"We're not doing this to improve our bottom line and we are not acquiring or planning to revive the PKR software platform. We're doing this because we think it's the right thing to do for the poker world and to encourage others to join us in putting you, the player, first by segregating and protecting player balances "

From the pokerstars press release. Interesting choice of words. I mean they've obviously acquired something if they have control of the domain? Having said that, the domain transfer could have been a totally seperate transaction.

https://www.pokerstars.com/en/blog/c...t-166975.shtml

The impression one gets from the press release is that Stars have made a coy move to call for more legitimacy in online poker and gain some positive PR in the process. I was shocked at some of the sites that don't have fully segregated player balances. Timing quite good with the possible EU player pool being mooted?

IIRC it's very few sites that have UKGC "High".

I can't find verification on a quick search, but I have no reason to not believe Hood when he states here: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=126, Partypoker - has a UKGC rating of "Basic" - as defined by UKGC "No extra protection. Money in these accounts would still be seen as part of the business if it went bust."

Any advice how to verify these matters in UKGC site would be nice if anyone knows. I can only find where it lists their domain names.

https://www.pokernews.com/news/2015/...nges-23635.htm

''We cant afford to fix and pay for our own mistakes. But we do pay for PKRs mistakes.''

Dont fall for it, its all PR/business. Remember this is Amaya

Has anyone heard any $ numbers being bandied about?

meh i think it was mostly supernova elite and supernova who paid for it.

I would not think amaya is doing this just for the players, they just want pr. If they were for the players they would not have screw us players in the first place.

Don't fall for their trick and cash out

Who do you think will pay for this?
Not Amaya for sure-they generate money,don't waste it for charity.

No need to hate on Amaya in this thread at least. Of course it's in their best interest after all, but some things are just win-win.

They say they won't resurrected it - doesn't explicitly say whether software or other assets were included in a deal. That the domain was surprised me. But I have it on good authority that the software was not part of the agreement.

The PKR Administrator put out a PR on Friday saying that it was an acquisition of the player database - probably for nothing, on the proviso of full reimbursement (my guess).

Probably high 80s have accounts on both i think. PS said "the majority"

Yes, in fact as you probably saw, Partick Leonard replied to that post and agreed with me this was an issue, and would raise it internally:

post here, third quote down

Pretty interesting statement from MPN put out on Friday on this very topic:

https://www.mpn.poker/blog/pkr/

Reading between the lines, this seems like a direct rebuttal to the statement from PokerStars about protecting player funds.

So first, I don't know of anyone else but Paf and PokerStars/FTP who are "high" levels of protection, but there may be others. None of the other major brands I've checked do.

I'm pretty surprised by MPN's response. I guess nothing is fullproof, but the "High" level of protection is, "Customers’ money is held in an account which is legally and in practice separate from the rest of the company. This account is controlled by an independent person or external auditor."

That seems like pretty damn strong to me. I'm not expert in this field, but I don't know what "change in the legal and regulatory framework" MPN is hinting at that would afford players better protection that what is outlined here.

TBH even the "Medium" level seems like a big step up - "There are arrangements (eg insurance) to make sure that the money in separate accounts is given to customers if the company goes bust" - which would have surely protected players in the PKR scenario.

From this article i wrote (link takes you behind the paywall), PKR player liability was in the region of $2m.

sick analysis ... so because they earned the money, it means the didn't actually "pay" for it. so what you say is, that everyone earning money, not really owns the money

the entitlement from some is hilarious. don't get me wrong, the SNE thing was sick and i think every grinder should have been paid. BUT how many times can ppl claim, this is the SNE money?

$1M freeroll - oh, the SNEs paid for it ... PS signs big celebrity - oh, the SNEs paid for it ... PS bails out PKR - oh, the SNEs paid for it.

I think what they're getting at is that it's never been challenged in court - if a site offering "high" protection went busto the liquidators would attempt to gain control of the segregated money by claiming it as assets of the company - if there was unpaid tax then things could get awkward (HMRC is always a preferred creditor I think?).

You'd have to imagine players would get their money eventually but it wouldn't be as simple as players getting paid out right away.

Really good post Hood. What is interesting to note that even with "High" protection (which I agree, does sound exceedingly strong) you get the following statement on https://www.pokerstars.uk/poker/room/tos/

So even with the top level of segregation player funds are still not 100% safe. There is no true guarantee like you get with a bank under certain schemes like FSCS. The reality is you are at the mercy of the owners at all online gambling sites. You might have some legal recourse now in certain jurisdictions but your moneys safety is always down to how ethically the owners of the sites behave. Every owner thinks they are ethical until the **** really hits the fan . The sole reason the old PokerStars was so safe was Isai. I would trust Amaya about as much as a drink made by Bill Cosby.

Customer naivety towards funds safety has sadly been high throughout online history although that has started to change a little. Part of the problem is the misrepresentation that goes on from affiliates as well as the sites themselves. IE Purple Lounge - touted by some affiliates as 100% safe because they were listed on the LSE - did a runner owing players shedloads.

It isn't entitlement to expect to be paid what you are rightfully owed and spent many hours and thousands of dollars towards. Amaya certainly didn't earn that money, they stole it.

PKR was a prominent well-known site. It would hurt the legitimacy of online poker if players lost balances, which would hurt Amaya. Good thing for PKR, good thing for Stars, good thing for players.

We will know most of the details of the deal when their Q3 report is published in a couple of months .

There is absolutely never a 100% guarantee, the only certain thing in life is death. Even if you have something like FSCS or EdB (who only pay up to 85k£/100k€ per customer and bank anyway) you are at risk of suffering at least a haircut if the s*** hits the fan. Just ask people in Greece how that feels like. FWIW, 10 years ago, common knowledge was that Lehman is certainly 'too big to fail'.

Still haven't received an email etc or had any update from stars? Is this meant to be a slow process? Thanks

I got paid and a few others too. Email was again in junk folder so check there

This is essentially right but I would put it another way:

Other creditors can seek to challenge the basis of the trust in court. If there was some error or if for instance the trust was created just in the days or weeks before the insolvency this might even be valid for the other creditors but for MPN to belittle the additional player safety of having a multi year long standing trust arrangement that is public knowledge for both the players and other creditors is disingenuous.

If done properly, preferably many years before the failure, before the other creditor even became a creditor and any challenge to the trust would be laughed out of court and could at worst only delay player refunds.

There is another factor - the trust will have the player funds but the post financial failure costs of refunding the money, all the admin can only come from the trust fund. A bankrupted firm with "high" could lose a few pennies in the pound to legitimate trust admin costs.

Again for MPN to present this as somehow a similar level of risk as "basic" is misleading in the extreme, with basic it would be pennies in the pound returned.

Found it in my junk mail, thanks... got an error message saying it's already been used but I haven't received the funds though I'll email stars

Got my money "back", which is great news obv, but I can't withdraw anything, anyone else having these issues?

Dear M. Hollreiser,
You recently wrote a post ‘Putting players first’ on Pokerstars Corporate blog. The company has recently made a move whose motivation is simple : 'to do what’s right'. The recent insolvency of online poker room PKR left tens of thousands of players short-changed. This is what happens when players aren't protected as they should be. It isn't fair, it isn't right. So you have signed an agreement with the court appointed Administrator to to make those players whole.
“PokerStars is proud that we're in a position where we're able to step in and help these players and encourage all companies in the industry to put players first. We’re not doing this to improve our bottom line and we are not acquiring or planning to revive the PKR software platform,” you stated.

Dear M. Hollreiser,
In January 2017, players in France received what was left of their bankroll on Europoker.fr. Their funds were said to be protected in the first place through a trustee. The 2014 insolvency of this online poker room left one thousand players short-changed. This is what happens when players aren't protected as they should be. It isn't fair, it isn't right.
Today they are happy to read Pokerstars’ new motto. You can contact the French regulator, ARJEL, or the trustee, Equitis Gestion, with a simple motivation : to do what’s right. The missing funds can be transferred to their Pokerstars account or to a new account if they are not already one of you customer.
It will not improve your bottom line and you won’t have to revive the Europoker software platform nor cook delicious Las Vegas ‘macarons’. That would just be…
… Putting players first. All players.

To do what’s right.

soxav
Poker by soxav

Stars and other sites in the French market find it hard enough to approve/allow/cashout their own players on their own player base due to redic ARJEL rules. I cannot see them trying to do a similar thing like they did for PKR players under .fr legislation

I don't think your comment is relevant here (obv it may be generally) . Pokerstars' post is only about "what is fair and to do the right thing no matter their bottom line is improved or not" as they pretend.

That's fine, and now it's their call to prove they have one word and do what they say, or are just liars making PR and lecturing the whole poker world for nothing.
No doubt they couldn't be the second, could they ? ...