looks like paddy is buying ftp recent promos + irish/british makes sense ...

Call it a case of Amerocentrism. I sloppily lumped Ireland in w/ UK.

The larger point is FTP (the poker company) is made up a group of European based companies and is a separate entity than the US based Tiltware (a poker software company).

Just because today they are owned by the same group of motley fools doesn't mean it always has to be that way. The ownership of FTP could change and become distinct from the ownership of Tiltware.

The reason he didn't show up for any WSOP event is due to the fact that FTP hasn't payed US Players yet:

'I am deeply disappointed and embarrassed that Full Tilt players have not been paid money they are owed. I am equally embarrassed that as a result many players cannot compete in tournaments and have suffered economic harm.

I am not playing in the World Series of Poker as I do not believe it is fair that I compete when others cannot. I am doing everything I can to seek a solution to the problem as quickly as possible.'

Companies sell off specific assets all the time. Just because you buy a piece of a company doesn't mean you own all their debt.

FT just isn't allowed to cash anyone out.

People tend to not buy assets subject to civil forfeiture though.

Civil forfeiture targets the asset not the company.

Simplified Version:
I own X
DOJ files civil forfeiture for X
You buy X
I lose to DOJ
You no longer own X the DOJ does.
You lose.

DoJ in USA
My assets elsewhere
I win

I mean it's plausible to say these ppl buy these parts if FTP and the us players get paid by old owners.

FTP feels that the DoJ has the American players $$$. As they have NO SCRUPLES they will do everything in their power to escape that obligation.

FTP in terms of the restrained accounts named in the civil claims and the fact most employees work in Dublin, Ireland means it is mostly an Irish based company.
There are no 'substantial' UK parts AFAIK. The United Kingdom and Ireland are separate sovereign countries € and £'s (only N. Ireland is in both Ireland and the UK )

tks hash 1982 for the link, I knew I read it somewhere - taxation not rake my mistake - although it's implied.

FYP,. As I asked in my post, if I sell an asset under forfeiture for fair value and receive $500k as in your example, surely the DOJ can get the 500k or the house worth 500k not both else it would be unequitable.

It is my understanding that in rem civil forfeiture doesn't exist in Ireland and the UK without prove of criminal conduct or proceeds of crime and as we all know playing poker isn't a crime here.

FTP assets are in UK/Ireland.
Courts in UK/Ireland enforced US court order to freeze FTP bank accounts. Actually 24 countries enforced orders to freeze 75 of FTP bank accounts.

In essence the investors would me making an all-in on the hope that the same courts who enforced freeze of FTP assets wouldn't also enforce civil forfeiture action.

We still dont know for a fact who the hell owns FullTilt!
Bitar is a cert, but the others is anyones guess?

A big problem hanging over Tilt is the likely penalties that the DoJ will impose on the owner/s. They may want to go easy with the fines so things can get sorted out, on the other hand they might not.

I think its impossible to predict which way this mess will go, but I cant say Im very optimistic, especially for US players.

But lets face it we've almost zero information on any facts that matter.

Maybe, but i believe the DOJ did this for pure economic reasons. The United States Marshals Service is responsible for managing and disposing of properties seized and forfeited by Department of Justice agencies. It currently manages around $1 billion worth of property. The United States Treasury Department is responsible for managing and disposing of properties seized by Treasury agencies. The goal of both programs is to maximize the net return from seized property by selling at auctions and to the private sector and then using the property and proceeds for law enforcement purposes. Thus, it COULD be possible that these investors have already negotiated terms w/ the DOJ as was the case with PartyPoker. If so, the government is happy, U.S. players get paid as part of deal and FT eats its losses and continues business elsewhere in the world. The DOJ is like a used car salesmen, they'll sell anything at a good price, just like they did w/ all the South American Cocaine under George H. W. Bush.

I don't see how this could be good news. It's either neutral or bad.

As one example, Full Tilt Poker does not have to continue using Tiltware software.

If they have found a way to unwind things to be able to say "FU" to U.S. players, with or without switching the Full Tilt brand to another software platform, this could be very bad news indeed.

Or it might be no news at all, of course.

No. Civil forfeiture is AGAINST THE ASSET. Period. If you buy an asset under civil forfeiture and the entity seeking forfeiture wins you just bought a worthless piece of paper. The courts view is that the DOJ owned it at the time of the sale, and it was never mine/FTP to sell. Of course any investor with hundreds of millions of splash around is well aware of that.

"Caveat emptor" - don't buy things under civil forfeiture.


The DOJ is seeking $1B in damages from FTP for alleged crimes HOWEVER the DOJ is ALSO seeking complete forfeiture of all of FTP assets used in those alleged crimes. These aren't mutual exlusive. The value of the assets forfeited doesn't apply against the $1B in damages sought.

The max FTP could lose is:
Entire forfeiture of any and all assets used in the alleged crimes PLUS $1B in monetary damages.

Now I don't think that will happen because FTP will ultimately settle for some monetary amount (say $400M) and DOJ will drop the forfeiture.

However if FTP loses the civil forfeiture then the assets were never FTP to sell and thus any company that "bought" them ended up buying nothing.


In the house example it wasn't my house to sell. It would be no different than in some random homeless guy said "I'll sell you that house for $100K" and you agreed" So wait you are out $100K/$500K. So where is YOUR recourse? Simple I owe you. I "sold" you something I didn't own and you paid me. Thus I owe you the $100K/$500K. The civil forfeiture takes the asset away but doesn't erase my debt to you. The DOJ doesn't owe you anything. I and I alone owe you $100K. So you could sue me for the money you paid me. Of course trying to collect from an insolvent, convicted drug dealer might be tough. Maybe knowing I was going to jail I just spent the $100K on hookers and blow. Alternatively maybe I sent it to a private banking haven (Caymans, Belize) so I would have some walking around money when I get out of jail. Either way any debt is between you and me not you and the DOJ.

IMHO there's a huge difference between granting a Mareva injunction and/or restraining order and agreeing to seizure/forfeiture to a foreign state Asset Forfeiture Fund before a trial has even occurred.

Especially when some of your citizens' have on balance likely a claim to some of these assets under your own laws and haven't received notice of summons.

@ D&T

OK, just keeping under US law and with no reference to Irish laws.
The DoJ gets my house then I can sue the seller for 500k correct?

My point is it is in equitable to receive both 500k and the house.
The seller here FTP has other assets and the buyer can agree to have contractual safeguards or even a bond deposited so if the DOJ wants the asset back I get money back with interest

Now the above only applies to the US assets, the foreign frozen ones have to be followed in accordance with the laws of those countries.

My feeling is that this is why it is good that the class action lawsuit was filed. Say Full Tilt does sell all that Europe facing stuff. Well, now they have a big pile of cash from the sale. That cash belongs to US players. We don't care if the new owners pay us, or the old owners with proceeds from the sale.

Very true with one exception ... the DOJ hasn't seized anything yet. They sought and obtained a court order freezing FTP bank accounts. People like to use the term "Seize" but that is factually incorrect. The asset (as of right now) still belong to FTP and thus aren't (yet) the DOJ's to sell. If/when FTP loses the courts can order them forfeited and then you are right they would be auctioned (what does the DOJ want with some poker software, customer records, trademarks, and patents anyways).

Who said anything about before a trial?

I think an underlying assumption most have made is that any sale would require a deal with the DOJ and AGCC and that one or both of these institutions will require that the US players are paid. If you change that assumption it begs the question why wouldn't FTP just continue on with existing ownership? I suppose its possible that the AGCC shut them down for reasons other than being unable to pay the US players and that the DOJ could be satisfied with a change in ownership and not paying US players. Doesn't seem likely to me.

No disrespect but this is just your opinion not facts.

You are guessing just like the rest of us.

You kind of lost some credibility last week when you posted the following with some clearly ridiculous math.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=201


As shown by previous filings and estimates they are burning through 250-500K a day while they are closed.

Everyone is getting paid but the players.

Yeah Dublin is in The Republic of Ireland. Not the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Yer I know, I was just poking fun at raiseya's post for implying PI actually played at the WSOP

What you quoted isn't my opinion.

It is my opinion that the investors wouldn't buy assets under forfeiture due to the risk involved. I don't think I exactly made that opinon unclear.

However the fact that civil foreiture follows an asset and one can't escape it by simply selling said asset isn't an opinion.

Fact:
Civil forfeiture is action against the asset not the owner.
That action follows the asset.
You can't escape civil forfeiture by simply selling the asset.
The new owner retains the risk of civil forfeiture when acquiring the asset.

If you thought about it for a few seconds you would realize why that exists.

Hint:

Really? I'm from the US so I really have no idea but I would be surprised to learn that the FTP brand is actually strong anywhere right now considering that nobody has been allowed to play there for some time. Even the average euro fish has probably learned what's going on; they try to open up FTP for a week straight and can't, go on the internet, Google it, there you go, as you type full tilt poker into Google it prompts you for full tilt poker shutdown which means that is one of the most searched keywords associated with FTP currently.

I remember somebody on 2p2 posting a link to the Rush patent and it was a company other than Pocket Kings.

Also worth noting while we are on facts.

I beleive Wilt on Tilt did an investigation relating to his funds in the UMW situation and his money seized by the DOJ.

Just because the DOJ asks for an account to be frozen in a foreign jurisdiction
doesnt mean its honoured or honoured in a timely manor. (important point)

Infact he was told by the government investigator that the vast majority of the time the accounts have been emptied by the time they are frozen.

Anyone assuming that FTP has vast bank accounts full of frozen cash may be way off.