That's right...blame the girl in the short skirt for getting raped. Why don't you go play a game of "hide and go **** yourself"?

I am far from a lawyer, or any sort of financial / legal expert, but it seems to me that remission paid (and I hope i'm not just speaking from a wishful thinking perspective) out would have to be much faster than in some of the examples / past cases,

if only for the fact that who is owed what should be (in 99% of the cases) very clear, as the balances owed to each player should still be recorded in the FTP databases and clearly stated. Its not like this was some massive chain of wronged people, it was very direction from FTP to each individual who played on FTP (in this case, American FTP players), there really is no middle man, unless i'm not seeing the whole picture?

Of course, one exception to all this would be the people who deposited and did not have the funds withdrawn from their bank accounts, but even that should be easy to address by (at the minimum) deducting the owed funds from their balances if the balance is greater than whats owed.

I suspect that stance is based on someone in Spain, or wherever, not knowing, understanding the facts. While it is certainly possible they could block for such reasons, I suspect they don't understand the deal or what is happening and believe it to just be the same entity. I think it is highly likely the position is one based on ignorance of the facts, so whether it will be an issue or not is to be seen. A country making such demands may just cause them to forgo their market entirely and perhaps cause issues with repayments to their players. It seems an irrational position given this is a third party with no tie to the stealing of the money stepping in to pay some of it/all of it back.

THIS! I came in here for cliffs. I don't know where they are now, I'm annoyed with trying to find them and annoyed with reading the posts from the ignorant rabble that always swamp important threads.

so what date now is our date? or wait again for a few weeks until DOJ says YES ? or?

but really though, wheres my money?

I love how this thread is full of nits. Think of the worst possible thing that could happen in some alternate bizzaro universe and declare it as fact. I'm gonna collect some of these and make a new thread making fun of all these people when we get our money back soon.

dude brah man that would be an extreme epic 1337 thread.

I guess you could say 2+2 pulled a...

[puts on glasses]

Bodog.

YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HH!

Are durrr and galfond still putting up their millions? It's Christmas/Hanukkah time and FT still hasn't paid us a dime.

I found a few more interesting entries regarding remission:
A list of DOJ cases nationwide, provided by DOJ: http://www.justice.gov/usao/briefing...ing_money.html
They can be googled individually to see typical times.

One of the more recent large cases was AdSurfDaily, its claim period expired January 19, 2011 and distributions began September 26, 2011, see: http://www.ponzitracker.com/main/tag/remission and
http://www.justice.gov/usao/dc/news/...ep/11-427.html

One more year till well know

All this talk of not paying players back, or not paying them back whole is madness.

For GBT it will be a "loss-leader", taking a hit in the 1st year by giving people their rolls back, but in future years re-couping that amount multiple times over in rake.

eg I have approx 5k roll on Stars, and have earned approx 125k VPPs this year, so have paid almost $23k in rake, minus approx 30% Rakeback = $16k.......and I only started playing on Stars in July after FTP shut down.

eg Achieving Iron man at 500 points x 20 days was worth approx $1700 rake per month to FTP, minus approx 30% rakeback = about $1200 per month = approx $14k per year.

Just sayin....

steelerian. 23 * 0,3

Zeus84. 23-(23*.3)

Soooo if the claim period lasts a year or two like some have mentioned, and payments don't start until months after that, does that mean it will still be years before anyone is paid?

That isn't really what a loss leader is. A loss leader is a product that is deliberately sold at a loss to attract customers to a retailer so that they can make an overall profit from them because of the other purchases the customer will make. I know what you are trying to say and I agree, its not a loss leader product though, its more of a liability or start up cost depending on which way you look at it.

So basically what your saying is your roll is small compared to the rake you generate.

Will you definitely play at FTP if you get your roll back, and definitely NOT if you don't?

Is there a reason there hasnt been an announcement by FTP or GBT? i mean if they have agreed why not tell it?? i dont get it..

I think this is a type of transaction where each situation is unique and therefore what has happened in the past is educational but may not be an accurate predictor of the outcome in this case. Having said that, it seems likely there will be a thirty day period commencing sometime after the "deal" is final to file a claim and then whatever time is necessary for an administrator to feel comfortable with the validity of the claims (I can't imagine this would be less than 2-3 months).
If there is one obvious thing I perceive as possibly delaying payments, it is resolving the phantom deposit issue (and how an administrator chooses to do that, i.e. if there are adequate funds to cover all claims, an administrator could choose to pay all those that have no phantom deposit issue and then proceed to resolve those remaining or an administrator could choose to make no payments until the phantom deposit issue is resolved or there could be some middle ground).
Maybe we'll all be surprised and the DOJ will pay very quickly based on BF balances. I don't think this will happen because DOJ is an organization full of lawyers and because of the phantom deposit issue; however, within the remission regulations, or mentioned by them, is the AG's authority for "restoration" which allows the use of forfeited assets to pay large numbers of victims quickly under certain circumstances and without their filing applications for remission.

Has anyone heard anything from Jeff Ifrah over the deal or any future plans?

I just found this article through google news:

http://www.compatiblepoker.com/poker...-advances/5265

I'm wondering about the following sentence at the end of the article:
"It is believed that players will need to provide evidence of the source of funds that they used to make deposits, as well as records of deposits and withdrawals at the site and, most importantly, prove compliance with federal income tax laws."

What I don't understand is how we prove to them how much money we had in our accounts that we won. Player deposits $600 and makes $$, cashes out some, and continues on. So you show the DOJ your deposit and how much you've withdrawn. If you withdrew more than $600, then you don't get your balance?

There's been a little talk wrt the legal implications of the DOJ refunding balances as opposed to deposits, so does anyone know if we get our balances as of April 15, 2011 or are they seriously refunding deposits? It would seem idiotic to me for them to reimburse actual deposits because that would cost way more than the $150M in player balances.

Doesn't make a lot of sense since wouldn't it be easier just to get deposit/withdrawal records direct from FTP? Of course player transfers and the like makes things a bit more complicated...

Agreed that it doesn't make much sense. Not to mention proving compliance with federal income tax laws would essentially become a tax audit. No way the DOJ get's involved in auditing the financial history of every person trying to make a withdrawal.

I recently contacted him, he said he had no comments, which is in complete contrast to his usual open emails. Thank the geniuses that mocked him for his help. How can one play poker (and manage multimillion businesses lol..) and not have an ounce of common sense?