Black Friday and the aftermath: Online Poker Implications

[Delboy]

Commissioner Annie Duke, while a non-voting member of the committee, does not participate in any committee decisions or discussions that involve league member discipline.

Absolute rubbish.

She just found out her brother has $40,000,000 in the bank and all he got her for Christmas was a Body Shop selection basket.

So now Howard must pay!

[ManuelsMum]

that's pretty close to a Ponzi scheme.

If it was a ponzi scheme the DoJ would have filed criminal charges instead of trying to seize more funds for its personal use while shouting "ponzi scheme" to justify this act.  

Btw this whole affair has been caused by stupid americans, thieving americans and talibanesque americans.  
-Stupid americans open a poker site,
-talibanesque americans pass laws making it difficult to get money on site,
-stupid americans try to get round the laws using dodgy processors and getting money stolen by thieving americans and seized by talibanesque americans,
-thieving americans make multiple deposiits on site when they realise their bank accounts aren't being debited,
-stupid americans dont notice this until almost all the fcking money has gone,
-talibanesque americans seize what is left of the money

The money said to have been siphoned for payments to directors, and to cover the 'ghost money' missing from undebited deposit transactions came from FTP operating capital. Yet the site continued to run and may have gone on running had the Feds/Alderney not busted them. But how? Where was the money coming from to keep on running? New player-deposits?

Ponzi.

[Jon MW]

that's pretty close to a Ponzi scheme.

If it was a ponzi scheme the DoJ would have filed criminal charges instead of trying to seize more funds for its personal use while shouting "ponzi scheme" to justify this act.  
...

The money said to have been siphoned for payments to directors, and to cover the 'ghost money' missing from undebited deposit transactions came from FTP operating capital. Yet the site continued to run and may have gone on running had the Feds/Alderney not busted them. But how? Where was the money coming from to keep on running? New player-deposits?

Ponzi.

The players weren't investors - not Ponzi

In fact the USP of FTP was that you were playing the pro's - so far from promising unobtainable returns on an investment they were closer to implicitly telling players that they would lose their money

[ManuelsMum]

that's pretty close to a Ponzi scheme.

If it was a ponzi scheme the DoJ would have filed criminal charges instead of trying to seize more funds for its personal use while shouting "ponzi scheme" to justify this act.  
...

The money said to have been siphoned for payments to directors, and to cover the 'ghost money' missing from undebited deposit transactions came from FTP operating capital. Yet the site continued to run and may have gone on running had the Feds/Alderney not busted them. But how? Where was the money coming from to keep on running? New player-deposits?

Ponzi.

The players weren't investors - not Ponzi

In fact the USP of FTP was that you were playing the pro's - so far from promising unobtainable returns on an investment they were closer to implicitly telling players that they would lose their money

You make a deposit in the reasonable belief that, notwithstanding the vagaries of chance and being outplayed, there will be operating capital available at the company to pay you should you wish to withdraw.
They didn't buy 'shares' in FTP, the allusion to Ponzi is not to compare them to investors, it's to show how FTP were conning players into new deposits (in hope of a return) to support a corrupt and thieving scheme which FTP knew could probably not repay them.

Guessing your last sentence is a level.

[ManuelsMum]

The question remains...why did this happen? FTP was a nice cash cow for these boys, they knew that removing so much cash would put it at risk and also risk exposing their dodgy operation. Why did they cashout? Did they know some kind of bust was imminent anyway?

[Jon MW]

that's pretty close to a Ponzi scheme.

If it was a ponzi scheme the DoJ would have filed criminal charges instead of trying to seize more funds for its personal use while shouting "ponzi scheme" to justify this act.  
...

The money said to have been siphoned for payments to directors, and to cover the 'ghost money' missing from undebited deposit transactions came from FTP operating capital. Yet the site continued to run and may have gone on running had the Feds/Alderney not busted them. But how? Where was the money coming from to keep on running? New player-deposits?

Ponzi.

The players weren't investors - not Ponzi

In fact the USP of FTP was that you were playing the pro's - so far from promising unobtainable returns on an investment they were closer to implicitly telling players that they would lose their money

You make a deposit in the reasonable belief that, notwithstanding the vagaries of chance and being outplayed, there will be operating capital available at the company to pay you should you wish to withdraw.
They didn't buy 'shares' in FTP, the allusion to Ponzi is not to compare them to investors, it's to show how FTP were conning players into new deposits (in hope of a return) to support a corrupt and thieving scheme which FTP knew could probably not repay them.

Guessing your last sentence is a level.

You seem to have a problem understanding the concept of either a ponzi scheme or an investment.

A ponzi scheme is an investment fraud - this is a lot more like theft; like if you set up a shop took hundreds of orders and then didn't deliver any products.

Not that the labelling is particularly important, I think we can agree it's bad whatever it's called.

This was someone who ran a really good ponzi scheme if anyone wants some entertaining reading - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Hartzell

[ManuelsMum]

that's pretty close to a Ponzi scheme.

If it was a ponzi scheme the DoJ would have filed criminal charges instead of trying to seize more funds for its personal use while shouting "ponzi scheme" to justify this act.  
...

The money said to have been siphoned for payments to directors, and to cover the 'ghost money' missing from undebited deposit transactions came from FTP operating capital. Yet the site continued to run and may have gone on running had the Feds/Alderney not busted them. But how? Where was the money coming from to keep on running? New player-deposits?

Ponzi.

The players weren't investors - not Ponzi

In fact the USP of FTP was that you were playing the pro's - so far from promising unobtainable returns on an investment they were closer to implicitly telling players that they would lose their money

You make a deposit in the reasonable belief that, notwithstanding the vagaries of chance and being outplayed, there will be operating capital available at the company to pay you should you wish to withdraw.
They didn't buy 'shares' in FTP, the allusion to Ponzi is not to compare them to investors, it's to show how FTP were conning players into new deposits (in hope of a return) to support a corrupt and thieving scheme which FTP knew could probably not repay them.

Guessing your last sentence is a level.

You seem to have a problem understanding the concept of either a ponzi scheme or an investment.

A ponzi scheme is an investment fraud - this is a lot more like theft; like if you set up a shop took hundreds of orders and then didn't deliver any products.

Not that the labelling is particularly important, I think we can agree it's bad whatever it's called.

This was someone who ran a really good ponzi scheme if anyone wants some entertaining reading - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Hartzell

The Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara must be really thick eh, thinking FTP was an investment company. He must have missed all those slick ads with chips n stuff, or maybe he thought FTP was like an investment company that paid dividends in the form of casino chips. For some reason.

[doubleup]

The Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara must be really thick eh,

no he is not thick at all, he is a devious manipulative pos who doesn't give a shit about anything but his own career.

[TommyD]

Posted by Rafe Furst in Uncategorized on September 21st, 2011 | 3 Comments

By now you’ve no doubt heard about the allegations against me in a Federal civil suit regarding Full Tilt Poker.  Because of the seriousness of the allegations I’m not able to comment at all about the pending case, much as I would like to.  From a moral, personal and interpersonal perspective I feel I’ve got nothing to hide.  And since I trust in our system of justice and have the utmost respect for my legal counsel, I will refrain from talking about the case until it’s resolved.

What I would like to express here is concern for my family, friends, colleagues and supporters who believe in me and who feel my pain as if it were their own.  It sucks to have to endure the character assassination and potshots being taken at me in the media and social networks without being able to defend myself.  Privately though I have received incredible support from many of you, and I can’t tell you how much it means to me.  May you never have to endure something like this, but if you do, I hope you have friends as good as mine.

To the skeptics, please consider that not everything you read is true, and our society is built on a presumption of innocence until proven otherwise.  It’s difficult to take back hurtful things that you might later regret, when the damage has already been done.

To those of you who have asked what you can do to show your support, I am grateful for the offer.  My only request at this time would be to not let the naysayers and haters be the only voices out there expressing their opinion of me. My twitter is @rafefurst, and I’d love to hear from you publicly.

With Respect and Love,

Rafe

Innocent before proven guilty, but when I read this I thought of Jonathan Aitken

[paulhouk03]

The Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara must be really thick eh,

no he is not thick at all, he is a devious manipulative pos who doesn't give a shit about anything but his own career.

Yanks gonna yank

[GreekStein]

This gets sicker and sicker every time I think about it. Even I wouldn't set fire to my own moneytree

[tikay]

This gets sicker and sicker every time I think about it. Even I wouldn't set fire to my own moneytree

I'm a buyer there......

[smashedagain]

This gets sicker and sicker every time I think about it. Even I wouldn't set fire to my own moneytree

i'm pretty sure you've experienced more than on forest fire you degen

[Bongo]

In some cases they never had it and there are rumours they spent some of the rest on marketing etc. Fractional Reserve poker, it's great!

So, in effect, Lederer is like Madoff?

No not really, firstly how much Lederer has been aware/cause of this mess is unknown. He is not the CEO (Ray Bitar is) and that is why he is hasn't been arrested by the US authorities. Also this isn't really a Ponzi scheme imo, more total mis management, I think the majority of people involved with Tilt had good intentions just totally incompetent.

Good call Longy! Sigh at Boldie getting there before the DoJ

Could a similar thing apply to those who withdrew their money?

This was talking about payments being reclaimed...

I read this earlier (on Pete Birks blog):

More interestingly, if the parallels with Madoff are pushed hard, then players such as myself who withdrew money between 2008 and 2011 might be chased to give it back. The argument here is simple. Why should I, who was lucky enough to take non-existent cash out of FTP, be ok, while someone who left their cash in there loses everything? And the defence os "I saw it coming" is even worse, because then you are admitting that you KNEW the money wasn't really there, but took it anyway.

Does anyone think that could happen?

[DaveShoelace]

I read this earlier (on Pete Birks blog):

More interestingly, if the parallels with Madoff are pushed hard, then players such as myself who withdrew money between 2008 and 2011 might be chased to give it back. The argument here is simple. Why should I, who was lucky enough to take non-existent cash out of FTP, be ok, while someone who left their cash in there loses everything? And the defence os "I saw it coming" is even worse, because then you are admitting that you KNEW the money wasn't really there, but took it anyway.

Does anyone think that could happen?

I'd be shocked if they did, I'm not sure how the DOJ could enforce that to players outside of the US.