Yes and so should players on Unibet.

I know what I am talking about having lost over 10K thanks to the thieves from Unibet. After two years I have lost all hope I will ever get it back.

Everybody talks about the UB or the Microgaming (= Ladbrokes & Unibet right?) scandal, but I am convinced the worst crooks are with Unibet and they deserve much more attention.

These companies make the bulk of their money with sportsbetting by the way and are both on the stockmarket. They don't get hurt much by bad publicity about Microgaming or players leaving their pokerrooms, but bad publicity about Ladbrokes or Unibet could hurt them/their stockprize a lot.
It would probably be worth $5,3M to them not to get a bad reputation.

Microgaming is -just- an internetgame provider with a strong position in their market, but not with such a strong position in their network.

It would have therefore been helpful for the players to KNOW this - they were clearly not informed adequately. The Tusk connection MAY have been buried somewhere in the Ts & Cs, and some people will argue that it's up to players to do full "due diligence" and fine-toothcomb everything, but this is a copout as far as I'm concerned. These are poker players / gamblers, not lawyers. If you read the original thread, there is post after post of confused players saying "Is it Battlefield (or whichever) who holds the money?", "Is it Microgaming?" etc. Neither Tusk, the skins nor Microgaming showed their cards on this.

It isn't the players fault for not knowing that which was clearly not adequately disclosed.

Noted my very small error in the original article, where "administrational issues" should read "compliance failures" for a correct eCOGRA quote. The essential fact remains unchanged - eCOGRA (ie. Microgaming / 888) referred to Tusk's total financial collapse in the blandest, most misleading possible terms. If the licensee was dead in the water, don't BS around with statements which are technically correct but totally misleading and inadequate, call it like it is: "Tusk is in administration".

I wonder if eCOGRA would have described the eruption of Vesuvius in AD 79 as an "unusual geological occurance"?

Since they claim to be the "independent standards authority of the online gaming industry", this was a contempibly inaccuarate statement at such a crucial time.

Those of you owed large sums should remember that Microgaming does not hide away at some fake PO box address in Costa Rica. They are very active and visible at the industry events, and as I said in the other thread, when I passed by their big, central stand at the London expo in January it was a total hive of activity, and I could see several well known industry front-runners shmoosing with them. Nobody is fighting your corner on this, but you have strength in numbers. I would seriously advise you to organise yourselves and meet these people head on. You can't force them to pay in person any more than you can via email, but you can make their lives a bloody sight less comfortable. You can't click "delete" on a person who's shouting at you and whose nose is six inches from your face.

Aside from the arguments of general provider responsibility and their past bailouts as precedent setters, Microgaming actually recommended and pushed Tusk on these skins. They have a clearly-defined responsibility.

It wasn't.

There are copies of the original blanket T&C (provided by tusk for r9 / BFP) in the ZOO thread. At no point was there any mention of Tusk. As a player you had no idea you were dealing with and I'm pretty sure everyone involved in this would say he assumed he was dealing with MGS by the way the sign up process to the "MGS network" was handled.

http://web.archive.org/web/200702280...nes.com/tc.php

wtf aren't the money supposed to be in escrow?

you'd be surprised, when this first broke over a year ago someone did some research about this in the ZOO thread. iirc (and people please correct me if im wrong) only 2 sites held the money in escrow (the then still independent ladbrokes) and pokerstars.

The player's purse was held in segregated accounts as required by the Interactive Gambling (Player Protection) Act 1998.

Unfortunately for the players Tusk was also $4,6M overdrawn at the Bank so when Tusk went into liquidation the Bankers did what Bankers do and paid off the overdraft with the players purse.

There is also a bigger problem here with douchebags who masquerade as watchdog agencies. Casinomeister is a casino shill that occasionally helps people with problems. This is why we don't see this coming earlier. He his bought and paid for by the casinos.

http://web.archive.org/web/200702280...nes.com/tc.php

These terms are certainly interesting, as aside from not mentioning Tusk anywhere, they appear to make bogus claims. Would it be fair to say that the Tusk connection was not only not clarified, but willfully concealed?

"The poker room", ie. Red Nines, does not in fact do any of this. Red Nines is a glorified affiliate site (skin) which has nothing to do with financial transactions. Yet one is clearly led to believe this is the case, ie. the page is part of the Red Nines site, therefore the "poker room" in question is Red Nines, therefore Red Nines does as described. You'd have to be on fortified crack to assume anything else.

But what they actually mean is "Tusk Investment Corporation".

One can, with hindsight, see that these terms are also generic, to be applied to all skins.

F. Microgaming forever

I proly played on a dozen diff microgaming software poker sites and the sign up was always the same, same SN,email... everything the same just diff color poker rooms and diff site name there would be no way for me to know Royal Poker was Tusk and Royal Vegas was not or Arctic was Tusk and Poker Time or Wild Jacks not........ - i'm done with microgaming 4ever (lol not be confused with poker4)

What happened then for losing 10k on unibet?can u elaborate on this?

I think this is EXACTLY the mistake that was made: the player's purse wasn't part of their ASSETS. So, the liquidators had zero right to do that. It wasn't TUSK's money. TUSK's assets was the rake from play, NOT the players' funds. I think people should look to sue whoever did THIS action...so it may be a bank or the liquidators.

Don't go after microgaming...go after who actually TOOK the players' money and used it to cover Tusk's liabilities.

I spent 14 years as a Banker and I believe you will find these are the true facts about segregated and trust accounts and why the Bank was entitled to them.

Unfortunately the players purse does form a part of Tusk's assets even though they were in a 'segregated' account, the Bank was within its rights to use the players purse to pay off the company overdraft.

In addition, Australian law is similar to Canadian law, as such even if the players purse was held in a 'pooled trust' account the Bank could still have used to players purse to pay off comapny debt.

'Pooled Trust' accounts are only safe if they are required by Statute, ie Real Estate and Lawyer's Trust accounts.

To be exempt from the Bank using their 'right of offset' each player would have to have a seperate account,...Tusk Investments (In Trust) for John Q Player,..etc etc.

In addition even if the players purse had been held 'in trust' the Liquidators and the Government can still utilise 'trust funds' to pay taxes and liquidation fees.

I feel there was something far more sinister happening here.

I am awaiting a reply from one of the skin owners regarding some numbers, but I believe the Tusk liquidation was planned from sometime in 2006 and Tusk's intentions all along was to steal the player's purse.

I think you made my point for me...banks shouldn't hold other people's money as the holder's assets. It's not like the players are buying stocks or bonds in the company...it's much more like a bank deposit. Aren't the depositor's first in line to get THEIR OWN MONEY back?

No, again a deposit you make at a Bank becomes a liability the Bank owes.

You rank as an 'unsecured' creditor in the event of a Bank failure.

Almost every network has skins. So, from what you are saying, people should only play at FTP or Pokerstars, cause they are independand sites.
Skins are just doors who lead into the same room. If i go through an official door that is advertised to lead into that room, i do not expect to fall down an empty elevator shaft and break my leg...

Noone knew about this Tusk business.
All the players thought that Microgaming handles the money.

Right...but not an 'asset.' It seems that the Tusk case treated them as assets...right?

The books must balance so a deposit ie the cc or ewallet deposit shows as cash on the financial statement, an asset of the compnay as cash is always an asset.

The fact that you made the deposit means that the company now has a liability to you on their books.

So if the company goes into liquidation, the cash is an asset of the company and the liability to you the depositor makes you an 'unsecured' creditor of the company.

You'd be surprised, players like Durrrr made most of their fortunes on Prima/Microgaming, that said, there were far more reputable sites on Microgaming back then however.

MODS

PLEASE STICKY THIS IN NVG. THIS SHOULD HAVE PARITY WITH THE UB SCANDAL.

ladbrokes is the biggest or one of the bigest sportbooks in europe...i think ur safea ton

This is nonsense (talking about Ladbrokes, I have no opinion on unibet).

Ladbrokes is probably the safest site out there regardless of what network they are using.

They are Britains biggest sportsbook and the largest retail bookmaker in the world and have been around since the 1800s or thereabouts.

Anyone not trusting Ladbrokes can certainly not trust any other gambling-companies out there either and should probably give up Internet gambling.

Your site can be the safest in the world, but that won't stop you from being worried if they willingly associate with crooks. I would at the very least express my concern to the owners.

All very interesting, but it will not lead to a cent more being recovered to the players.

Tusk is history. Microgaming is not. Microgaming is highly active, and it is to Microgaming that players need to be looking for the necessary assistance here.

Thanks for making this post skier.