Pricewaterhouse to pay$50million settlement (can we say fraud)

[jetset]

Dirk, we go back a long time to when I really appreciated your balanced, informative and reasonable posts and read them with care.

But in more recent times you sound increasingly like DaveR, another man who's gambling expertise I definitely respect but who's unproved and almost totally unbalanced allegations and views on various issues I have come to distrust and largely reject for lack of evidence and way too much personal conjecture.

I hate to say this and I do not like to be impolite, but imo you have no idea of what goes on behind the scenes in getting player issues resolved in this business by the very people that you accuse of being "too close" to various software suppliers.

We're talking about hundreds of cases that do not become high profile issues but are nevertheless resolved to the benefit of the player...and we lose some of them too, because all players are not above board in the same way that some casinos are way better than others. Software providers, too.

That's apart from the considerable personal effort we devote to investigating the bad bastards out there and warning players through publicity, too.

No fanfare or expectation of reward from either side - just putting something back into the industry, which the cynical seem to have a hard job understanding.

That is not accomplished by raving on the message boards making unfounded allegations, denigrating trust and actively encouraging a growing chasm between the two most important and interdependent parts of the business - players and casinos.

There are enough naysayers out there and I fear you have become one of them, with the concomitant danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

We take the time to talk to the key people regardless of provider who can make things happen and hopefully improve the industry, travelling at our own expense and most of all time to events in order to interact with all aspects and learn more about the other side, and maintaining communication links that invariably turn out to be of use in player issues.

Sometimes we have achieved resolutions without the player even being aware of some behind-the-scenes "heads ups" to the right people who have a real commitment to good business practices.

To say that we are too far removed from the player's POV is overstating the case to put it mildly. Most of us are not only regularly in private comms with disgruntled players, but are here and on other good boards every day trying to learn, give an alternative perspective and help. And I believe that we have a right to express sometimes conflicting opinions without in any way being accused of not being close to player interests.

You can guarantee one thing - the three of us have always tried to give an honestly held opinion, and sometimes that is desirable to counter-balance some of the unreasonable rants that are posted.

You need to consider your own position here imo. What is your real motive for trashing eCOGRA so vehemently along with Caruso? You seem totally resolved to dismiss this substantial initiative as a mere Microgaming inspired PR stunt despite the compelling evidence to the contrary that is steadily evolving. And how productive to the player is it to have an admitted trash policy every time the eCOGRA name appears - does the player community win in this sort of personal pissing contest, and what useful alternatives are you proposing?

I think Spear and Bryan have very eloquently expressed everything else I have to say on this.

Let's just remember that there are other views on most issues, and that some of your own opinions can be plain wrong.

[jetset]

Hi Jet;

As you know Jet, I'm able to rely on some pretty substantial individuals and organizations with backgrounds in Law and Investigations. For the last couple of years "we" (those individuals, organizations and myself cumulatively) have endeavored to keep very close tabs on what "we" consider to be a MG/PWC charade.

I'd be very interested to hear any new comment that PRICE WATERHOUSE COOPERS might have to offer. Though I seriously doubt that it would be anything short of the same banter that has been offered by them in the past.

Good to hear from you Jet. Have a good one.

I sure do appreciate your take on what is right and what is wrong, together with your legal capabilities in the cases against Virtual and more recently Hamptons, Cipher.

I believe you rendered a wider and valuable service to the industry as well as yourself in both of those issues, and in other useful but non-litigative inputs you have made on the message boards.

I will therefore watch for your announcements and look forward to reporting in our bulletins the progress of your litigative attempts focused on Microgaming and Pricewaterhouse Coopers after the long investigation into the "charade" you refer to - it will no doubt make fascinating reading.

I have commented on the PwC issue in the USA elsewhere on this message board - thus far PwC have not responded to me with an official comment.

You have a good one, too!

[sw2003]

Three million?

I'll turn to the dark side for two million.(negotiable to 500k)

No, no, no! I will only turn to the dark side for USD 10 million, not a cent less!
Ok 10 million Pound Sterling also accepted!
You are asking me to compromise my otherwise impeccable unblemished
integrity, I won't do it for less!

[RobWin]

Im just curious if anyone else out there has proof that eCOGRA was not set up by associates/members of the Microgaming company... it was awhile before they had two other software providers that were not Microgaming ? This would be a definitive question to have answered... it always seems that anytime a question of this nature arises the affiliates want the players to show proof that there is a connection between the two.... I want to know if there are any affiliates of microgaming out there that can show proof that eCOGRA was not set up by associates/members of the Microgaming company ?

Bryan you said "eCOGRA is not a casino watchdog." Question: If this is true, then what is its exact purpose if not to be a watchdog and regulate this online gaming industry ?

Bryan you also said "You won't find eCOGRA reporting on trademark violation issues, or alerting players on deceptive spam scams, or notifying players on software that REALLY cheats" Question: If eCOGRA is not going to "notify players on software that REALLY cheats" then again how are they helping us players... ?

Another question Bryan, you said that "eCOGRA has their place in the big picture; to offer player assurance by implementing and enforcing detailed criteria to their member casinos." Question: ... by implementing and enforcing detailed criteria to their member casinos... How is this helping us players... could you please elaborate on this statement.

It seems to me that if you really think about it, this is the very reason that the largest land based casino country in the world " The USA " did not want to try and tackle all the problems they knew would arise from trying to regulate online gambling based out of third world countries...IMHO

Thanks for your response ........

[spearmaster]

Where did anyone say that Microgaming didn't have a hand in the establishment of eCOGRA? They are a founding member along with Cassava and certainly they have played a role. I should think this is completely unquestionable.

As for the rest - will leave it to whom it was addressed towards.

[GrandMaster]

Bryan you said "eCOGRA is not a casino watchdog." Question: If this is true, then what is its exact purpose if not to be a watchdog and regulate this online gaming industry ?

Bryan you also said "You won't find eCOGRA reporting on trademark violation issues, or alerting players on deceptive spam scams, or notifying players on software that REALLY cheats" Question: If eCOGRA is not going to "notify players on software that REALLY cheats" then again how are they helping us players... ?

I think this means that ecogra is only dealing with its "approved casinos". It is not going to get involved if you have a problem with Slots Alley or Warren Cloud.

The biggest problem problem with ecogra is the inspection, approval and audit processes are secret, so nobody outside ecogra and PwC know how much they are worth. The Casinomeister regularly mentions how the people running OPA have no qualifications, but what are PwC's qualifications in testing random numbers and game fairness? They could publish that the randomness tests were devised by Prof X of the University of Y, then I could look up his publications, and check his reputation. I also want to point out that ecogra's for game fairness is inadequate, Rule 109.R.5 is flawed, which gives me the impression that nobody with appropriate mathematical training was involved in formulating the rules.

The other problem is that there is no player input at any stage, for example, as a player, I would place much greater emphasis on truth in advertising, and I would consider factually correct advertising (113.P.3) as compulsory, not just a suggested practice.

[RobWin]

Spearmaster, Thanks for the clarification... and Grandmaster, point agreed, this would be useful info.

[spearmaster]

Rule 109.R.5 is flawed, which gives me the impression that nobody with appropriate mathematical training was involved in formulating the rules.

Would you mind elaborating? It might be an interesting point to look at - in all honesty I have not gone over eCOGRAs rules and seals with a fine-tooth comb, otherwise I would have spotted the "Players Seal of Approval" slipup. And I'm sure eCOGRA would like to know if indeed there is some sort of flaw there.

[RobWin]

I am still confused as to what the exact purpose of eCOGRA is, especially after just reading all of their "Generally Accepted Practices" ..... one in particular that concerns me is this one :



100 PAYMENT TO AND RECEIPTS FROM PLAYERS

OBJECTIVE:

Payment requests/receipts shall be efficiently and promptly attended to and payments/receipts shall be completely and accurately processed.


METHODOLOGY:

The eCOGRA audit panel shall ensure acceptable financial and control practices are used to meet this objective.


MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS:

Receipt from and Payment to Players SP O
100.R.1 All receipts from and payments to players must be conducted through a formal documented process.
100.R.2 All information regarding receipts and payments shall be logged and retained by the applicable parties.
100.R.3 Bank reconciliation procedures must be demonstrated.

Excluded Players SP O
100.R.4 Any uncontested funds left in an account, previously de-activated by the operator, shall be remitted to the owner of the funds.



My Question : What about Time Frame, there is absolutely nothing stated about the Time Frame that approved eCOGRA Casinos have to get payment to their players other than "Payment requests/receipts shall be efficiently and promptly attended to"

To me if it is the casinos policy to promptly pay their players within (ie: 60 days or so) and this is considered to be their standard policy then again how is eCOGRA regulating this because all eCOGRA states is that this is just their objective and no mention of any timeline in their MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS section as you can see above.

[RobWin]

Another Confusing Statement that I just read from eCOGRA's site page listing their approved casinos :


"Accredited sites are subject to regular monitoring of their operation. Whilst eCOGRA makes its best endeavors, no representation or warranty can be given that the operation of any games at any given site is at all times in accordance with the eCOGRA requirements. Therefore eCOGRA cannot assume responsibility for consequences resulting from the use of any Internet gaming site bearing the eCOGRA Players Seal of Approval. eCOGRA is not liable to any person or group of persons, firm, company or entity for losses of any description that a user of an accredited site may suffer."


The sentence that I underlined above is the one that concerns me, could you imagine if the New Jersey or the Nevada Gaming Commission made a statement to this effect ?

If any games at any given site is NOT AT ALL TIMES in accordance with the eCOGRA requirements then how in the world is eCOGRA Regulating this online Gaming Industry ?

Does this also mean that the owners of the sites can manipulate the games and outcomes so that they would not be in regulation with eCOGRA requirements ?

I think these are fair questions that need to be addressed by eCOGRA if they are to be respected by the player community.