No see no evil, speak no evil hear no evil with lederer, bitar and ferguson?

The problem is it is unlikely the doj deal is modifiable. If gbt is buying assets for nothing and the accounts payable is part of that there is no way to change the deal to make up for it unless the FTP shareholders cough up cash.

Gbt has always been trying to do this on the ultra cheap. If they intended to use these to offset the doj payment it can be a problem.

While selling loans is not abnormal, it is when other assets are also being bought. The only reason they are even part of the deal is so gbt can get something for nothing. There is no way I see the deal being modified to make up for it. The doj is not going to alter their deal and I don't see FTP shareholders coming out of pocket.

In normal circumstances they would just adjust the sale price for the shortfall but because of this being a three party deal with some significant complexities and special circumstances that is not likely an option.

So unless gbt eats it it may be a stumbling block. I don't remember all the numbers but I thought Tapie would pay doj 80 million and get an account for 40 million. If they also included these loans then they were looking to buy FTP for 20 million dollars + row payouts. The difference between 20 and 40 is big.

One way they could offset it would be against row payouts. I am not suggesting that will happen or is even an option depending on the doj and FTP deals. I am just saying if the opportunity was there for them to offset those loans they can't collect the row payouts might be the only option.

It does shed some light on things though. Someone please correct my numbers if wrong but buying FTP for 20 million plus row payouts would be quite a deal. Especially if they can tie row payouts to action in the site. In that case it would be a complete steal.

I don't think the doj is spending much energy on the deal part right now. I was under the impression that the doj and gbt reached terms and FTP and gbt are what is going on now. Due diligence for business acquisitions can take a long term. Giving the extenuating circumstances here it is even worse.

If the 29th comes and passes nobody should assume that is doom. There is no external deadline putting pressure on gbt so they will take their time to get the best deal possible. The doj really has no time pressure either. You might think the FTP owners have pressure but as long as this goes on it keeps some other things in limbo which is good for them.

I know people here want to believe there is massive urgency here but from what I see none of those involved have any need to rush or expedite this.

I think I think I think I think I think I think... What else is new.

I think you are reading too much into that article.

It says: It doesn't say explicitly that the "deadline" is a date at which the DoJ/GBT deal expires. The "deadline" could just as easily refer to the target date set by Tapie in an earlier interview, as referenced in the first quoted paragraph.

Also, "expect" in that paragraph probably ought to have been replaced by "hope", given what Tapie is actually quoted to have said.

Because even those four guys wouldn't be stupid enough to agree to voluntarily accept those liabilies.

Can you provide some more reasoning as to why the DoJ is unlikely to agree to a modified deal?

I've always seen the DOJ as being in this to get whatever they can, not to insist on a specific price. If they can't get $80M, I think they'd rather have $60M than nothing. I think they were willing to sell receivables and foreign accounts to GBT because they'd be able to forego risk and higher collection costs than if they kept those for themselves.

FWIW, I think your numbers are OK. The asset purchase was very much intended to be leveraged.

An announcement on the morning of April 1^st would seem appropriate.

Perhaps by an anonymous source.

The email Goebbels has also reportedly said the deadline is the 29th. I guess we'll find out.

There should be made an "FTP Players Alliance" in which we declare that we agree to give up to 10% of our bankrolls in order to hurry up the things and not depend anymore on this so called FTP pros(if this is really the problem why things go so slow)...

i think the FTP employees have the time do "adjust" our bankrolls(Tapie will pay more now to the DoJ,but will pay less to us...kinda logic)

Im just sick to open this thread every day with the hope that ill see some good news,but what i can only see is people who say"I want my money back"," **** you Mattusow" and many more...

i realized that if we want a piece of cake we should work for it....

I know it sounds childish,i know its gonna be very difficult to do it,but its better to do so than gossip and accuse people

JUST MY 2 CENTS,and sorry for my basic grammar(english its not my native language)...hope you guys understood what i want to point here....Peace

What if I don't agree to give up part of my bankroll?

Then u risk to lose it all? or at least u will recive a very small part of it after months,years?

Actually, those aren't the choices. I could let you give up your bankroll for example. Or the deal could go through on it's own and I could be paid in full. I'm going to stop having this discussion now though since this has no chance of happening. Thus talking about it is completely pointless.

I could have missed something (not like I read all 17,000+ posts) but wouldn't the fact that all those pros owe FT money make it more desirable? I only say that because it seemed like they wanted to buy the company (for $80M or whatever) knowing what assets they would receive and the amounts seized by DOJ/in company accounts.

So when they found out that there was $20M (not sure exact #) owed to the company wouldn't that just increase the overall assets they would be purchasing for $80M? I could be mistaken if they thought they were buying an account with $20M in it then found out it had been loaned out and $20M was mising but it sounded like the money owed by pros wasn't part of what they originally thought they were buying so it is more like an added bonus.

They knew about the $14M Ferguson thing before the pros loans news came out (I assume since they had offered him $14M in shares or whatever it was)

The pro debts would make the company more attractive if they had been originally valued at $0. It seem more likely that they were valued at nearly $20M, but are turning out to be worth much less.

Yes, I saw that post and gave it all due consideration as I composed my response.

I would imagine they knew about the loans for 20 million, its kinda of hard to miss it. They may have waited untill the last hour of the deal then wanted assurances that it would be paid.

Ya that's what I'm not sure about. I thought that they had just found out about the debts while looking through the bookwork, not that '$20M in outstanding loans to multiple people' had been included in the original list of assets GBT was purchasing.

The info about pro's debts came out so much later than the original deal plans that it seemed like they just discovered it.

O well I was just thinking about it, it doesn't really matter. I just hope it goes through!

DJ Ricco,weren't you saying that FTP staff at pocketkings were getting ready for something this week?
Have you spoken to any of them again?

All, I am owed $25k by FTP and not sure like the rest of you wether will ever see it again.

BUT my question is this and I do not know if this has been asked before on here;

If GBT take over FTP but they cannot pay all us back but offer us free roles into tournaments and a % of our bank rolls in the future, would we play on the new FTP site again?

I guess the question is, is something better than nothing or is principal more important?

Something is always better than nothing, but it would really suck if it came to that (partial recovery). FWIW I am still optimistic, so I believe a partial recovery will still be fairly large for both USA and ROW.

A few comments...Firstly the guy who said i want my "monkey" back could have been saying £500; which is slang in UK anyway

Second Even if the deadline is 1st march or whatever its still gonna be a while before we have access to accounts no? Maybe I'm overt thinking things but surely they are going to have a marketing campaign before opening or exactly when it opens to attract players who don't read this/other similar threads. So if we have not heard of anything about a marketing campaign then we may have a long wait still

Finally; what would people think of getting say 1/3rd of their bankroll to cash out, the other 1/3rd to play with and the other 1/3rd in ADDITIONAL rake back; say 20% until the debt is paid; that way players will be able to cash out some money, they will WANT to play there to gain the rest of there money and GPT wont need as much cash straight away

the guy has way more on tilt and it was just a typo

It is a Friday and maybe my brain is on tilt but has the question been asked why just Group Bernard Tapie (GBT) taking over Full Tilt Poker (FTP)?

They are not putting in any money, they have agreed to release funds in FTP accounts to the DOJ and agreed to pay back non US players eventually in some way we do not know how yet.

What is stopping the Global Poker Players launching a proposal to take over FTP? We know about poker more than GBT at present that is for sure, also many of us on 2+2 and in the poker world are business people also.

What can be better than us poker players running FTP properly?

Of course there has to be proper governance to stop what happened last time and we ALL have to be organised, but we know what players want, we know that we could organise to be paid back and we know that there would be players on the site (us).

I am owed $25k by FTP and many more are owed much more, but I feel we are like sheep here (no offence to any), we wait and wait for news and GBT are in no rush because there is no-one else going for it.

Please tell me guys what you think.

Before there was any asset sale/purchase agreement, the debts of the "pros" to FTP were publicized. Everyone's assumption, and it seems reasonable, is that the loans were represented as part of the a/r's and assigned a value. When the value is found to be different the purchase price needs to be adjusted. I've dealt with DOJ in representing buyers of bankrupt real estate limited partnership interests out of bankruptcy and it functions like a reasonable business person, who would adjust the price appropriately, when it is in a position similar to this.