They have seen! That's how the deal got done! That's why this is all happening.

When you buy a company, you can't just write give them a hand written IOU. You have to show you have the funds to make the deal work.

If you would actually do that, it would be one thing. But your continued insistence that every single piece of news is bad news for ROW players is getting flat out absurd. Knock it off ffs.

Morphy

There are people who believe that Tapie would pretty much spend (probably) ~20 million during the negotiation process, give 80 million to the DOJ, and assume 150 million in liabilities just to say:

Just kidding guys! No withdrawals!

I am entitlted to my opinions as others are entitlted to theirs.

Unfortunately I havent seen Tapie hand over any money yet and there is still no completed deal.

First hurdle (DoJ) seems to have finally now been overcome lets see what happens at the next/subsequent ones.

First battle has been won but the war is not yet over comes to mind.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the idea that it isn't over yet, it isn't over yet. Lots of things can happen.

The thing I object to is that you seem to think the deal will go through, but it will come with some dire consequences for different groups of people. There is absolutely no evidence to support this at all, and you're just pulling it out of thin air because you never thought the deal could go through in the first place because of issues you thought wouldn't be overcome.

Cliffs:

ATM --> Cashout --> Titties --> PM picture to Hdemet

I dunno what the fuss is about. If this guy wants to get FTP2 up and running hes gonna have to pay back ROW players. He didnt just give away $80million so he could make the ROW players jealous.

Diamond_flush,

i) Do we know if there is a possible fine for FTP to pay in addition to the $80,000,000?
ii) Will the DOJ still go after the board of director's money (that they alleged came from stolen players funds in the 'ponzi scheme' are were pursuing when they amended the complaint)?

Also thanks a lot for all your work on this matter!

now now, just because the DOJ signed an agreement stipulating that GBT would have to repay the ROW in full, and GBT signed this agreement too, and FTP is likely agreeing to this deal, and very respected media is reporting this, and GBT clearly wanted to acquire this company, doesn't mean a meteor wont hit the earth.

- OR - this contract and deal is fake and there is actually a double super secret REAL contract that supersedes the one that is being reported in the media.

There are still many ways players might not get paid and then HD will be right!

We have to wait until every possible vapor excuse with no factual basis is exhausted before declaring him entirely, unequivocally incorrect.

It is subject to an agreement btween the DoJ and FTP. GBT's descrption of the deal doesn't include it being subject to a GBT/FTP deal, but FTP's description does.

We don't know that the $80M will go to US players.

+1

However, it is also possible that ROW players will get more than US players. I'm sure US players would like to see assurances that this won't happen either.

Talk about taking something and preenting it COMPLETELY out of context

I will NEVER BE HAPPY and omitting the rest of the sentance

You are an absolute disgrace calling yourself a journalist.

How dare you even pretend to be impartial and objective when all you have done to date is take statements by people like Ray Bitar and give extra weight and credence to their propoganda and lies and allow them to give credence to untruths and statements they have made via your Subject Poker website.

Not only that but you have made false accusations about me in the past without substantiating them and not even having the decency to ask me for my version of things which any self respecting individual never mind a so called journalist would normally do. But then Hey why let anything like the truth get int he way of a stroy even a fabricated one by you.

I challenge each and every one of you out there to take any statement I have made and show how it has been proven false to date but make sure you take it in its entirety and dont do a hatchet job and distort it int he way Diamond_Flush chooses to.

The only way any of you have done this to date is by distorting stuff I have actually written and I cannot be held responsible for those that are unable to comprehend basic English.

One of the main bones of contention some on this thread have with me is claims about my saying this and that and whatever so I will address what I think some of you think is a major issue surrounding Tapie.

To summarize I have said NOBODY will pay $350+ Million to date for FTP as it is simply not worth it and that includes Tapie.

Tapie so far is committed to $80 million plus whatever he may or may not offer to RoW players and is in no way stumping up $350+ million for FTP.

When and if he does I will revisit this subject.

I believe Tapie is very bad news for players because he is a crook and untrustworthy and we will soon see how great a saviour he actually is.

I have also stated repayment of player funds are heavily dependant on money coming from sources other than Tapie.

Now If you want a debate then present my quotes here in their entirety and show me where they are mistaken or wrong?

Other wise STFU and that particularly applies to Diamond_Flush.

I can easily take quotes by him and distort them in the way he has done with mine and it is below the belt totally uncalled for and absolutely disgraceful behaviour.

How would you like it if I took quotes of yours and cut them up and presented them in a totally misrepresentational manner?

Why are u crying man ? Nobody push you to play ever again on Full Tilt... get your fkn money and do whatever u want with em and leave other's to live and to make choice's where they want to play and what they want to do with their money.
no offence, just you are bitching too much ...

BLUE FINAL TABLES - OM NOM NOM .

Relax. DF's post was obviously a joke, and quite a funny one at that. Even journalists are entitled to have a sense of humour. I'd be surprised if one other person in this thread besides you thinks DF's post was 'an absolute disgrace'.

Every one else it seems knew this agreement would work out exactly the way it has, so let me be the one to say I'm stunned.

A few weeks ago I heard that the DOJ wanted $200M from Tapie, so the total cost to Tapie would be close to $400M and he was offering less than half of that.

Then two weeks ago they reached a deal in principle, I ASSuMEd the DOJ had caved by allowing Tapie to pay 80M and the rest in installments making the total price close to $400M.

Now we find out that Tapie actually managed to get the DOJ to completely fold to him, no future installments so he is purchasing FTP and getting the fines dropped for 100M less than FTP owed the players,

The online poker industry assumes that 1/3 of every deposit will eventually become rake, so if Tapie treats ROW debt as deposits on his new site, he is only eating $100M, so $80M (DOJ) +$100M (ROW) + ~$20M (get site up and running) = Tapie bought FTP for $200M?!

PartyPoker never dealt a hand after the UIGEA went into effect and they paid a $105M fine, but FTP's fine is apparently the cost of doing business under the UIGEA (seized funds) + 80M - 150M (US Player funds).

Am I really the only one surprised by this?

Edit: I forgot to account for the fact that the DOJ has apparently nixed Tapie's idea of buying Fergusen's debt with stock in the new FTP, so he may have to come up with the cash to get CF's vote, so Tapie's cost may be closer to $250M (unless CF as the only Director who elected not to accept all his dividends from player funds end up getting no compensation for it).

gawd it's so hard to scroll through to all the pop champagne and rub on titties posts with all of the Hdemet 'sky is falling' spam throughout this thread!

You obviosuly have trouble with your comprehension so I suggest you put me on ignore.

I feel like i'm the only one who would get punished / infracted / tempbanned for telling hdemet the things he needs to be told, and calling him the very appropriate names he needs to be referred to as.

It gets even better. According to the WSJ (link in other thread?) for his $80M payment Tapie gets $40M worth of (presumeably European) bank accounts freed up. So revise your estimate down to $160M.

I certainly didn't predict it would end up exactly this way, as I never predicted any particular outcome, just tried to broaden people's perceived range of possible outcomes. I'll admit to a certain amount of surpise that it seems they are getting it so cheap. OTOH the DoJ's line seems to be explained by the old saying "You can't get blood from a stone". What will surprise me a bit more will be if FTP settles (including shareholders' vote) all their parts of the civil case before the end of the month. I'll be extremely surprised if all US players are paid out in full before the end of February. I'll be a bit less surprised if ROW players are paid in full (or have their full balances available for play) by then.

Harry, you like asking questions and demanding answers a lot. Now here's a question for you, I'd appreciate your answer:

You say that you don't see any guarantees for the RoW players and that it's possible that Tapie could somehow screw us over. Tell me what do you think the chances are that the players that were screwed by Tapie are going to keep playing on FT and how that is going to affect his new investment.

Yeah just caught up with the news and that $40M rebate he is getting, and it's still possible he could be paying the $80M in installments. Regardless of if he somehow (how?) manages to screw up the business and lose money, getting FTP for this price is a flat out steal.

As far as getting paid, It's probable that US players may have to wait for a conviction or plead to get remission, but SDNY is like 97% in that area so FTP$ should be pretty close to the value of $ right now.

As for RoW, not allowing withdrawals is like the only possible way Tapie could screw up his money printing machine, so I'd be shocked if he did that but it clearly wouldn't be the first time something surprised me in this ordeal.

It seems you believe the remission fund will be large enough to cover all US player balances (perhaps net of phantom deposits). Does this mean you think that money seized on or before BF will be available for remission payments? What about the $80M? Given the DoJ statements so far, I think there is some reason to doubt that they are treating those as related to a crime that resulted in player losses. That crime would appear to me to be limited to the improper dividend payments, and probably concurrent statements about player funds being safe. Since these were not the actions that led to the BF and pre-BF seizures, nor to the forfeiture allegations that may be settled by FTP resulting in a sale to GBT, I think there is some reason to doubt that these funds will be available for remission. The DoJ has made reference to attempts to recover from Directors, and these statements have been in the context of discussion of remission. I am not 100% certain that even funds recovered from Directors could be used for remission if no related criminal charge is laid.

I think it all goes back to MythelBridge's (sp?) question when the deal in principle was first announced, if you believe that the DOJ is motivated to see that 'victim's' are repaid (which I believe they are) then we don't need to concern ourselves with the technicalities, because the DOJ can structure the deal in order for it to work in our favor.

The fact that they are even calling us victims and referring to repayment as remission is a good indication of their motives, and as the PPA said, the DOJ has a lot of discretion over remission and if necessary remission regulations are easier to have tweaked than statutes.

Just as a hypothetical example the DOJ could write the agreement so that the $80M wasn't a purchase price but a monetary settlement in lieu of forfeiture, which would then qualify to be used for remission.

Ultimately, if US players aren't paid it won't be because the DOJ wants to see victims made whole but the law wouldn't allow it, it would have to be that the DOJ doesn't want us to get paid and wrote up the agreement to make it look like the law stopped them, and every reasonable indication so far has been that they do want us to get paid.

cliffs plz ?

We have quite different opinions on this, I guess.

I don't think we have enough evidence to decide whether the DoJ wants players to get their balances, or rather wanted the sites to pay the players. I think there is just as much reason to believe that their motivaton was getting money out of the site's hands as in to the players' hands. The motion to refuse players filing an interest in forfeited funds doesn't sound like the action of a DoJ that really, really wants the players to get the money.

I don't think the DoJ has unlimited leeway to structure a deal with whatever money is required to pay players in full. Specifically such leeway that they can magically decide that money seized for an unrelated offence can be used for remission. I'm not sure why the DoJ would have tied recovering funds from Directors to discussion of remission if they already had enough money to pay full remission.

I don't think the DoJ has ever explicitly called players victims. Some of us just inferred it when they used the word "player" in one paragaph and "victim" in the next paragraph.

I think that if $80M was a payment in lieu of forfeiture, rather than proceeds from sale of a forfeited asset, that it actually reduces the likelyhood of it being available for remssion. AIUI, proceeds of sale of forfeited assets are available for remission, as long as the forfeiture was for a crime related to the victim's loss. It is not clear to me that the assets FTP would forfeit and that would then get sold to GBT would have been forfeited due to a crime related to the players losing their money. The cause of forfeiture was the original counts in the civil complaint, which were possibly not related to the players' loss. If, however, those offences are deemed to be related then proceeds of sale are remittable. Payment in lieu may not be.

Ultimately, if players are not paid in full, I believe it will either be because they are deemed not to qualify as victims of a crime related to forfeitures, or there were not enough forfeited assets related to a crime that caused player losses. This will be, not because that is what the DoJ wanted to happen, but rather because it is what an objective reading of the law and facts yields.

Please note I am not asserting that the cause of forfeiture for BF and earlier seizures definitely isn't an offence related to player losses, just that it may not be. If it is a related offence, it would seem the DoJ has sufficient funds to fully pay US players, even allowing for reasonable costs.