Everyone ought to read this article. http://www.osga.com/artman/publish/article_9514.shtml

IMO, it accurately tells the story about FTP.

You're talking about business, and PR. I'm talking about a CRIMINAL case, and legal ramifications. An attorney handling a CRIMINAL case will, in the vast majority of cases (if not all), advise his client to shut up. That's what I was talking about.

• Let's consider the source (OSGA stands for Off Shore Gambling Association)
• This article simply debates what term should be used for the fraud and who is responsible. It does nothing to convince me that fraud did not take place.

Many of the cases referenced in material I read as well as on the wiki page involve death and negligent homicide and potential for other such severe charges. Once again I challenge you to find a single source that suggests the best decision for a company is simply to go silent when their customers wealth and security is compromised.

From what I read, it pretty much shows that fraud DID take place. It says they continued to pay stock holders in an effort to hide the true situation. The only way to do that was to rob the player funds.

It does suggest, however, that the pros may not have been aware. Still, they should step forward and attempt to return whatever moneys they can. I'd like to think that I would do that in a similar situation.

It never made any sense to equate FTP pros with owner/shareholders. Yes, a few (about 20) were both. But most FTP pros were some combination of shills/marketing tools.

Sorry.. that was my inexactness. I was referring to those pros that were both. Thanks for clarifying for me.

I actually think it is entirely obvious that there are NO "strings being pulled" with respect to the DOJ actions and that you are in delusional, tinfoil hat, conspiracy theory-land.

The DOJ has done exactly what I would expect them to do under the circumstances. They were never going to accept offshore online poker, because doing so would undermine our tax, money laundering, and gaming laws. And they were never going to accept the argument that UIGEA didn't apply to poker, because (1) they don't believe that, (2) the legislative history of UIGEA does not suggest that, and (3) a lot of powerful congressmen care a lot about this issue which is the reason UIGEA got passed.

Trust me, your average Assistant US Attorney does not give a poop whether Harrah's ever gets a license or not. He or she just doesn't care. That's up to Congress and the President. Your average Assistant US Attorney DOES care about the fact that offshore unregulated online poker threatens the enforcement of a bunch of US laws that he or she thinks are important.

Until you come up with one SHRED of evidence that "strings are being pulled", your comment is nothing more than a defamation of the character of career federal prosecutors. Take it to Free Republic or the Art Bell show.

^^^

Right, defamation of character. lol lawdude, like I said, we've been down this road before, and I don't feel like arguing with your opinions that you so eloquently state as thought they're facts. If you think it is "entirely obvious to you" what is going on, then it is entirely obvious to me that you're blind.

There's a lot that isn't obvious here. But the conspiracy theories require that you assume that there is no way any federal prosecutor could ever have a problem with online poker unless he or she is doing Harrah's bidding. People who believe this need to get to know some federal prosecutors.

The DOJ has everything to with player funds. They're ****ing holding it. Losses from seized processors in the past can be covered when they're still generating revenue. ROW players were withdrawing money, and receiving it slowly post BF. In order to pay back US players without being allowed access to their DOJ-frozen accounts, they'd need to continue generating revenue with what little player base they had left, and/or sell some/all of the company to raise cash. The BF indictments, multiple lawsuits, and suspension of license kinda makes any of that hard to do.

jfc you are the king of strawman. And then you puff out your chest with thinly veiled brag rhetoric like "trust me" and "people need to get to know federal prosecutors" as if to imply you know something everyone else doesn't. Please stop compromising the bevy of knowledge you actually do contribute to this forum by stating your opinions as though they're facts in addition to the first two sentences of my post.

1. Bear in mind there's a difference between FREEZING and SEIZING.

2. Thanks to Tilt's failure to seize funds, and the apparent Ponzi-like behavior of the people running it, there's a bunch of unsegregated accounts that apparently do not cover the actual amount of player funds. If that is true (and the DOJ bears the burden of proof on this), then the reason the players are not getting their funds is because Tilt didn't safeguard them.

Teflon, some of my law school classmates went to the US Attorney's office. I still talk to a few of them. I am not a complete font of insider information about these prosecutions, but I do know something about what they are going on.

I also know a lot about the history of gambling regulation in the United States, which is really important because the ACTUAL motivations of federal prosecutors have a lot to do with that history (and in particular, what unregulated gaming led to in the past as well as the problems with offshore financial transactions).

But having said all that, I actually don't think it takes much intelligence or knowledge to know that the federal prosecutors are not doing Harrah's bidding here. As I said, it's pretty easy to figure out that NO federal prosecutor (or executive branch official for that matter) is going to consider unregulated offshore online poker acceptable. And that goes double for any site that is suspected of defrauding Americans.

Indeed, there was a thread here a few months ago by someone else who also has sources in the DOJ and who COMPLETELY corroborated what I am saying about the prosecutors' motives.

A lot of libertarians don't seem to realize that there is basically NOBODY in the government who believes in unregulated gambling. There are variously libertarian views about how much gambling to allow and under what circumstances, but NOBODY in the government believes in unregulated gambling. This is a subset of "libertarianism just isn't that popular". People who think that it is their job to ensure tax collection and prevent money laundering and keep 17 year olds from gambling just don't agree with libertarians about unregulated gambling.

Thanks for the clarification. I was unaware that a partner in an LLC could take any form of compensation legally termed a 'dividend'. Certainly any dividend that I have heard of is taxable so the 'draws' to which you refer must not be called 'dividends'. I suppose that inasmuch as partners in an LLC have 'shares', they could get dividends on those shares.

In any case, I think we agree that it is fairly easy for owners of unlisted companies to set those companies up in any was they wish even if the set-up seems obviously unethical to a business ethicist.

1. Lawdude, I'm aware there's a difference between freezing and seizing. It is my understanding that processor money in the past is seized, and that current BF indictment bank accounts are frozen. Unless my understanding is incorrect, I don't know why you brought that up in the first place.

2. We both know that's bull****, and the DOJ is probably going to get away with this whether they can prove it or not because this is how they win. The only reason I'm pissed about this particular instance is that the UIGEA is a vague law that deserves to be clarified. Instead, the DOJ is going after the throats of anyone and everyone who "thumbed their noses" at them in their view. Which I get, because nobody ****s with America, but the avenue being taken is clearly one that was intended to benefit corrupt people in order to make more money. It has nothing to do with underage gambling and tax revenue and everyone knows it. You solve those problems with regulation, and the DOJ should not be in the business of robotically wasting money fighting an enemy that's not there. That $16 muffin story is an ant of a story compared to the waste of resources that has gone on since 2006 and maybe further back.

3. You're strawmanning me again.

4. I'm not a libertarian, and I WANT online poker regulated. But I WANT corruption out of those regulations also. What is going on with the UIGEA, BF, and the subsequent buzz phrase ponzi scheme accusations is all corruption catalyzed by GWB, Frist, Kyl, Bachus, the UIGEA lobbyists, and those who came after. The end game will only benefit us if the games are decent, but there is absolutely no way an intellectually honest person can't say the means were complete and utter bull****.

^^^

• IMEGA contended UIGEA was vague - the 3rd Circuit Court rejected their argument.
• If anyone was supposed to challenge UIGEA, it was the sites themselves. It was their fight to fight.
• You seem to have a problem with billion dollar corporations using their $$$ to influence US law to their advantage. But ask yourself, suppose PS/FT were able to use their $$$ to exempt poker from UIGEA - that would OK by you, AMIRITE?
• DOJ can't write regulations for online poker of pass laws of any kind - all they get to do is prosecute the people who break the law.
• I pretty much despise all the people mentioned. But that is hardly an excuse for FTP rolling.

While true that the DOJ doesn't vote on legislation, they routinely influence legislation. Sometimes they're asked for input by Congress, sometimes they approach Congress with legislative requests. There is an Assistant Attorney General that heads an office that deals with these matters.

About DOJ » Office of Legislative Affairs

The Office of Legislative Affairs (OLA) has responsibility for the development and implementation of strategies to advance the Department's legislative initiatives and other interests relating to Congress. OLA also articulates the Department's position on legislation proposed by Congress, facilitates the appearance of Department witnesses at congressional hearings, and manages the interagency clearance process led by OMB. Additionally, OLA coordinates the Department's responses to congressional committee oversight requests and other inquiries from individual Members and congressional staff. OLA also participates in the Senate confirmation process for federal judges and Department nominees, such as Assistant Attorneys General and United States Attorneys. These functions are important to the Department's cooperative and productive relationship with Congress.

I tend to agree that FTP was not formed for criminal purposes. I think this is more a situation of bad luck and persecution coupled with poor decisions. I feel that final move to distribute what they believed or hoped were legitimate funds to the owners was there way of trying to protect their profits. Unfortunately for them it was too late and those funds should be restored to the company to meet financial obligations.

And yes, I had money there also. I don’t believe FT planned on being robbed by the processor or the DOJ.

Gee, thanks. They protected their "profits", which they didn't even make, at the expense of the player funds, which didn't belong to them.

Makes a certain degree of sense, until you realize it is a form of fraud. Hence, it is nice to have the DOJ around to stop them from getting away with it.

This is true. Many people wanted litigation either by the PPA or the sites. But it isn't as simple as that, just like this "ponzi scheme" drama isn't as simple as zomg PS paid us and FT didn't therefore = ponzi scheme/scam/theft/whatever.

I neither know where to start with nor see the point to this ******ed question.

wtf is this "FTP rolling" business? They were operating 100% exactly like every other site on the planet until the DOJ came in and literally shut them down within days. After BF, they were processing withdrawals to ROW players. During all this BS, they've been seeking buyers for the company. What part of that makes you think there was some devious scheme to rob players?

This just is not true. They were severely insolvent on March 31st, 2011 (like having $300 million less than they needed just to cover player deposits.) I might add that a dividend was paid out to the owners on April 1st, 2011.

Last question first - the evidence gathered by the DOJ strongly suggests they made payments to themselves in the forms of dividends and loans in excess of their actual profits. Hence they only had $60M on real cash to cover well over $300M in player accounts. That is pretty "devious".

After BF they tried to stay open for the ROW, but they were inadequately financed to even do that. They might have been generating revenue, but they were bleeding cash, and more and more complaints from ROW players were piling in. Alderney had no choice but to pull the plug.

Seeking a buyer so that we can get paid ... I wish someone would buy it. But I seriously, seriously, seriously doubt there is anyone in their right mind who would layout the kind of money needed. US players - gone for good; 80% of the ROW hits the cash out button ASAP. The only thing left is the software, which, while it is the best of any site around, is NOT worth $300M. Even Rush Poker is gonna lose its value once PS introduces the "Fast Moving Ring Game Product" they are testing now.

In the likely event they cannot find a buyer, what is "plan B"? Does it even exist at this point? How can our funds be "safe and sound" (the exact words still on their web site), when they have no definitive means of paying (let alone a time table)?

100% like other sites ...

For starters, they couldn't even fulfill their FTP Store orders. Dozens of people ordered things they never got, even after waiting for months. Hard to believe they could possibly be out of everything for that long a time period. And I somehow doubt the DOJ was making it difficult to process t-shirt orders. It's no biggie, but it is a good example of how FTP was not operating like PS was.

More importantly, when UIGEA really kicked in mid/late 2010, both PS and FTP found it impossible to process electronic deposits from players in certain states. PS did the sensible thing by simply informing players "sorry, but we cannot accept e-checks from players in your state". FTP chose to float these players. Rather than speculating on why they chose to do this, please try to accept that this represented a significant policy shift for a site "operating 100% exactly like every other site on the planet".

The assumption that most people made was that the sites would pay out the US so as to keep their "modestly successful" business in the ROW (that is a joke - FTP could still rake in at least $100M in revenues - nothing to sneeze at). Clearly this is exactly what PS planned for and carried out.

FTP had a different end in mind.

Full tilt poker have been made by some players to steal some other players.
Do you realize that Ivey played with funds of player?
Easy to broke some guys with infinite bankroll.

Except Mr Dwan, all ftp is a piece of ****

Explanation of How the DOJ Stole Player Money.

They seized 55M and 115M.
Thanks to them 42M got stolen and 128M is "missing".
This totals 340m.

According to the complaints FTP was 331M short on 31 March 2011 and aproximately 300M on June 12.
So even after Black Friday FTP made almost 400K a day.

They owe far less than 300 million to the players. About half of it is to US players. These balances will be corrected obviously and that will bring most of the 128M back. Also if the boardmembers need to repay their profits that is an immediate 60M cash injection that was previously owed to Mr Ferguson.

Do the math for yourself, all these numbers are from the DOJ.
FTP is still a very healthy company and only dirty politics can kill them.
If the DOJ would stop further actions we all get our money back.
I hope they will not be so foolish to kill the goose that lays golden eggs.