IMPORTANT - CAP Euro Event Changes

[spearmaster]

The problem was this wasn't planned - I landed in Macau to attend AIG and whilst sitting drinking beers with SpearMaster the texts, calls and emails started arriving about the whole situation and all I knew was that there was some urgent changes to be made and set about making these happen.

Very true - first thing I asked when I saw him is "Have you seen what happened yet?" knowing that it was likely he was actually on the plane when everything started... by that time his Blackberry was literally buzzing and ringing off the hook...

The next night - over noodles and the Bruce Lee slots - the decision had more or less been made to see what could be done. Obviously he had many more phone calls and discussions to finish first, though.

Throughout this period I was amazed that Alex kept his good humour and that smile on his face (though a bit wry!). I know I certainly couldn't have done that so all credit to him for keeping his composure during trying times!

Obviously it was more than a few days later before Alex could reveal the details of what decision had been reached and what had been done - but I can 100% assure you he was on the situation right from the get-go.

 

[PokerNations]

Thanks for further explaining the situation Alex. This makes a lot more sense now since you put it into perspective there in that last post and I would personally like to see "iGaming Business" flourish and do well.

Agreed, it's just easier for many of us to support your efforts if CAP or any of their related entities aren't deriving financial benefits in the process.

I know you can't really get too indepth into that currently, because things are still messy. But just realize that is the primary issue for many involved here, we don't want to do anything that is going to result in a benefit for Lou and Warren.

 

[Casinomeister]

Very true - first thing I asked when I saw him is "Have you seen what happened yet?" knowing that it was likely he was actually on the plane when everything started... by that time his Blackberry was literally buzzing and ringing off the hook...

This is what I was doing when Alex was freaking out over his Blackberry in Macau

But seriously, I'm glad Alex seems to be taking this situation by the horns. I believe he knows what he's doing, and I have faith it'll turn out good for affiliates and the affiliate programs.

 

[RobWin]

This is what I was doing when Alex was freaking out over his Blackberry in Macau

But seriously, I'm glad Alex seems to be taking this situation by the horns. I believe he knows what he's doing, and I have faith it'll turn out good for affiliates and the affiliate programs.

Cool pic my friend, but I'm surprised to see you on skis and not a snowboard, I personally like snowboarding better now since I started it three years ago...

 

[jetset]

I don't want to harp on this, but there is a serious question of credibility from the get-go here imo, and that is turning on the lack of transparency which still bedevils this transaction.

Alex's personal and business reputation is such that he does not need to defend himself here, but his board of directors at iGaming Business should be made aware that failing to furnish the fundamental details of this transaction could impact their credibility going forward.

And the cynical will continue to suspect that certain individuals are still intimately and profitably involved (beyond mere sponsorship) in the enterprise, given their previous business deceptions.

I suggest that that would do little to enhance a new and independent events regime such as Alex has suggested in his various posts here.

If this is a straight commercial deal in which iGaming has paid (or is to pay) a consideration to AMI or its management for the exclusive right to take over these events as an independent venture, then I would have no problem at all with that....but it needs to be out in the open and not cloaked as a transaction that is so sudden and messy as to preclude the basics being disclosed.

The truth will eventually out - and if it transpires that iGaming Business was party to a further deception, that will not sit well with the industry imo.

 

[rikkerbuddy]

Alex is very good

I have meet Alex many times - he is a class act and the people he works with are in my opinion always helpful. I am so happy to know he has cut ties with warren and Lou.

Alex has always out done himself at every event he has put on

I will be at any event Alex puts on and I look forward to Budapest.

 

[KasinoKing]

I have meet Alex many times - he is a class act and the people he works with are in my opinion always helpful. I am so happy to know he has cut ties with warren and Lou.

Alex has always out done himself at every event he has put on

I will be at any event Alex puts on and I look forward to Budapest.

I agree - Alex is a top bloke!

I've been trying to decide whether to go to CAC or AAC for several weeks... and I'm leaning heavily towards AAC at the moment... after Alex's assurance that L&W aren't pulling any strings.

KK

 

[justred]

Fine post Jetset. If the CAP guys will still make money from the event and it is not disclosed and only revealed / uncovered later it will put a serious dent in Igamingbusiness' credibility.

If this turns out to be window dressing and just a name change to try and pull numbers I would have to think twice about attending any of their events.

I hope they come clean. God knows we need transaparency.

 

[RobWin]

I don't want to harp on this, but there is a serious question of credibility from the get-go here imo, and that is turning on the lack of transparency which still bedevils this transaction.

Alex's personal and business reputation is such that he does not need to defend himself here, but his board of directors at iGaming Business should be made aware that failing to furnish the fundamental details of this transaction could impact their credibility going forward.

And the cynical will continue to suspect that certain individuals are still intimately and profitably involved (beyond mere sponsorship) in the enterprise, given their previous business deceptions.

I suggest that that would do little to enhance a new and independent events regime such as Alex has suggested in his various posts here.

If this is a straight commercial deal in which iGaming has paid (or is to pay) a consideration to AMI or its management for the exclusive right to take over these events as an independent venture, then I would have no problem at all with that....but it needs to be out in the open and not cloaked as a transaction that is so sudden and messy as to preclude the basics being disclosed.

The truth will eventually out - and if it transpires that iGaming Business was party to a further deception, that will not sit well with the industry imo.

Well, only 10 months later now and it appears that the truth of this IGB/Cap financial relationship is finally revealed....

Is anyone actually surprised?

Looks like business as usual to me...this freaking industry will never change IMO as long as you peeps keep on supporting and/or attending these conferences that CAP is truly a beneficiary of!!

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

____
____

 

[PokerNations]

Yup, I can't support anything that CAP benefits from financially, so I won't be attending any of these events.

 

[Webzcas]

Rob, most people knew CAP still had a strong financial link to these conferences.

I will be attending this year in it's entirety ( I only went to the morning of the opening day for the first two CAP London events and missed last years altogether ) after frequenting the ICE at Earls Court which immediately precedes it.

However my attendance is not to give CAP my approval not that it would matter a jot to them. But my sole reason in attending is to catch up with peers and acquaintances who I respect and value as friends. This is also the first opportunity I have in attending such an event since the ICE in 2009. Being only 100 miles away from my home also makes it easier.

That said I will continue to support CAC and plan to make Amsterdam this Spring. As for other CAP events, I will not be attending them.

 

[RobWin]

Rob, most people knew CAP still had a strong financial link to these conferences.

I will be attending this year in it's entirety ( I only went to the morning of the opening day for the first two CAP London events and missed last years altogether ) after frequenting the ICE at Earls Court which immediately precedes it.

However my attendance is not to give CAP my approval not that it would matter a jot to them. But my sole reason in attending is to catch up with peers and acquaintances who I respect and value as friends. This is also the first opportunity I have in attending such an event since the ICE in 2009. Being only 100 miles away from my home also makes it easier.

That said I will continue to support CAC and plan to make Amsterdam this Spring. As for other CAP events, I will not be attending them.

Webzcas, although true, you will still be counted as an attendee but I do understand your reasoning behind attending the event, catch up with old acquaintances and all. But in that same respect I do have to agree with what "thepokerkeep" said

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

at the GPWA Forum about the continuing revenue stream being generated and benefiting CAP in the big picture and scheme of things.

As long as affiliates are still willing to continue to attend these IGB/CAP events it is in fact truly helping to line the pockets of Warren and CAP. Just like "thepokerkeep" said, As long as affiliates attend, the casinos and affiliate programs will pay to be there. As long as they continue to pay then Warren and most likely Lou too if the truth be known will continue to benefit in the big picture.

If affiliates stop attending these and only show up for Marc Lesnick's events then it would certainly put a damper on new money filtering into CAP's pockets.

I also think Alex has his best interests misplaced here and is certainly in bed with the wrong peeps, just my opinion.
____
____

 

[PokerNations]

I also think Alex has his best interests misplaced here and is certainly in bed with the wrong peeps, just my opinion.
____
____

I don't blame Alex here, likely the contract that was signed makes it difficult to extract their company from working with CAP on these events.

Thus the reason to vote with your feet and wallets and let others in the industry know you won't support something that benefits a company as unethical as CAP

 

[RobWin]

I don't blame Alex here, likely the contract that was signed makes it difficult to extract their company from working with CAP on these events.

Thus the reason to vote with your feet and wallets and let others in the industry know you won't support something that benefits a company as unethical as CAP

If that is truly the case then, and it may not be Alex per se but the company he works for that signed that contract deal, but if they did not write themselves an "out" or "exit" clause or waiver into it then they are not as bright as most peeps think they are.

I wrote contracts for the past 20 years for multi-million dollar amounts in the commercial construction industry and we never ever signed one that did not have an "out" or "exit" clause/waiver written into it. That being said, I would almost bet the farm that if Alex and IGB really wanted out of that contract then they would in fact relinquish it!
____
____

 

[Simmo!]

I don't blame Alex here, likely the contract that was signed makes it difficult to extract their company from working with CAP on these events.

Agreed. Plus Alex is an employee of the company anyway so ultimately that wouldn't have been his decision. I'll be supporting both Alex and Marc and will be at both.

If we avoided doing things because a company whose morals we didn't agree with benefitted down the line, we wouldn't do anything. Wouldn't put my money in a bank, wouldn't fly anywhere, probably wouldn't even have a computer.

 

[RobWin]

Agreed. Plus Alex is an employee of the company anyway so ultimately that wouldn't have been his decision. I'll be supporting both Alex and Marc and will be at both.

If we avoided doing things because a company whose morals we didn't agree with benefitted down the line, we wouldn't do anything. Wouldn't put my money in a bank, wouldn't fly anywhere, probably wouldn't even have a computer.

And that is ultimately why CAP will flourish again one day in the near future...
____
____

 

[Simmo!]

And that is ultimately why CAP will flourish again one day in the near future...
____
____

I take it you don't use banks then Rob

 

[RobWin]

I take it you don't use banks then Rob

I do, although I hate to admit it... But actually no more than I have to as a life necessity, whereas helping to line the pockets of CAP by attending their events is not a life necessity.

But I still respect your choice to attend, don't understand it though...but I respect your decision.
____
____

 

[Simmo!]

You could always keep the cash under your bed. If you do, can you ping me your address...I'd like to pop in for a coffee

My point is not really just banks, but in everyday life we use and do all sorts of things that have links to companies whose ethics we won't agree with, but we will choose to ignore them because it's more convenient or we don't really care. Cosmetic products + companies that use animal testing? Companies who pollute the atmosphere? Just a couple of many non "life necessity" examples. I bet everyone here and at GPWA has at least one company whose ethics they disagree with but that they support in some way, shape or form when there are alternative options.

 

[Simmo!]

Actually, just for shits and giggles, here's an alternative viewpoint:

CAP primarily derive revenue from the affiliate programs advertising. The affiliate programs survive off players generated by affiliates. The more affiliates that attend the conferences, the more deals will be done. The more deals that are done, the more money affiliate programs make. The more money affiliate programs make, the less they need to advertise. The less they need to advertise...

 

[Pinababy69]

Well, only 10 months later now and it appears that the truth of this IGB/Cap financial relationship is finally revealed....

Is anyone actually surprised?

Looks like business as usual to me...this freaking industry will never change IMO as long as you peeps keep on supporting and/or attending these conferences that CAP is truly a beneficiary of!!

____
____

Rob, I actually just went and read the whole thread..well, most of it anyway. Maybe you can tell me if I have this right?

Last year, MCorfman/GPWA go out of their way to "dig up the dirt" on CAP, and end up knocking them down a few notches over the whole Cardspike issue (and Absolute Slots as well?). The main concern in all of it was LACK OF TRANSPARENCY, right? So GPWA ends up benefitting from CAP's losses...long and short of it. Many programs left CAP and I would assume that GPWA's business picked up as a result?

Now...fast forward to this year and an upcoming affiliate conference. Mojo posts, wanting to know what financial/business relationship there is between CAP and the sponsors of the next affy conference, because she doesn't want to support in any way, shape or form, the owners of CAP. Reasonable request, in the interests of TRANSPARENCY. The thread goes along, and we end up with JTodd (Integrity) posting what I assume was supposed to be hush hush confidential info regarding CAP and their current affiliations. M Corfman even goes so far as to remove the thread, edit out this highly confidential info, and slap JTodd with a temporary posting ban. Am I following this so far Rob?

Then...wait for it...along comes Alex, who...LO AND BEHOLD, confirms that CAP does indeed profit financially from these conferences re: the contracts and business arrangements in place. So, one is left to assume that this is the highly confidential info that JTodd had posted, and which obviously M Corfman and GPWA/Casino City employees were privy to all along...but which affiliates who may attend one of these conventions, were not allowed to know about.

To sum it up...the same M Corfman that sought to bring down CAP a year ago, now goes out of his way to protect the very same CAP..with the very same Warren Jolly at the helm? Even to the extent of suspending one of his own employees from posting. Hypocrisy sure does make strange bedfellows doesn't it? BTW, I'm not calling Michael Corfman personally a hypocrite. It's this whole industry...it's BUILT on hypocrisy...it's the foundation.

Can you tell me if I've come close Rob? I haven't been following this saga for the last year..so this past half hour was a crash course on the latest goings on of GPWA/Casino City/CAP...and all the highly ethical people involved with all of them.

 

[Pinababy69]

I take it you don't use banks then Rob

BTW, I don't use banks Simmo...strictly on principle. Most of my financial dealings are in cash...and I intend to keep it that way. I don't need banks and/or CC companies knowing my business, or what I spend my money on. I even pay my rent in cash. And my only CC is a prepaid one..when I wanna buy something (online), I go and load the money on that I need just for that purchase.

I do get your point about having to (in some cases), deal with companies whose ethics leave something to be desired. Perfect example..phone and internet companies. Honestly, if I didn't have a small child, I wouldn't even have a phone, period. I don't have a cellphone, and refuse to ever get one. But I do HAVE to have a landline, no way around it. I'd also prefer to never have to deal with some of the large chain grocery stores...but we have to eat. Those are what I consider necessities. However, attending an affiliate conference that benefits ethically challenged people like Warren Jolly (or a multitude of others), is not a necessity. Not IMO anyway. Just my thoughts.

 

[Casinomeister]

Wow! What an dramatic meltdown (at GPWA) - affiliates at their best going for the jugular

I'm not equating the LAC conference as a CAP conference. As far as I'm concerned, even though there may be a CAP finger or two in the pie, that's not a justification for an all out boycott of the event.

The reason I am going is for my

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

which I feel supersedes any affiliate conflicts/dilemmas/bitch-and-moaning/rogueness etc. since it deals primarily with the players and what they want.

That's important, isn't it?

All this posturing and banner waving is secondary to player needs IMO. I think a lot of people are forgetting that. It's because of the player that affiliates are able to run a business, and this is the first time EVER that players have been invited to share what's on their minds.

I'll be there - Max will be there along with Vinylweatherman, Slotster and thelawnet. It's amazing how affiliate politics overshadow this.

 

[Simmo!]

But I do HAVE to have a landline, no way around it.

Good God woman! What's wrong with two cups tied to the end of a long bit of string?!

It's this whole industry...it's BUILT on hypocrisy...it's the foundation.

It's not just this industry. It's pretty much every industry that involves money changing hands. You think this industry's bad, go work in the music industry for a bit! Makes this one look like a prayer meeting in Heaven.

Wherever there is money, there will be hypocrisy and that's just human nature Pina. Can't be stopped...ain't unique...just the way it always has been and always will be.

Doesn't mean you can't change a few people along the way though. Just I think some people (not aimed at you) probably think it should change a few more than it ever will.

If I want to go to a conference and meet up with friends I will. Besides, I wanna hear what's in Slotster's mind

Bryan makes a good point: an affiliate chooses not to go so they don't be seen to be supporting CAP. They potentially miss out on hearing a talk on something which will make them a better affiliate that gives the player a better experience. Which is better? To me, it seems obvious.

 

[Casinomeister]

... an affiliate chooses not to go so they don't be seen to be supporting CAP. They potentially miss out on hearing a talk on something which will make them a better affiliate that gives the player a better experience. Which is better? To me, it seems obvious.

And to clear up any possible misunderstandings, the panel discussion was my idea - no one approached me to see if I'd do it.