Alderney Gambling Control Commission Interview: APCW Perspectives Weekly for October

**BingoT** · 8th October 2011, 10:11 AM

Alderney Gambling Control Commission Interview: APCW Perspectives Weekly for October 7th, 2011

EXCLUSIVE APCW INTERVIEW: This week J Todd travels to the Global Gaming Expo in Las Vegas. In his exclusive video interview with Andre Wilsenach, the CEO of Alderney Gambling Control Commission, Mr Wilsenach clearly points the blame at Full Tilt Poker for their 'deceptive' reporting and business practices. However, this leaves many to wonder if the AGCC really believes they are free of blame in this situation, and how "regulation" will change in the evolving online gambling and poker industry.

**4 of a kind** · 13th October 2011, 12:09 PM

I stopped listening to this idiot half way through this. Regulating based on trust!! What a perfect example why online gaming is what it is today.

Players that lost money through Full-Tilt should go after this idiot and the phony regulating commission he represents. This just keeps getting worse every time another idiot affiliated with this mess opens their mouth.

**Simmo!** · 13th October 2011, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by 4 of a kind

...and the phony regulating commission he represents..

Must admit I thought Alderney got the FTP licence decision wrong from the moment it was announced but "phony"? Nah LOL. I'd love to know how you classify Costa Rica 4oak

**DiamondGeezer** · 13th October 2011, 02:12 PM

Hardly their fault the DOJ didn't inform them. I don't see how any regulator is going to cope when a government starts seizing funds covertly.

I guess you could say Alderney badly misread the political situation and allowed the DOJ to make fools of them.

The stuff he said about ringfencing funds not making any difference if a company went bust due to the banks having claims on the ringfenced funds was very interesting I thought. However in this case they could clearly have acted had the funds been ringfenced. They really ought to have been aware a DOJ seizure was highly likely.

**spiderlegz** · 13th October 2011, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by DiamondGeezer

Hardly their fault the DOJ didn't inform them. I don't see how any regulator is going to cope when a government starts seizing funds covertly.

I guess you could say Alderney badly misread the political situation and allowed the DOJ to make fools of them.

The stuff he said about ringfencing funds not making any difference if a company went bust due to the banks having claims on the ringfenced funds was very interesting I thought. However in this case they could clearly have acted had the funds been ringfenced. They really ought to have been aware a DOJ seizure was highly likely.

Thats why there is segregated and protected. They even mention it themself on their site.

AGCC has zero credibility left, as 4OAK said basing your regulation on basically trust is no regulation at all. And to have the audacity of trying to act like the victim.

Even I could offer similar "regulation". AGCC you are just a giant facepalm.

And LOL TonyG is going to sue them.

**Simmo!** · 13th October 2011, 06:42 PM

Originally Posted by spiderlegz

AGCC has zero credibility left...

Or more accurately, some people think that AGCC made a mistake and for those individuals it lost credibility as a result. Some people, like me, think they made an ill-informed decision but in fact they are generally very good at policing licencees and they shouldn't be hung, drawn and quartered on one faux pas.

**Auditor** · 20th October 2011, 04:54 PM

Here is a new link to the video. The original link is down.

**vinylweatherman** · 21st October 2011, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by DiamondGeezer

Hardly their fault the DOJ didn't inform them. I don't see how any regulator is going to cope when a government starts seizing funds covertly.

I guess you could say Alderney badly misread the political situation and allowed the DOJ to make fools of them.

The stuff he said about ringfencing funds not making any difference if a company went bust due to the banks having claims on the ringfenced funds was very interesting I thought. However in this case they could clearly have acted had the funds been ringfenced. They really ought to have been aware a DOJ seizure was highly likely.

I thought operators licensed by Alderney were prohibited from taking bets from the US in any case, and as such, DoJ actions should have had no effect on funds owned by non-US players. Since pretty much "everybody knew" that Full Tilt WAS heavily involved in taking US bets, the AGCC should have known, and should have either suspended thir license, or demanded proof that the US operation was 100% separate from the non-US one so that nothing that happened in the US could affect non-US players.

The other thing is that the AGCC bowed to pressure from Full Tilt and held the hearings in secret. This begs the question of who is in charge, the AGCC or Full Tilt. This made the AGCC appear weak, and easily bent by pressure from those it licenses. This further dents confidence in their abilty to enforce their regulations.

**bpb** · 21st October 2011, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by Simmo!

Or more accurately, some people think that AGCC made a mistake and for those individuals it lost credibility as a result. Some people, like me, think they made an ill-informed decision but in fact they are generally very good at policing licencees and they shouldn't be hung, drawn and quartered on one faux pas.

Faux pas!?!?!??!?!? Are you #*!$*! kidding me!?!?!??!

They failed to notice a several hundred million dollar shortfall in segregated accounts holding players deposits.

That isn't a faux-pas. That's criminal negligence at best, and only if you're willing to give them the extreme benefit of the doubt. It's not a stretch to imagine that they were accepting briefcases full of cash as bribes in order to look the other way.

**Simmo!** · 21st October 2011, 06:56 PM

Originally Posted by bpb

Faux pas!?!?!??!?!? Are you #*!$*! kidding me!?!?!??!

They failed to notice a several hundred million dollar shortfall in segregated accounts holding players deposits.

That isn't a faux-pas. That's criminal negligence at best, and only if you're willing to give them the extreme benefit of the doubt. It's not a stretch to imagine that they were accepting briefcases full of cash as bribes in order to look the other way.

Arguing over my choice of words is just semantics. We are all of the opinion that they cocked up. My point is: some people will think they aren't fit to licence ever again, some believe that one mistake doesn't make someone rotten to the core.