a monopoly grip on it by domestic business interests which can only lead to US (the consumers) being exploited in any number of ways (higher rakes, taxed deposits, taxed withdrawls, etc.; ALL on top of the already taxed paychecks used to deposit, and the already taxed income those withdraws fund).

See, poker is already taxed. It didn't need protectionist regulation to be made safe...it needed LEGALIZED, and that's it. From there, HARM and FRAUD are illegal in U.S. courts, and recompense could be derived from those defrauding players DEVOID of additional pre-emptive regulation.

I'm all for regulating these bodies...but it has to be done independently, not via some USA only market or ONLY in conjunction with USA corporates. The whole reason these crap regulators exist now (AGCC) is because it is ILLEGAL. It's not that we need better regulators per se, it's that we need standing in court, and therefore regulators with teeth. Without those teeth, no regulation body has any merit whatsoever.

Am I wrong here? Anyone? (and if I am please correct me, I'm not a lawyer)
Darkelf is not aware of the Jack Abramoff - Native American Casino debacle. Jeff Ifrah actually worked for the same firm that Abramoff worked for at the time of the scandal. Jeff still has financial interest in that law firm. The firm is Greenberg Traurig http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffifrah.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenberg_Traurig
In January 2001, lobbyist Jack Abramoff left Preston Gates & Ellis to join Greenberg Traurig. Abramoff brought a book of business then worth more than $6 million annually to Greenberg Traurig, according to his own estimates. At the firm he assembled "Team Abramoff," a lobbying team that was involved in the Jack Abramoff Indian lobbying scandal and the monetary influence of Jack Abramoff. A Greenberg spokesman said that its federal lobbying revenue in 2005 was 1 percent of its total revenues of $860 million.

In 2000, before Abramoff joined the firm, Greenberg had $3.3 million in lobbying fees. After he joined in 2001, the firm took in $16.2 million in fees. By 2002, that number jumped to $17.7 million, and $25.5 million by 2003.[13] The firm became one of the top 10 of Washington lobbying firms, moving from 16th place to fourth, according to the National Journal.[14]

In early 2004 Greenberg Traurig fired Abramoff and subsequently received praise from federal investigators and members of Congress for its cooperation in the Abramoff investigation, according to the ABA Journal.[15]

On July 12, 2006, the Alabama-Coushatta tribe filed a federal racketeering lawsuit against now-convicted Abramoff and his cohorts. Greenberg Traurig was not a named defendant. Its lawsuit states that "There was a nexus between Greenberg, the enterprise and the pattern of racketeering." According to the suit, internal Greenberg e-mails showed that Abramoff associate Michael Scanlon, although not a member of the firm, "billed hours to tribal clients through Greenberg and that members of the law firm, including attorneys Kevin Ring, Shawn Vasell, Stephanie Leger, Todd Boulanger and others, fabricated hours and time entries for Scanlon." The suit also says the firm allowed checks sent by the tribe to a bogus Abramoff-linked think tank to be funneled and cashed through Greenberg Traurig.[13]


Here is how the Lobbyist under Abramoff worked:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ab...bbying_scandal
Allegation of double dealing

On June 22, 2000, Susan Ralston e-mailed Abramoff, "I have 3 checks from elot: (1) 2 checks for $80K payable to ATR and (2) 1 check to TVC for $25K," [...] "Let me know exactly what to do next. Send to Grover? Send to Rev. Lou?"[19]

Thus eLottery money went through Norquist's foundation, Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), the Faith and Family Alliance, and Reed's company, Century Strategies, while the last check was sent to Sheldon's Traditional Values Coalition (TVC).

In 2000, Abramoff forced the Choctaws to give the Alabama Christian Coalition of America $1.15 million in installments. Norquist agreed to pass the money on to the Coalition and another Alabama antigambling group, both of which Reed was mobilizing for the fight against a proposed Alabama state lottery.

In 2002, after Abramoff worked with Reed to close the casino of the Tigua tribe, he persuaded the tribe to hire him to lobby Congress to reopen the casino.

Of the $7.7 million Abramoff and Scanlon charged the Choctaw for projects in 2001, they spent $1.2 million on their behalf and split the rest in a scheme they called "gimme five."


So basically, Jack Abramoff would use organizations like Focus on Family to put pressure on government officials and bodies to shut down Indian Casinos.
The government would shut them down, then Abramoff would contact them and say he could get them re-opened again for the right amount of money. The Indian casinos would then pay him a retainer and make donations to certain organization and PACs his friends had. The money would be distributed through the PACs to many influential politicians and the Casinos would be reopened.

So it is certainly plausible the Caesars / Wynn / NFL (Rooneys) are using these same tactics to shut down Full Tilt Poker and buy them on the cheap. They don't want the players money to go to the DOJ but rather to stay in the accounts when they own it.

The NFL used lobbyist law firm Covington and Burling to deal with Focus on Family themselves. They basically have used a poetic license on Jack Abramoff's "gimme five" scheme:
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b9cbd...#axzz1aOxWZQjs

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b9cbdaae-4...#ixzz1aOyDxRLW

In a July 31 e-mail obtained by the Financial Times, Bill Wichterman – a Washington lobbyist for the NFL who served as a top adviser to former Republican majority leader Bill Frist – encouraged conservative groups to co-sign a letter to Congress that ostensibly was written by Focus on the Family. “The threat posed by the Frank legislation is very real, and we must actively work against it,” Mr Wichterman wrote.

The letter was co-signed by the Christian Coalition and American Values, among others. It urged members of Congress to protect the integrity of the 2006 Act, and cautioned that lawmakers should be wary of “misinformation campaigns” by “foreign gambling interests”.

The NFL said the sports league did not author the Focus on the Family letter and there was nothing unusual about its alliance with the Christian groups given their mutual opposition to gambling. Focus on the Family declined to comment.


Now keep in mind that Eric Holder represented the NFL as a lawyer when he WAS AT COVINGTON and BURLING. This is a major conflict of interest. He failed to mention this in the Senate DOJ over site committee.
10-10-2011 , 01:48 PM
Please move this to your own thread
10-10-2011 , 01:54 PM
Are better yet to the politics forum.
10-10-2011 , 01:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamiller866
What keeps being ignored in this 'poker is a game of skill' argument is that it was PartyPoker who used the "poker is a game of chance" argument to stay in the US market despite the Wire Act up until the UIGEA was passed.

If poker is ruled to be a game of skill, that isn't going to suddenly make online poker legal, as it will then fall directly into the qualifications for gambling under the Wire Act.

So I don't see what the point is of arguing that they didn't violate the UIGEA, the situation is a catch 22 until poker specific legislation is passed.
Please go to the legislation forum and read up on the various legal analyses. Almost every word you have written is incorrect.
10-10-2011 , 02:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vamooose
Nope, especially when the FTP ToS that you agreed to stated the funds weren't segregated.

ZOMG, FTP took rake from the pot and AGCC aren't bothered by it
You do realize that FTP had stated before Black Friday that funds were segregated right? They only changed it in their terms and conditions after it was obvious that they were not. I don't think Alderney knew anything about what is in FTPs terms and conditions though so it is not surprising that you are unaware as well.
10-10-2011 , 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDarkElf
And this is the point where all the conspiracy theories fall apart.

BF happened, and we still have no legislation concerning poker. And many in the casino community itself don't see it happening anytime soon.
Maybe so. Or we just have no idea what the point really is.
10-10-2011 , 04:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaneO19
You do realize that FTP had stated before Black Friday that funds were segregated right? They only changed it in their terms and conditions after it was obvious that they were not. I don't think Alderney knew anything about what is in FTPs terms and conditions though so it is not surprising that you are unaware as well.
^^this @vamoose the agcc shill

      
m