My letter to ESPN regarding the Dutch Boyd/PokerSpot.com issue

[mchilger]

I was one of the big losers at Poker Spot as they owe me a lot of money. Bypassing the argument on whether or not there is a legal obligation, several things have occured during this long process that doesn't say much about the character or integrity of Mr. Boyd:
- When Poker Spot informed me that they were not withdrawing my funds right away, their first explanation was that my account was being investigated. According to them, I won too much money above the "norm" and they were analyzing my hand histories. Here I was being accused of cheating while the company itself commingled my funds and was dishonest during the process.
- When Dutch was making his run at the WSOP a few years ago, I am pretty sure that he actually posted somewhere that he would repay the funds, if and only if, he won first place (someone please correct me if this wasn't the exact qoute but that is how I remember it). I guess 1.25 million wasn't enough for him to feel the need to meet his obligations.

Does he have to pay? No. Whether or not he ought to pay back the poker community is something he has to live with.

Matthew Hilger

[ToTheFelt]

As time goes by the personal feeling or need to repay a debit deminishes considerably...

Although those who lost out don't have to "let it go" you can almost bet that Dutch has...

[rabbitlover]

[ QUOTE ]
in a similar situation, the
legendary Doyle Brunson, used his own personal funds to refund customer
deposits of a failed online poker room
which he had endorsed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you enlighten as to what this with Brunson was about?

Thanks

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]

People who invest in start-ups know there are risks involved; I would think that poker players would be particularly aware of these risks.

Is it really fair to say that Boyd "scammed" players? That makes it sound like he intended on stealing their money from the outset. It sounds like his business failed, perhaps due to his incompetence, but not due to any desire to cheat his players. I'm sure there are many things he could have done to make the enterprise more successful, and you can criticize his business sense, but I don't see any criminal motive here.

If you really think this was a scam, send this letter to Congress and maybe they will try to do something about it. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Investing in a failed business is one thing but that's not what Olivert was referring to. He is talking about the poker players who deposited their money in Boyd's site to gamble with and instead of putting those funds in separate accounts like other major poker sites do he commingled them with the businesses operating finds. When the business needed more funds they simply used whatever was in that account to cover it and eventually there was no more money left to pay winning players.

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
I think one of the problems is that online gambling sites are so unregulated that it is not clear what the ethical rules are. For instance, banks leverage customer deposits to make a profit...if everyone simultaneously wanted to withdraw their account at a bank, the bank would not be able to pay. Because this created problems in the past, there is now an extensive federal insurance and regulation in the banking industry to protect customers. But there is no such regulation of offshore gambling sites, and everyone who invests in one needs to understand that.

It absolutely would not surprise me that a poker site would leverage player deposits to increase its profits. I'm sure many poker sites do the same thing. More established ones might be able to invest these deposits and just keep the interest off them, but it would make good business sense for start-ups, which are not yet profitable, to use these deposits to pay for its expenses as long as it can project profits in the future. I don't know whether this is ethical or not...the problem is that the ethics of this industry are basically up in the air as long as it remains quasi-legal.

It is certainly wrong for Boyd to issue checks that he knew would bounce. But is also makes good business sense to hide the extent of the company's financial troubles from investors. Revealing this would trigger a run of withdrawals that not only could not be paid, but would cripple any possibility for future profitability.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well run Poker sites are pretty much a non-government mint. The rake is how they make their money and they are making it hand over fist. There is no need for them to steal the players deposits since they know that they have a guaranteed stream of income and all it takes is one scandal like that to cause widespread withdrawals.

[LDorey]

The thing that kills me is that he has the balls to promote his new poker room. His new room is supposedly rake free (it’s not open yet). You would have to be a complete idiot to play there when it opens. I guess that he is banking on people not knowing about the pokerspot train wreck.

[lastsamurai]

[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately I think ESPN will bury their collective heads in the proverbial sand(cliches are cool!). This is a case where Scamboyd should pay up. His ego is too big and sorry to say I'm sure that this is all "in the past" as far as he is concerned. Scamboyd should be hung by his balls if he doesn't take care of his obligations.

[/ QUOTE ]
Its funny how you could spot a gimick account in a second...SUP BRO?

[stickdude]

For those who are a little slow on the uptake here...

What happened was no different than you sitting there at a live BJ table with $10,000 in chips in front of you, having a pit boss walk up and tell you "Sorry, we're running a little short this month and we need those chips to meet payroll" and taking your chips right from under your nose.

[NickMPK]

[ QUOTE ]
For those who are a little slow on the uptake here...

What happened was no different than you sitting there at a live BJ table with $10,000 in chips in front of you, having a pit boss walk up and tell you "Sorry, we're running a little short this month and we need those chips to meet payroll" and taking your chips right from under your nose.

[/ QUOTE ]

No it's not. Casinos operate under stringent government regulations, and customers patronize casinos with the knowledge that casinos will be shut down immediately if they try something like that, and that the customer will have a well-established legal recourse.

US customers of online poker sites know (or should know) that they walking into a legal no-man's lands where basically anything can happen and they won't be able to do anything about it. Because of this, I only play at the largest and most stable sites, and don't keep much money in any account. And even if these sites decided to confiscate my account one day, I would be pissed, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Honestly, I have to wonder why anyone would keep a lot of money in an account in quasi-legal online start-up in the late 90's run by some 19-year-old with no business experience.

Boyd made a lot of huge mistakes in running this site, and at the very least, cutting bad checks and defrauding customers at to where there money is is illegal. But he was a kid with no realistic recourse to pay back his customers, and this was six or seven years ago. The statute of limitations on this is well past...let it go and let the guy live the rest of his life.

[Dids]

Really tempted to put on my mod hat and say "NickMPK is officially wrong and further responses from him will be considered trolling".

But I won't.

Nick, regardless of how aware people were of the risks involved, it doesn't serve to mitigate what Boyd did. You're dragging this conversation off track.