AP infinity plus one - New AP Statement

[El_Hombre_Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Regarding the difference in opinion over 'what should happen' to AP now. Everyone here can indeed influence it. We already have.

Personally, I think that last statement shows they're still 100% corrupt at the very top, and for me was the last straw.

AP should be shut down and all the perpetrators (including those who knew about this but kept quiet) reported, arrested, prosecuted and jailed. That's not going to happen while AP continues to protect the ID of the perps, and refuses to report them to the relevant law enforcement (KGC doesn't count).

If, before this had been exposed, we had a discussion about 'what it would take' for a site to deserve total black-listing and closure, some undetected cheating wouldn't do it. Nor would a dodgy 'regulatory' system or crappy customer service.

Finding out the entire place is run by crooks? The boss plays on 'God-mode' and steals millions? They rob charity fundraisers too? Yes, that would qualify.

Even if Tom/Green et al are booted out, they and their families will still be earning millions from their shares in AP. That is not acceptable.

I will not play on AP ever again. Neither will anyone I know. I've written letters to my MP, two national UK papers, three international mens' mags, two poker mags, four affiliates and even put the Absolute Fraud logo as my Facebook picture.

(That's before I get asked 'what I'm doing about it'.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for ruining poker giving it a bad reputation with fish.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure what should be done with AP over the long haul, but I have grown tired of those who think that we should help AP sweep this under the rug because its "bad for Poker." Cheating operators are bad for poker. Not people who out cheating operators.

[N 82 50 24]

[ QUOTE ]
Any consideration to the thought that AP began offering high interest bearing accounts to its costumers as a way to try to attract more high stakes players to their site, basically knowing they were going to fleece them anyway with their superuser abilities?

[/ QUOTE ]
Not discounting your theory, but the reason I was told they did that was twofold:

1) Get people to stop depositing/withdrawing over and over with the same money. They don't want someone putting money in ING while they go on vacation for two weeks because of the transaction fees.

2) Get people to rake more because the interest accounts were for people with a lot of activity

[ikestoys]

[ QUOTE ]
Any consideration to the thought that AP began offering high interest bearing accounts to its costumers as a way to try to attract more high stakes players to their site, basically knowing they were going to fleece them anyway with their superuser abilities?

[/ QUOTE ]
Meh, no one really takes this program seriously b/c of the insane restrictions on it.

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, knowledge of this scandal isn't exactly reaching as much of the poker community as we had hoped.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nearly every day of the fall poker classic at canterbury, I somehow ended up talking about AP at the tables -- usually by other people bringing it up. I think it's a sort of underground movement that will gradually spread its way across the entire poker playing community.

[Cruzincat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Both sites and Joe Norton state that he owns 100% of the firms. It was very easy for us to determine that. What is apparently difficult for us is - to believe it.

It's not really surprising that we might have doubts, because this is a privately owned firm, and private owners are not required to reveal very much about their affairs. I own a business as a sole proprietor, just as Mr Norton claims he owns these gambling firms. If I sold someone an option to buy my firm, I'm not required to tell you about that, or to tell anyone else. That's just the way it is. Are you really amazed that I don't have to tell you about my business, or that you have no way of knowing if I have given someone a right to buy me out?

[/ QUOTE ]
But if that secrecy allowed you to cheat your customers and they find out about it, would you be able to continue your business and maintain that secrecy, or would you have to become more transparent in the future?

[/ QUOTE ]

How could they be more transparent about possible hidden ownership? If Mr Norton has in fact sold an option to someone giving that person the right to buy out his interest in AP he can tell us the truth, or he can lie to us, and there is no way for us to know which is the case. We must either believe him, or not. There is nothing he can do to PROVE he is telling the truth about this. There is no device which can make the inside of his head so transparent that we can tell whether he is telling the truth or not. It is possible that he has secretly sold his interest to the Queen of England. As long as neither of them says it's true, we can't rule her out as the real owner.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well then that only leaves one possibility open, doesn't it? If they cannot prove the truth as far as ownership goes then there is no reason to ever trust them again and they have to go down(or at least only the ignorant and greedy continue to play there).

[Cruzincat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The ownership structure is going to be next to impossible to figure out without some sort of confidential document.

As long as we are talking about transparency - who owns Poker Stars? - almost impossible to figure out

[/ QUOTE ]

''Because of rules requiring that Mohawks own all businesses on-reserve, the commission set up Mohawk Internet Technologies to operate the online casino business. MIT operates a server farm on the reserve, and offers space on the servers to online casino operators. MIT collects a monthly fee from the casino operators.''

The above is a quote from this article:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/ga...etcasinos.html

This means Joe Norton owns AP because AP needs to be owned by an Indian according to Mohawk rules (i.e. for AP to be able to have their server on the reserve). As I understand it, the ownership by Joe Norton is for Indian rules and Joe charges a fee for this services but is not part of the actual management of AP.

[/ QUOTE ]
Then Joe pretty much has to have as much money as Bill Gates, because he would have to own all the companies that make use of the servers, wouldn't he?

[adanthar]

Joe is pretty up there on the 'people Forbes 500 doesn't know about' list, yeah

[ggouoyd25]

wuts up people I had to join this stupid forum to so you could get info from the true face of AP.

[e_phemeral]

[ QUOTE ]
ThWi & Others who want to bring AP down,

What are you doing about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not playing there anymore. Seems like a reasonable start.

[FoxInTheHenHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
wuts up people I had to join this stupid forum to so you could get info from the true face of AP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not funny
Not clever
Keep trying....