All indications so far are that most people should expect to get their FTP balance, as shown in the cashier, minus (hopefully small) processing fees.

Those with phantom deposits, limbo withdrawals, or other complicating issues may be an exception.

But nobody knows for sure. All we can do is wait and see.

In what way? Getting it all, or getting none at all?

getting it corrected. If you had phantom deposits I would imagine they would be subtracted from your FTP balance

Please somebody give me some good news or at least a glimmer of hope.

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2012/0...anim-11718.htm

imo players really start to get angry now... it is time for them to make an effort and give at least an approximate (possible)relaunch date

Can people please stop linking articles that have already been linked twice on the same page even.

Not in my browser.

Umm, how about an investor has agreed to buy FTP and re-open it, through which all players are to be repaid one way or another? How about the DoJ has already met and agreed to terms with an investor and FTP has already met with said investor to agree to turn over everything so that FTP can be re-opened? I would say those are rather confidence inspiring considering where we were in late august.

Waiting sucks but considering the situation we could be much worse off.

only now?

Just curious what you mean by "our"

I would think they are acting in the best interests of the US players and are fine with getting rid of the ROW players ASAP.

I still wonder what protections the ROW players will be offered if we end up getting a bad deal.

Im guessing its too late then and we have no power to do anything.

The ROW player debt passes to GBT when they complete the purchase of FTP from DoJ...which means we benefit from the ability to sue GBT, either individually or via class action when they take ownership but....

Ofc, we won't need to sue.
GBT is buying an online poker company and might just be planning to reopen it to make some cash.
GBT will need licence if they like deposits by Visa or any other processor you've ever heard of.
GBT will need a licence in order to recoup the $40m paid and to ensure that $150m ROW player liability doesn't end up in court.
GBT will only get licence if they have funds to guarantee the ROW players deposits.
GBT wouldn't have bothered spending 'millions' arranging deals with DoJ and FTP if they didn't have $150m or didn't think they'd get a licence.

I'd say the chances of ROW seeing 100% are far greater than US but there are some (you in particular) that won't see sense til they have their money in their pocket.

They are buying FTP's forfeited assets from the DOJ. Are we sure that liabilities transfer that way?
I think it would be a bad business decision to screw the customers that would be their livelihood at least for the near future so hopefully they will pay us in full but maybe they don't have to.

They don't.
Agreed.

Pretty much entirely wrong.

They are reported to be buying assets, not the companies. The debt to players will not transfer as a result of buying assets. It might transfer as an addtional term of the sale. Players will likely not have any ability to sue GBT for FTP1 debts.

This much is correct.
True only if they plan to recoup their investment from operating profits.

A licence will not affect liabilities to FTP1 players.

This is true only if the only licence they seek is the one suspended but not revoked by the AGCC, or if they plan on crediting ROW players with past balances. There are no grounds for AGCC or any other licencing agency to refuse a new license to GBT if GBT doesn't credit FTP1 ROW players' balances.

The latter is certainly true, the former less certain.

I'd agree that ROW are more likely to see money first, but I'm less sure than you about 100% or "far greater".

No, the debt does not pass to GBT. FTP is forfeiting its assets to the DOJ. GBT is then buying those forfeited assets from the DOJ. There is no transfer of liabilities, which includes USA/ROW player debt. However, as reported, the terms of the sale would include an agreement that GBT will repay or make whole ROW players, and that the DOJ will take responsibility for US player balances (does not necessarily mean 100% payment, see below).


This is for the most part true. It wouldn't make any business sense for GBT to buy the FTP assets and then stiff ROW players. However, since the debt doesn't technically transfer over during the asset sale, GBT probably won't end up in court if they end up not paying 100% of ROW balances (depending on the terms of the agreements between FTP, GBT and the DOJ). Also, while they may need to have all ROW funds on hand in order to get/regain a license with the AGCC, that doesn't necessarily mean they have to allow for ROW players to be able to withdraw 100% of their FTP balance when FTP2 opens.

There is still the possibility that some balance will be repaid in equity in FTP2 (unlikely / bad idea IMO), or that players will have to unlock some/all of their balance by playing on FTP2 (more likely but still a bad idea IMO). I think the best strategy is for GBT to offer full cashouts for ROW players, with strong incentives (bonuses, player points, etc.) for players who don't cashout and put in volume on FTP2.

I agree with you that the ROW is more likely to see 100% of their balance than US players. There will almost certainly be some sort of application/processing fee for US players to claim/receive their balance from the DOJ, and there's also the possibility that the DOJ screws over US players and only offers partial repayment.

I might have a complicating issue... I have never made a deposit on FTP but won a buck in a freeroll and built it up to $1900... Anyone have any ideas what might happen in a situation like this ?

You didn't get $1900 in you account without making a deposit, every winning cash session or tournament cash is automatically deposited into your account.

I would think any licsened issued wowuld require full payment to all players, both US and ROW. If the company went the chapter 11 route, then yes the debt would be cleared after all the assets were sold off and divided between the creditors.

IMO, no new player would ever go to a new FTP if all the players were not paided in full without limitations. Even if they did, you would get into chip dumping.

I have $1000 on the old fulltilt and the new company wanted me to put in volume and release it over time. I would just find a new player and dump off the chips in a cash game so he could withdraw them and pay me.

There is no benifit for the present owners to sell off the company unless they can pay off the debts/players.

IDK there might be some hassles with verifying your identity, bank account, etc. etc. but all indications are that you will eventually get the $1900, minus fees.

But, again, nothing is certain at this point.

If this is the way it pans out, the DoJ hasn't a hope in hell of seizing the directors (of the UK and Irish co.'s) personal bank accounts held within foreign jurisdictions where companies who provided services and individuals (players) are owed funds.

I think the terms for repayment of ROW players contained within the DoJ/GBT agreement will be far more stringent than assumed.

If the DoJ is selling on ROW players name, addresses and banking details (an asset they are recovering from FTP) to a convicted criminal then I would guess their legal eagles are brainy enough to ensure they are never held legally liable for doing so by transferring full responsibility under their agreement with GBT.

Ummm obviously.


You're missing the point that the more bitar et al have seized, the greater the amount of money can be forfeited towards US players

Are the DoJ really saying 'hey, we'll also cancel those US lawsuits against FTP' if they are of no concern to GBT in the future?

Doesn't that $40m look extremely small if the ROW player debt of $150m isn't really a legal part of the agreement???????

Jeez, some US players and Forbes think Pokerstars makes a $1m a day....Tapie would have that purchase price back in a little over a month flat if ROW players weren't a legal liability.

The DoJ and FTP announcements would have stated 'we sold the software and office chairs' for $40m as opposed to the legal clarification of who was responsible for who (players)

And with that your honour, I rest my case.

US players would not be a consideration as to the grant of a licence in ROW. Deal agreed between GBT/DoJ allows GBT to apply for a US licence so can assume DoJ are happy with the $40m sale price for full and final settlement of US players, which the DoJ are contracted to accept liability to and cancellation of existing US lawsuits against FTP.

No. The DoJ can't cancel the lawsuits. The liability will remain with FTP1. They just won't have any assets with which to pay a judgement.

Small compared to what? When the DoJ found out that FTP really didn't have any money, they had to make do with whatever they could get. The purchase price is not directly related to the amount of player debt.

I expect that the $1M/day is gross not net. FTP1 was not Pokerstars and FTP2 will not be. Going by memory, it looks like FTP1 averaged a profit of between $3M/month and $5M/month over its final three years of operation. They may have peaked around $15M/month but didn't really maintain that rate. IF FTP2 can regain all of FTP1's ROW business, they might expect to eventually make up to $5M/month. If GBT shells out about $200M up front ($40M net to DoJ, $150M to FTP1 ROW players and $10M in startup costs), then they will eventually make an ROI of 30% per annum, which is quite nice. However, I doubt that they will make that much or that their initial outlays will be so low.

It is not "as oppsed to". It is "as well as". The announcements and interviews have talked about the purchase of assets, so essentially they did say they would buy the sofware and office chairs. They also talked about who would be responsible for which player balances because it was in the interest of GBT and FTP to provide reassurance.