This might be relevant to the HPT thread,
so as per the directions in that last post... Feel free to move this post to the HPT thread if it is worth re-opening.
Over the last week, I've discussed the HPT situation with various gaming professionals who have a large amount of experience in
both live and online poker tournaments. I don't want to identify them, but with that proviso:
1) None of these stories relate to PokerStars live or online operations. I'm not making any reference to PokerStars activities in this post. I'm not making any comment on anything with reference to PokerStars here.
2) The people that I spoke to have experience working with
multiple live operators, and
multiple online operators.
3) When operators believed that there was going to be an overlay caused by a guarantee, every single staff member thought it was entirely mundane and routine for operators to give favourable entry conditions to certain customers.
4) In no cases did the staff tell me stories that were literally identical to the HPT case. These are all different to what happened at HPT.
5) In some (online) cases, I was told that this involved operators running satellites that were guaranteed to overlay, either by:
a) guaranteed prize pools (seats) with real money buy-ins
b) guaranteed prize pools (seats) with various points buy-ins
6) In some (live) cases, I was told that this involved operators phoning favoured regulars to alert them to the overlays.
7) In some (live) cases, I was told that this involved operators giving discounts on entry fees to selected customers.
8) In at least one (online) case, I was told that this involved an operator just registering a number of customers to the online tournament, with those players just sitting out and blinding out (or, if they happened to be logged in, they could play).
9) In at least one (online) case, I was told that employees of the site registered into the online event. Allegedly, this took place with identifiable staff accounts - I am sceptical of this aspect.
I have no way of verifying the claims that I was told, but I have no reason to doubt the claims. Some of these alleged activities happened at different sites, operating under different regulations, and I have no reason to suspect that there was any rules breach. I do not know the dates when these various events took place.