PPA should disassociate itself from scandal ridden CEO Poker tour

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

what was the date on that response from Greg? Also we havent heard from anyone at CEO for almost a week after they said they would update us daily and offered a $100 settlement ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Cmon DJ, you've made about 100 posts in this thread so just chill out. You think that everything revolves around you and this thread? The people who are on the Board at the PPA have regular jobs or are Pros and trying to earn a living. They have other issues that also need to be worked on. Greg told you what the score is on that so just have some patience and wait a couple of weeks before you shout out to them again.

And I'd be extremely surprised if anyone from CEO comes on this board again after they were exposed mutli-accounting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think it takes a "few weeks" to see that the CEO Poker Tour is not an organization that should be endorsed by the PPA which is an organiztion supposed to protect Players rights?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I do think it could take a "couple of weeks". As Greg pointed out he is only 1/10th of the Board of the PPA. They need to do their own research into the situation and there are probably legal issues that have to be taken into consideration. Years ago, when I was on the Board of Directors for a non-profit organization we had a person who ran the day to day business of the group (along with her staff) and we met once a month to review things, and decide the overall policies. There were procedures in place that we had to follow before we could call a Board meeting. Things are different these days as communications can be much faster but unless these Board members are doing this full time (and I doubt they are) we can't expect them to drop everything they are doing to focus on this one issue - no matter how important we think it is. Internet time and real time are two very different things.

[Stinky Johnson]

Do you really think it takes a "few weeks" to see that the CEO Poker Tour is not an organization that should be endorsed by the PPA which is an organiztion supposed to protect Players rights?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Rottersod - "Yes, I do think it could take a "couple of weeks".

Disagree completely with Rottersod and others taking that position.

The PPA endorsed the CEO Poker Tour.

We now know that the CEO Poker Tour was a scam (and that the principals of it are involved in other internet deceit).

The PPA has stated that they are there to protect the rights of poker players.

The CEO Poker Tour has other events already scheduled. It's conceivable that poker players are pre-registering for these, or will be shortly.


Now that this is discovered, "weeks" to get rolling to protect the rights of the poker players who were scammed by the CEO Poker Tour is unacceptable.

The lack of response by the PPA to date, and the fact that walking away from this issue is even being considered as a possiblility, makes me doubt the value and effectiveness of the PPA's future.

[PITTM]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you really think it takes a "few weeks" to see that the CEO Poker Tour is not an organization that should be endorsed by the PPA which is an organiztion supposed to protect Players rights?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Rottersod - "Yes, I do think it could take a "couple of weeks".

Disagree completely with Rottersod and others taking that position.

The PPA endorsed the CEO Poker Tour.

We now know that the CEO Poker Tour was a scam (and that the principals of it are involved in other internet deceit).

The PPA has stated that they are there to protect the rights of poker players.

The CEO Poker Tour has other events already scheduled. It's conceivable that poker players are pre-registering for these, or will be shortly.


Now that this is discovered, "weeks" to get rolling to protect the rights of the poker players who were scammed by the CEO Poker Tour is unacceptable.

The lack of response by the PPA to date, and the fact that walking away from this issue is even being considered as a possiblility, makes me doubt the value and effectiveness of the PPA's future.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow this guy is good for a new poster. i pretty much agree with this 100%. So far the PPA has done a pretty solid job of showing they can talk the talk. when the time finally comes to walk the walk they are unmoving.

[OutOfCrown]

[ QUOTE ]
Years ago, when I was on the Board of Directors for a non-profit organization we had a person who ran the day to day business of the group (along with her staff) and we met once a month to review things, and decide the overall policies. There were procedures in place that we had to follow before we could call a Board meeting. Things are different these days as communications can be much faster but unless these Board members are doing this full time (and I doubt they are) we can't expect them to drop everything they are doing to focus on this one issue - no matter how important we think it is. Internet time and real time are two very different things.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT.

I am chairman of a non-profit. Calling an unscheduled Board meeting requires that we send out certified letters to each Board member and that we confirm everyone has been notified. Then we have to ensure we get quorum at the meeting. The only alternative is "unanimous consent" where we get a signed, written (email is NOT sufficient) consent from every single Board member, consenting to the unscheduled "ad hoc" meeting. If just one Board member is on vacation in Italy for a month, no can do.

These rules are fairly standard/boilerplate and probably appear in 99% of all non-profit Bylaws. Calling for an unscheduled Board action is supposed to be difficult (to protect the rights of the Board members, who may in fact end up being held accountable for a Board action they might have no chance to even know about if the rules weren't so strict regarding unscheduled meetings).

Raymer already told you that the original endorsement was done by one person acting alone. I doubt the PPA is going to do anything without at least some form of Board involvement at this stage. This is inherently going to take a while. It could take weeks, possibly even months. In the organization I chair, we don't meet during the summer, and calling an unscheduled Board meeting would probably take me 3 weeks or more just to get notices sent to everyone, get unanimous consents, etc. Plus, regardless of what the Bylaws state, common courtesy dictates that if I know someone is out for a month on vacation, that I attempt to track them down and get their consent, even if technically speaking delivering a certified letter to their address (if anyone is there to sign for it) is sufficient.

Expecting a response at internet message board speed is completely unreasonable here.

[Rottersod]

The way I see it, it looks like this thread has accomplished quite a lot in just a couple of weeks. The biggest things is that any future CEO Poker Tour tourneys will have the standard vig that pro's and regular players have come to expect. Also, they said that there wouldn't be any charity deductions from the players prize pool. In addition you get the opportunity to confront them at the next tourney.

The things that still need to be settled are the discrepancy between the posted prize pools and the actual amounts paid out for the past tourneys, and the refund to the players of the extra vig that was taken out without their knowledge before they entered the tourneys. As to the former, this is something that the PPA can work with the CEO Poker Tour execs with to go through the paper trail of records that should exist for each of the tourneys, compare the number of players who played and payed and compare the amounts paid out from canceled checks, receipts, bank statements, etc. It's not that hard to do assuming there are adequate records. If they find differences or if there aren't records, or if the CEO Poker Tour doesn't give them access then the PPA should have no problem disassociating themselves with that company.

Last week Maria Gomez offered to pay every player who had entered an event $100 as a refund. The PPA should be able to negotiate with them to get a higher refund.

The things I've written above need to happen privately between the two organizations and not publicly on an internet board. Real negotiations do not take place on an anonymous internet forum where nuances can be misinterpreted and where personal agendas can overwhelm any rational discussions. They take time. Records have to be gathered, people may have to travel, and time has to be set aside for discussions. If the PPA were to break off all contact with the CEO Poker Tour right now then they would lose any leverage to examine the books and to negotiate a larger refund for the players.

It wouldn't hurt for the directors of the PPA to issue a statement as to what their position is and what they are looking to accomplish. I see nothing wrong with giving them a couple of weeks to meet, discuss it and put out a statement.

[PITTM]

Why should the CEO poker tour be allowed to continue? They stole money from their participants, denied it, when we proved it they ran away. Now that they offered to not steal in the future we should be satisfied? no no no.

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
Why should the CEO poker tour be allowed to continue? They stole money from their participants, denied it, when we proved it they ran away. Now that they offered to not steal in the future we should be satisfied? no no no.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then don't participate. But until you can go over their records or have them deny you access you can't be 100% sure that they stole anything. Just because attendance numbers are posted on internet sites doesn't mean they are accurate. That's why real organizations like the PPA don't make accusations like this on an internet forum. It seems to me that you all have done a fine job uncovering what looks very likely to be some shady business and you've reported it to the PPA. Now let them go and decide how they want to proceed.

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]
The way I see it, it looks like this thread has accomplished quite a lot in just a couple of weeks. The biggest things is that any future CEO Poker Tour tourneys will have the standard vig that pro's and regular players have come to expect. Also, they said that there wouldn't be any charity deductions from the players prize pool. In addition you get the opportunity to confront them at the next tourney.

The things that still need to be settled are the discrepancy between the posted prize pools and the actual amounts paid out for the past tourneys, and the refund to the players of the extra vig that was taken out without their knowledge before they entered the tourneys. As to the former, this is something that the PPA can work with the CEO Poker Tour execs with to go through the paper trail of records that should exist for each of the tourneys, compare the number of players who played and payed and compare the amounts paid out from canceled checks, receipts, bank statements, etc. It's not that hard to do assuming there are adequate records. If they find differences or if there aren't records, or if the CEO Poker Tour doesn't give them access then the PPA should have no problem disassociating themselves with that company.

Last week Maria Gomez offered to pay every player who had entered an event $100 as a refund. The PPA should be able to negotiate with them to get a higher refund.

The things I've written above need to happen privately between the two organizations and not publicly on an internet board. Real negotiations do not take place on an anonymous internet forum where nuances can be misinterpreted and where personal agendas can overwhelm any rational discussions. They take time. Records have to be gathered, people may have to travel, and time has to be set aside for discussions. If the PPA were to break off all contact with the CEO Poker Tour right now then they would lose any leverage to examine the books and to negotiate a larger refund for the players.

It wouldn't hurt for the directors of the PPA to issue a statement as to what their position is and what they are looking to accomplish. I see nothing wrong with giving them a couple of weeks to meet, discuss it and put out a statement.

[/ QUOTE ]

Problems:

It was suggested that the Maria Gomez account here was a complete hoax. As in maybe Maria and Co. actually have no idea that this thread exists.

CEO Tournaments are still scheduled. The scam continues. The PPA continues to participate in this scam until they get their name off of this.

Would it really take "weeks" to make a decision if this was going to cost the PPA everything? I have endorsed the PPA at every step, but if they are going to continue to endorse a scam, then I have to withdraw my membership and ask others to do so as well.

[dknightx]

2+2 should disassociate itself from attention whore doublejoker

[pokulator]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why should the CEO poker tour be allowed to continue? They stole money from their participants, denied it, when we proved it they ran away. Now that they offered to not steal in the future we should be satisfied? no no no.

[/ QUOTE ]



Then don't participate. But until you can go over their records or have them deny you access you can't be 100% sure that they stole anything. Just because attendance numbers are posted on internet sites doesn't mean they are accurate. That's why real organizations like the PPA don't make accusations like this on an internet forum. It seems to me that you all have done a fine job uncovering what looks very likely to be some shady business and you've reported it to the PPA. Now let them go and decide how they want to proceed.

[/ QUOTE ]


the president of the PPA told me that this is more of a case for the WPA. he said that the PPA allowed the CEO tour to promote the PPA at events in order to get more poker players aware of the PPA and that was the extent of their relationship. when i asked if the PPA will allow the CEO tour to promote the PPA at future events he said, "I don’t know. I’m waiting to see how this gets resolved. I don’t have the resources to figure out what transpired here. We are going to wait and see."