Card Spike

[mojo]

I hope we can all remain calm here. This is a multi-layered issue and many of us are confused on the facts. Besides ownership issues there are many other factors that shouldn't be lost. There are so many carefully chosen words that I am at a loss on what to think!

Cap official statement: Cardspike is not controlled or managed by CAP, PAP, Affiliate Media, Warren Jolly or Lou "The Professor" Fabiano.
CAP, PAP, Affiliate Media, Warren Jolly, Lou "The Professor" Fabiano and all other personnel of CAP have absolutely no ownership interest, no profits interest and no beneficial interest whatsoever in Cardspike.
Any statements or malicious rumors to the contrary are untrue and unfair.

[Casinomeister]

I hope we can all remain calm here. This is a multi-layered issue and many of us are confused on the facts. Besides ownership issues there are many other factors that shouldn't be lost. There are so many carefully chosen words that I am at a loss on what to think!

Who's getting excited?

I'd just like to have a couple of answers, that's all.

[mojo]

Who's getting excited?

No one, Everyone? We would all just like answers.

[Casinomeister]

Was there another statement made from CAP? If so, where is it?

[mojo]

Was there another statement made from CAP? If so, where is it?

No CM, I was referring to the latest video. This is all to much over my head and perhaps I should just stay quiet.

[jetset]

"Carefully chosen words" is an appropriate description of the activities of both sides here imo.

And there is an element of hubris and assumption in J. Todd's vid explanation for the latest CAP statement detailing its corporate structure - I can think of other reasons for such a pre-emptive strike.

That said, Todd has a point (reinforced by Mojo in this thread) when he says that the CAP statement did claim that:

"Cardspike is not controlled or managed by CAP, PAP, Affiliate Media, Warren Jolly or Lou "The Professor" Fabiano.

"CAP, PAP, Affiliate Media, Warren Jolly, Lou "The Professor" Fabiano and all other personnel of CAP have absolutely no ownership interest, no profits interest and no beneficial interest whatsoever in Cardspike."

That sort of sweeping denial would seem to embrace any earning/profits earned by any CAP firm from the activities of CardSpike?

If that is the case, then how are management fees defined? Assuming that CAP subsidiaries have been managing CardSpike's affiliate operations.

CAP has already emphasised that it has no beneficial ownership interest in CardSpike.

What I would really like to know, clearly and without obfuscation if at all possible is:

1) Was CAP or its companies/executives involved in managing or administering the (non) payment of affiliates at CardSpike?

2) If the answer to that is 'yes', was the payment of affiliates a direct responsiblity of the CAP subsidiary in terms of the management contract?

3) Why were affiliates not paid? Was the alleged stifling of comment or complaint on the issue at CAP's forum an extension (ie a conflict of interest) of CAP's commercial involvement with CardSpike?

4) If the answer to (1) is in the affirmative, what was the CAP entity's reward for rendering those services?

5) And would such an arrangement be a conflict of interest bearing in mind CAP's influential role in affiliate affairs, and the consequent often emotional forum exchanges?

6) Is Effective Media an integral part of the CAP group, or a seperate and individual company in which certain CAP principals have an external interest? Because it seems from Warren Jolly's "clarification" on Tuesday that Effective Media was the entity that managed CardSpike's affiliate affairs, presumably including the non-payments. The involvement of CAP top management in a distinctly seperate company that is nevertheless involved in affiliate business could still constitute a conflict imv.

Finally, it's probably a forlorn hope, but I would really like to know who owns CardSpike, and have a look at the relationships that might flow from that!

[mojo]

Gosh! I wish I could articulate like that. TY Jetset. That is what I would have like to have said.

[RobWin]

2.Effective Media Group, its officers, staff and investors have no direct or indirect ownership in CardSpike.com. EMG operated as performance based consultant ONLY for an offshore investor.

It seems to me by the above statement that Warren made, after you break it down and dissect or analyze it a little more that it is clear that they, being Warren & Lou were clearly working for the owner of CardSpike. The owner being the "offshore investor", which IMO is clearly a conflict of interest here, especially when they were obviously performing "consulting services" for the owner of the casino/offshore investor.

ADDED: If they were doing a good job of consulting for this so called off shore investor then they also had to keep that casino owner/offshore investors best interest in the #1 position in front of the affiliates best interest IMO.

How can it not be ? On the one hand they have their affiliate programs running through Affiliate Media Inc. and on the other hand they have their Casino consulting services that they offer to investors and operators of online gaming properties through EMG Corp.

This is not any different than Bush and Cheney setting public policy initiatives concerning big oil while also sitting on the boards of these companies and being large share holders at the same time while appearing to have different skins !

[Casinomeister]

Well, I'm getting a bit perturbed by this whole thing.

The bottom line is that CAP has denied any connection whatsoever, except that they received funds for the certification, and that there was some sort of management fee that wasn't paid.

Correct me if I'm wrong on that. No connection - final word.

But I still only see assumptions - where is the beef? Sure, Effective Media provided service for some "offshore" entity. Well - what the hell?

Clear as day? It's clear as mud to me.

I still want to know where it explicitly states that Effective Media ran the affiliate program for Cardspike. No one has produced this yet.

How about an on camera interview with Greg Powell? Perhaps he could clear this up

Added: I hope this isn't an excercise of splitting hairs. If an "offshore entity" is defined as Cardspike, or if "managerial services" is meant to be "the affiliate program", a lot of people are going to be rather pissed off for being lied to. If you state you have nothing at all to do with a business, we take your word for it.

[Casino City]

I still want to know where it explicitly states that Effective Media ran the affiliate program for Cardspike. No one has produced this yet.

OK, we'll make sure to put that material together and publish it. Some examples of materials that substantiate this include that Greg has confirmed he was an employee of effective media group, paid by effective media group, and working out of an office owned by effective media group at the time he was the affiliate manager for cardspike. And while he was affiliate manager he had working e-mail addresses at both effective media group and cardspike. And the cardspike website was developed by the same web development firm that developed the PAP website.

How about an on camera interview with Greg Powell? Perhaps he could clear this up

He is not in a position to make many statements beyond what I stated above because he is bound by a confidentiality agreement, and so he has a very limited ability to comment on the matter without getting himself into a situation where he could be sued. Greg is adamant about not answering questions that he feels would violate that agreement. I've rarely seen someone so concerned ab out the possible consequences of violating a confidentiality agreement, which I think in and of itself says something about the pressures behind the scenes. Actually, that might make an interview pretty interesting - a series of statements to which he responds he is not free to reply.

Added: I hope this isn't an excercise of splitting hairs. If an "offshore entity" is defined as Cardspike, or if "managerial services" is meant to be "the affiliate program", a lot of people are going to be rather pissed off for being lied to. If you state you have nothing at all to do with a business, we take your word for it.

Your statements here are 100% correct. There is a case of very, very, very carefully written statements being made by Affiliate Media.