60k "Staking" dispute

[Lucky]

obv boosted owes 'loaned' 30k and prob other 30k. Clearly he didn't explain 'makeup' to OP as clearly as he did in this thread.

The big question is, wtf, why is boosted running around getting staked from all kinds of people. He's 'crushing 10/20' yet people are lining up to vouch for him after they've staked him???

I guess i'm just a nit grinder who doesn't understand high stakes, but this sounds a bit too much like the 'tj cloutier story' for me.

[xxThe_Lebowskixx]

[ QUOTE ]


This issue is solved. Neutrality is staking him with 50k at 10/20 on ftp and stars and I will get weekly payments of profits until I get 30k. I hope this will restore boosted's credit with the people who may question him now. It will for me when I get 30 back.

[/ QUOTE ]

If BJ lives in the USA and he can send $2500/day to Stars via moneygram if he wanted to. Itd take him three weeks to get $50K onto Stars and he wouldnt need to be staked.

Good luck. I hope you get your money back and I hope you learned something from this experience and stop being so immature in the future.

[KingNeo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, Boosted and I have talked on IM and exchanged $ on FTP before. IMO he is a standup guy. I don't think he intentionally tried to deceive him.


[/ QUOTE ]
Do you want to stake me at $75/150 NL deep with $60K?

Please tell me why you think that would be a good or a bad idea.

Then reevaluate the statement you made above.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure what you are getting at. My response was simply to state that from my interactions with boosted he doesn't seem to be a scumbag.

Like I said in my OP, I think all staking deals are total crap. So no, I dont want to stake you. Also, I highly doubt you need to be staked anyways.

[Melchiades]

[ QUOTE ]
if I had a business deal go south with someone, and then a buddy of that someone came up to 'help out' and take 50% of fixing the deal, I'd be suspicious. Especially a buddy that is close enough they've shared accounts in the past.

[/ QUOTE ]
QFT. Seems very shady to me.

[GTL]

Taking a 400bb shot with 50% to the backer and the knowledge that the backer is not rolled to bankroll someone playing 75-150 is unethical at best, and highway robbery at worst. Stating that makeup means the arrangement is risk free is a lie.

If the op understood that the entire 60k was a stake, he was still getting fleeced. If this is the case, I don't think op has a right to the money, but he got hosed by Boosted and it is very unethical on Boosted's part to make a staking deal like this. I still believe OP should be able to back boosted at any stakes untill the entire 60k is repaid.

The fact that OP is accepting a deal where he will only recieve 30k back makes me question the deal. Even if the op isn't presenting all the facts, he was clearly hustled to some degree.

What I see here is boosted decided to take a flier and see if the op would be naive enough to accept a ridiculous backing deal. Now it's out in the open and boosted doesn't legally owe the money, but he has done something unethical.

The fact that his friend steps in to offer a stake could mean a few things. It definately means that boosted wants the op to keep his mouth shut. If boosted thought he had done nothing wrong, he would state this and leave it at that. He wouldn't be trying to appease the op. It could mean that boosted feels he owes the op some money, from an ethical standpoint. Perhaps he doesn't want to admit wrong doing so instead he is going to pay the 30k back through a third party under the guise of makeup. Perhaps the friend is indeed staking boosted and making a tidy buck through the whole process. This is speculation.

Edit - I made my post with the assumption that the backer would be getting 50% of the profits in the staking deal. Going back, I'm unsure if this was ever specifically stated or just implied. Obviously, if op was getting a much higher percentage my opinion would be different. Exactly how high the percentage would have to be before the deal would become "ethical" in my mind is a math problem based on a lot of unknowns. 50% is obviously way too low, however.

[RaiseAndPray]

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, this thread just makes me really depressed for the future of humanity.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ha. Well, I dunno about that....

[xxThe_Lebowskixx]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, Boosted and I have talked on IM and exchanged $ on FTP before. IMO he is a standup guy. I don't think he intentionally tried to deceive him.


[/ QUOTE ]
Do you want to stake me at $75/150 NL deep with $60K?

Please tell me why you think that would be a good or a bad idea.

Then reevaluate the statement you made above.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure what you are getting at. My response was simply to state that from my interactions with boosted he doesn't seem to be a scumbag.

Like I said in my OP, I think all staking deals are total crap. So no, I dont want to stake you. Also, I highly doubt you need to be staked anyways.

[/ QUOTE ]

BJ was essentially in a situation where he could win a coin flip, taking 50% of the profits, or lose a coin flip and take no loses. This arrangment is skewed in BJ's favor by absurd proportions.

So... I do not know how you can say that BJ wasnt trying to decieve him.

[stigmata]

FWIW, I think Boosted is coming off as manupalitive, underhand and a d-bag, wherease OP has done very little except offer up solid evidence in his own favour (e.g. Boosted isn't actually denying he said any of this).

IMO boosted should pay up, right away, or lose all respect in the community. It has been noted and will be remembered by many people.

[Jocke_F]

"him: that way it's 100% no loss for you
me: whoa
me: what's in it for you though?
him: I borrowed 10k from someone else
him: and they are freaking out
him: that I'm playing 1 table of 25/50 ring
him: so it might be easier just to deal with you
him: and that way
him: I dont feel bad borrowing 30k from you
him: and I can play more freely "

This part of the conversation shows that Boosted was misleading OP. I also have a really hard time to understand how Boosted doesn't think its totally reckless, shady and a lack of respect for OP to play 75/150 with the stake and claim he doesn't owe anything if he loses it all. OP would obviously not approve of 75/150 if he wasn't under the impression he was getting his money back no matter what.

[wtfsvi]

OP should get out of that maybe get $30k back deal right now and take this to court. Allthough boosted is being scummy here I don't think he will lie in court about the chain of events (and this thread is pretty good as evidence anyway). If US contract law is anything like Norwegian contract law I'm pretty sure he will get his money back. Any US lawyers or law students here that can tell us how it is?