I have heard this from several 'reliable sources', some from the inside of PP too. Inflate for a certain amount of time, sell out to a major player and then run off into the sunset with their personal profits.
Good easy money if you can make it (whilst dodging the scandals along the way!)

Aha! thank you.
I'm glad I apologised in my post in case I was wrong.
It may well have been 'the other guy' that RR was chatting to in Nando's, and I looked up and mixed them up maybe?
Still very well written though

HMRC would have a look if dtd were running tournaments to a loss to pay zero tax to hmrc then using a staking group to recoup cash directly back to their pockets, is there proof brs and dtd are working together, do dtd pay no tax, ?

The MTTs are not their only business though. I'm sure with their slot machines, roulette, bar and cash games they are making plenty of profit to be paying a lot of tax. Plus when extra players are put in then they all go in to the tournament entry, with registration fee so it won't even appear to be making a loss on the tournament, even if they were.

I think it would be more about preventing a loss from occurring from a huge overlay in the tournament.

Freedom of speech doesn't exist within the uk, we have hate speech laws here in Britain. Freedom of speech is only protected in America. God bless America.

yes exactely, taking profit off of the casino games , inflating guarentees and effectively washing cash thru the brs players. check hmrc companies house if anyone can read accounts

So you're implying it is a simple tax scam with PP taking the "loss", deducting that from the profitable casino games and evading taxes while BRS is the money cow? Is how I'm reading it correct?

I'm not Ryan Riess, but you are right that I was the other player at Nando's talking to him. I went by myself and Ryan came to sit with me, i've known him since before his WSOP win and have always respected him as a person/player/business savvy guy. He is always a lot of fun to catch up and shoot the **** with. My name is Marty Mathis as others have pointed out

This **** is getting deeper n deeper....what sickens me is not anyone from pp/dtd/brs has come out with any kind of statement to defend their name and for me this makes them look worse.

I’m getting the opinion from what iv read from Twitter of those who run ppl they are trying to blame this on Pokerstars as smear campaign.

Iv also heard brs is still running as normal but more then likely with only a trusted inner circle.

They're still running but recently cut a load of players. I guess if you're getting loads of free entries from party it makes sense to have plenty of players who were not necessarily big winners, to get the maximum out of the free seats. The free seats seemed to dry up a week or two before their cull of players. Free seats for the online tournaments that is, not for the PPL satellites, they were still running.

maybe , i dont have any solid answer, just guessing really, but DTD pays no tax i think if i look on companies house, is paying no tax or operating at a loss standard fo card room/casino? in effect the tax man is taking the loss. like a con, in a way i think what they are doing is kind of good for the poker community, i really dont care i dont play there , and wont really play on party now

So their main defense is other sites are getting people to make these claims?

In my case they have a very weak argument as Pokerstars must hate me for the criticism I've offered them over the past 7 years. But in all fairness they've run some horrific overlays in the past few years and like a professional company they've ate the loss. I don't agree with Pstars direction they've took with Live events since 2014 and feel the EPT reinstitution may be a buck too late and a dollar too short.

I want to express some concerns publicly related to how this thread intertwines with regulated U.S. iGaming, particularly in the state of Pennsylvania.

In my view as an analyst and someone who covers PA iGaming regulatory matters, there's no way some of the player concerns being discussed in this thread DON'T eventually come up in a Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board meeting/hearing.

I'm unsure whether GVC Holdings (partypoker parent company) is applying for the random Qualified Gaming Entities (QGEs) drawing as a main iGaming certificate holder in PA -- which barring an MSIGA compact would be a sole-state, ring-fenced online poker market. The application deadline is at the end of this month, and then the Board will determine which applicants qualify before the drawing.

PGCB Interactive Gaming License Applications

But if anyone is wondering about Pennsylvania gaming regulators' ability to REQUIRE COMPLETE TRANSPARENCY from their licensees, the Sept 12th, 2018, PGCB meeting included VERY transparent discussion on several "social responsibility" and/or "game integrity" topics... on top of the "normal" stuff of revealing full names of "required to be excluded" persons and casino employees mucking it up.

All this can be viewed in the video embedded within Post #1 of the following NVG thread. I've included the timestamps for reference.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...-call-1723642/

A. The Board reverses a lifetime voluntary self-exclusion (1:06:43-1:10:00)

B. Two casino patrons who over-indulged in alcoholic beverages while gaming. In one case the customer was in such bad shape she had to be wheeled back to her room by janitorial staff after throwing up and fighting with people in the restroom. In the other case, the patron consumed 21 drinks over an 11 hour period. First he couldn't find his seat at the bar and had to be assisted by other customers. Then he fell asleep at the slot machines and had to be woken up by another customer. Then he had another patron order a drink for him. Then he was served another drink. Then finally cut off. (1:24:25-1:34:16)

C. A city administrator in a town of about 25,000 people wasn't able to get $85,000 in local gaming fund disbursements (derived from statewide tax allocations per Pennsylvania law) to pay for a police canine unit. He says this is because he's the only Democrat in his county and is the victim of retribution tactics by Republican politicians in the area, who decided to authorize only $13,000 for "dog food."

The local official then goes on to explain that the person who is primarily responsible for withholding these local funds is the son of a man the township administrator's officers arrested for felony sexual assault years ago. That person would serve several years in prison, and garnered mainstream attention following the Sandusky/Penn State child sex abuse scandal from November 2011.

- There's also another thread here in NVG discussing PA regulators' recent fine of SugarHouse Casino ($100,000) for dealing 16 unshuffled hands to customers, thereby affecting game integrity.
___

All these discomforting, controversial topics related to gaming regulation are public information, and involve LOCAL interests who have formed years-long relationships with the Board, who have already contributed a substantial amount of tax dollars to Pennsylvania elderly and other statewide social initiatives, and have established a genuine rapport with influential members in their respective communities.

How do some of the topics in this thread NOT come up before Partypoker is authorized to operate a licensed peer-to-peer product (either under a land-based casino brand or as a randomly selected main certificate holder)?

Would Pennsylvania online poker players (estimated market launch in H1-2019) petition the Board to review some of these concerns and ask for COMPLETE transparency on how the business model works, and how it affects consumers? Especially if it involves clarification of game integrity and/or social responsibility concerns?

Lipo Fund/ Marty Mathis, I may have some interesting information for you. Contact me at captsetmine@mail.com please.

Brs give Low skilled players free ppl$ sat tickets that were given to brs by pp...these low skilled players grind the ppl$ sats and any ppl$’s won are then pooled by brs in one account...brs then use these ppl$’s to buy better players into live events at dtd or aboard etc...

That’s my understanding in short

Yeah, these accusations are weak sauce. I was texting with my local pp rep yesterday and she made the same accusations: "people who feel threatened have to spew lies to try and affect your success".

Like you, I'm probably an enemy of Pokerstars since I've publicly called them out for what they've done in recent years (after being a staunch supporter of them in the past) and I 100% do not play there anymore (and likely will not ever again).

I've also publicly said that I think Party Poker Live is a great innovation in the industry, has had considerable success, and is one of the key factors why I think pp could eventually displace stars as the industry leader.

I love the deal they have with Playground and this has been of benefit to me.

Nevertheless, these shady dealings appear very much to be real, not fake news, with a preponderance of evidence presented in this thread, as well as my own anecdotal experiences.

I want pp to come into this thread and do the right thing for the players. I've nothing but goodwill towards them, but they need to take some action here.

So far I've seen from the following people:

Pads: bringing in stable tumors is good, what are you complaining about

Duthie: idunno, what I do know is we're being attacked by competitors

PP: crickets

How difficult is it for any of these people to deny (or confirm if they have the balls) these accusations? Just a simple "No, that is categorically false" will do.

yea the reactions/rebuttals I have gotten so far. (there aren't denials fwiw) :

1. "this is a coordinated attack by our competitors"




2. "affiliate deals, prop players, etc have always existed, you should know this"



3. "but, butttt, their good intentions"

the road to hell is paved with good intentions

Holy **** you going to a lot of effort just to be able to transfer the PPL$'s you've won. They should just let you do it to kill the heat.

Yea it does seem a bit odd that they put so much pressure on themselves when adding money etc would be really well received by 'casual' players like me. I travelled to one of their events in Montreal and really enjoyed it, so I would be really upset if there was some manipulation going on.

I'm not sure that I totally understand what is being implied in this thread. They are being accused of backing players through training sites? Is anyone cheating? Makes me a bit nervous when I hear all this stuff. I tend to only play live now for obvious reasons and really enjoy tournaments because I feel safer playing them as cheating is presumably much harder?

Anyway, I hope it's not true and that this is just malicious gossip.

Does the trip report from the recent event at DTD from user 'joepublic' not concern you? If you missed it then its a couple of pages back

I think the tax angle is a bit of a stretch, overlaying a poker tournament is a natural tax write off.

What about money that is won by the staked player...player collects payout and pays no tax on it and then gives 60% to what ever company staked him does the company not have to pay tax on the winnings if they have used company money to stake the player and company’s house registered

if a company overlays, that is tax deductible, so lets say a poker room was making £1m profit on the year and on the final day of the year held a poker tournament and overlayed £500k, that £500k comes from the bottom line (it goes to the prize pool) so if for ease of numbers there woudl have been £100k on Corp.Tax due on that 500k it;s now no longer due so real capital loss to the company is £400k.

So if, like you infer, a company was putting players into the tournament using money they would have to contribute anyway, then they would lose the ability to claim the losses against the taxes, not only that but they would also owe VAT/Gambling duty (pretty sure it's gambling duty on poker tournaments) on the reg fee.

If what you're saying is should the staker (if it's a corporate entity) pay profits on his horses profits, thats an entirely different discussion and is really not relevant here IMO. The answer is probably, probably. They would for sure be able to NET it down though.

I'm not suggesting (in this post) that this clears the accusations in the thread, I'm saying that if you're citing some tax benefit as a primary motivator for your conspiracy, I'd suggest that its pretty inplausible, there are way, way more effective, legitimate practices to be tax efficient this would be a pretty pointless way to go about it.