Tusk investments - anyone owed anything?

[Tengil]

Sadly, you are probably correct.

The only scenario where I see that they would step up is if they get massive negative publicity and the big players in the industry would put pressure on them. This could damage their business.

But that wont happen. Players and affiliates couldnt care less if they dont have any own money at stake. Just look at the zero publicity it has gotten to date.
For example, Caruso wouldnt have known of it if he hadnt read it here, and he usually tends to be quite up to date with the "dark side" of gambling industry.

 

[Soul Rebel]

Hey guys, I just wanted to point anyone here who does not regularly read 2+2 to the new thread that summarizes this situation.

Casinomeister - I assume posting this link is within the forum rules, but if not, please take appropriate action.

Thanks.

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

 

[vinylweatherman]

I think it highly unlikely that MGS will be coming to the rescue.

I believe I have seen written somewhere that the MGS "Casino" licensing fees were about $400K at the time of the 2001 and 2002 bailouts.

I have also seen written that MGS licensing fees for a "Poker Room" are approx $150K

The average "Casino" player does not leave large sums in their "Casino" account.

Its commonly recommended that a poker player have on deposit: Ring games 20 buyins, STT's/MTT's 100 buyins.
In the Tusk situation this seems to be borne out "Casino" players purse under $200K, "Poker Room" players purse $5.3M. When you compare the licensing fee to the size of the player's purse it becomes pretty obvious to me at least that if you haven't "earned" the license fee why you might put a portion of it into a Trustee's hands to protect the players.

I also believe that MGS prompted the formation of eCOGRA after the undisclosed amount it contributed to the 2001/2002 bailouts, perhaps to forestall ever having to provide bailouts in the future.

Based on the profitability of publicly listed network gaming providers, I would think that the $5.3M players purse represents more than 1 years net profit for MGS's poker network and a number of years net revenue from the Tusk poker room.

MGS corporate business strategy seems in my opinion to be oriented towards firstly "Casino" operators who want to offer poker as an option to the "Casino" customer, secondly to "Sports Book" operators who want to offer casino and poker to their clientele and finally to the primarily poker room operators who want to offer a casino.

If you have ever dealt with the support personnel at any of the sites I think you may concur with this last opinion. Currently, the only site on the MGS poker network where the CS can actually deal with a poker oriented situation is Eurolinx. Every other site I've dealt with has to refer the situation to the poker department.

Just my .02 worth but does provide some food for thought.

Well, this should be "commonly UNrecommended" now. More important would be access to funds in a secure external wallet from which they can be quickly deposited. Ordinarily, deposits into casino & poker software takes seconds, it is withdrawals that can take days.

This incident has shown that even eCogra is contractually "gagged" when it comes to issuing warnings BEFORE the **** hits the fan in these situations, and the most it could do was yank the seals immediately, and give a bland statement that standards have not been met. It was a representative of TUSK that gave out the "administrative issue" and "it's business as usual" statements, and on this forum too!

Players of both casinos and poker need to learn from how this has played out, as if something like this happens again, we will have to "read between the lines" of any statements and make our own risk assessments of the situation. It was fortunate that the casinos had the instant payment system, as even casino players had to wait over a month to see their money again, and now we learn that MGS would probably NOT have stepped in had the deal with Casino Rewards not been brokered by someone (was this MGS?, or the liquidators?).

Fortunately, players who deposited by CREDIT CARD, at least in the UK, will be able to retrieve these DEPOSITS back through the card issuers once it becomes clear how much is going to be retrieved from the liquidation. This is only NET DEPOSITS though, and would not cover any winnings.
This could lead to an interesting situation with respect to the Consumer Credit act, since card companies previously appealed to the highest court that they should NOT have to honour "foreign" purchases, and they LOST, and are now required to refund customers who have lost money in a company going into liquidation whether foreign or domestic. It is NOT the same thing as a "chargeback", it is a rule about "joint liability" between the company providing a service, and the company providing a loan to a retail consumer that is used to purchase the service.
Recently, card companies have been forking out thousands for losses due to budget airlines going bust, and other holiday companies failing to honour booked holidays. It must apply to poker, since these sites are pretty scared of the "chargeback", and if gambling was somehow exempt, this fear would not exist.

The scope of the Consumer Credit act here in the UK makes a credit card one of the safest ways to pay for good or services, provided each item costs 100 or more. Presumably, poker players make more substantial single deposits than low rolling casino players, and I would suspect that there was a chance of pursuing lost single deposits of 100 or more with the card providers.

Card providers, in turn, will probably lean on the online gambling industry to put more robust procedures in place, such as insurance backed guarantees of player funds, or risk having card companies refuse to offer transaction services to the industry, something that many have already done given my own experience of cards constantly getting declined where they are advertised as "should be available".

 

[Tengil]

Hey guys, I just wanted to point anyone here who does not regularly read 2+2 to the new thread that summarizes this situation.

Casinomeister - I assume posting this link is within the forum rules, but if not, please take appropriate action.

Thanks.

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

Its doing quite nice. Close to 20k views already. And once again a rep, now from Unibet, popped in and posted some BS.

Well, this should be "commonly UNrecommended" now. More important would be access to funds in a secure external wallet from which they can be quickly deposited. Ordinarily, deposits into casino & poker software takes seconds, it is withdrawals that can take days.
This incident has shown that even eCogra is contractually "gagged" when it comes to issuing warnings BEFORE the **** hits the fan in these situations, and the most it could do was yank the seals immediately, and give a bland statement that standards have not been met. It was a representative of TUSK that gave out the "administrative issue" and "it's business as usual" statements, and on this forum too!

Players of both casinos and poker need to learn from how this has played out, as if something like this happens again, we will have to "read between the lines" of any statements and make our own risk assessments of the situation. It was fortunate that the casinos had the instant payment system, as even casino players had to wait over a month to see their money again, and now we learn that MGS would probably NOT have stepped in had the deal with Casino Rewards not been brokered by someone (was this MGS?, or the liquidators?).

Fortunately, players who deposited by CREDIT CARD, at least in the UK, will be able to retrieve these DEPOSITS back through the card issuers once it becomes clear how much is going to be retrieved from the liquidation. This is only NET DEPOSITS though, and would not cover any winnings.
This could lead to an interesting situation with respect to the Consumer Credit act, since card companies previously appealed to the highest court that they should NOT have to honour "foreign" purchases, and they LOST, and are now required to refund customers who have lost money in a company going into liquidation whether foreign or domestic. It is NOT the same thing as a "chargeback", it is a rule about "joint liability" between the company providing a service, and the company providing a loan to a retail consumer that is used to purchase the service.
Recently, card companies have been forking out thousands for losses due to budget airlines going bust, and other holiday companies failing to honour booked holidays. It must apply to poker, since these sites are pretty scared of the "chargeback", and if gambling was somehow exempt, this fear would not exist.

The scope of the Consumer Credit act here in the UK makes a credit card one of the safest ways to pay for good or services, provided each item costs 100 or more. Presumably, poker players make more substantial single deposits than low rolling casino players, and I would suspect that there was a chance of pursuing lost single deposits of 100 or more with the card providers.

Card providers, in turn, will probably lean on the online gambling industry to put more robust procedures in place, such as insurance backed guarantees of player funds, or risk having card companies refuse to offer transaction services to the industry, something that many have already done given my own experience of cards constantly getting declined where they are advertised as "should be available".

The skins had a max withdrawal of 10k/week. So this could only apply to lower stakes. At higher stakes we talk about several hundred thousands. I dont think that a poker room would like it if you constantly transfer your roll back and forth.

The only solution is that the network ringfences all the deposits. Im not 100% sure but i think that the IPN (Boss) network does this(?). Pokerstars at least does.

Edit: Ill take a wild guess that not a single word was raised about this at CAC Amsterdam. MG was there.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Its doing quite nice. Close to 20k views already. And once again a rep, now from Unibet, popped in and posted some BS.



The skins had a max withdrawal of 10k/week. So this could only apply to lower stakes. At higher stakes we talk about several hundred thousands. I dont think that a poker room would like it if you constantly transfer your roll back and forth.
The only solution is that the network ringfences all the deposits. Im not 100% sure but i think that the IPN (Boss) network does this(?). Pokerstars at least does.

Edit: Ill take a wild guess that not a single word was raised about this at CAC Amsterdam. MG was there.

Probably not, but after players got ROYALLY SCREWED for leaving their funds on account, they may have to LUMP it, or arrange a GUARANTEE scheme for player balances in the event that a network goes bust. There would be a considerable competitive advantage after TUSK for having such a scheme, as it would attract the big stakes players, who through convenience like to leave considerable funds on account, but are now worried because MGS "reneged" on an "understanding" that had previously applied between them, and players of their licensees.

 

[Tengil]

Probably not, but after players got ROYALLY SCREWED for leaving their funds on account, they may have to LUMP it, or arrange a GUARANTEE scheme for player balances in the event that a network goes bust. There would be a considerable competitive advantage after TUSK for having such a scheme, as it would attract the big stakes players, who through convenience like to leave considerable funds on account, but are now worried because MGS "reneged" on an "understanding" that had previously applied between them, and players of their licensees.

That would be ringfencing the player funds. Shouldnt be so hard to set up.
Players still hold big rolls online (7 figures) even if they arent 100% secure at every place. So its basically down to trusting the site.

And would still like to know if anyone confronted MG at CAC about this? I guess not.

 

[thelawnet]

So how did they lose so much money?

 

[Casinomeister]

...And would still like to know if anyone confronted MG at CAC about this? I guess not.

As far as I know, there were no MGS reps at CAC. CAC is a conference for webmasters and affiliate managers - not software providers. You'll find them at industry events like the ICE, EIG, etc.

They also have email addresses and phone numbers. You don't have to meet them to "confront" them.

 

[Tengil]

So how did they lose so much money?

TUSK was probably set up just as a scam after the ownership change. Mellowman has investigated this quite a bit so he could give some more and detailed info.

As far as I know, there were no MGS reps at CAC. CAC is a conference for webmasters and affiliate managers - not software providers. You'll find them at industry events like the ICE, EIG, etc.

They also have email addresses and phone numbers. You don't have to meet them to "confront" them.

My bad (about CAC). People have tried only to find out its totally useless.

 

[Pinababy69]

They also have email addresses and phone numbers. You don't have to meet them to "confront" them.

You happen to have Roger Raatgever's phone number handy.....I thought I'd give him a shout later on.

 

[Mellowman307]

TUSK was probably set up just as a scam after the ownership change. Mellowman has investigated this quite a bit so he could give some more and detailed info.

The ownership change was smoke and mirrors as well.

In March 06 Tusk's 2 majority owners were Ken Talbot and Robert Canning-Ure. Tusk was operated/managed by NewEcon Pty LTD also owned by the above.

After a failed attempt to complete a reverse takeover of a listed company, Global Approach, Tusk was sold to Fuze Media Pty LTD. A search of Australian company records reveals that Fuze Media Pty LTD is none other than the new name of NewEcon Pty LTD.

So they sold the company to themselves.

 

[Tengil]

The thread in NVG at 2+2 is also doing a slow death.

So to the players affected:

Nobody will help you apart from caruso and mellowman.

No one cares.

Just hope that you get even 20% of what is owed.

How I love this industry..