|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Notre Dame 8-1 | |||
| 1 |
   
|
0 | 0% |
| 2 |
  
|
1 | 2.78% |
| 3 |
  
|
1 | 2.78% |
| 4 |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| 5 |
  
|
1 | 2.78% |
| 6 |
  
|
2 | 5.56% |
| 7 |
|
2 | 5.56% |
| 8 |
|
11 | 30.56% |
| 9 |
|
5 | 13.89% |
| 10 |
|
13 | 36.11% |
| Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#551
10-24-2007, 01:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: AP Visit: I\'m going to Costa Rica
[ QUOTE ]
Any updates? p.s. Anyone thinking it's NOT a good idea for Nat to go is really, really dumb. As has been said a hundred times, we're NEVER going to get a perfect rock-solid 100%-transparent audit [/ QUOTE ] It's not about that though. Nat going is marginally better than Nat not going. But since AP are offering to have someone look over their system, AND pay, why send someone who doesn't have a clue about the things that will really matter (by his own admission). I'm sure AP is professionally run, and that the offices/staff are really quite good. I'm sure their systems and security are fine too. There's too much money and too many investors involved for it not to be. The thing that needs to be discovered is whether current management are on the up and up, and the extent of the cheating. Nat is pretty much unqualified to determine the first and blocked from discovering the second. Anyone who buys the "under audit" reason hasn't been around too long. I have a feeling AP is buying time to blow this thing off, as well as impress Nat with their operation. If he goes, I have no doubt they'll succeed at both. AP knows they need to "come clean" to the community to take some of the heat off, and inviting a 25yo with little experience of crooks, is a way of doing that without actually revealing anything. To the guy who makes $300+ an hour, and who said $5000 + expenses isn't fair compensation, that's equivalent to 250K/year. That covers something like 95% of professional salaries. If Nat's time is worth far more than that, and it's such an imposition, then perhaps he should ask AP to invite someone else. Taking a large payment, with talk of non disclosure agreements, is pretty much f'ed up IMO. A poster above summed it up pretty well: [ QUOTE ] AP could come clean with an open letter to the poker community explaining everything that they know about the situation, including names of the cheaters, how it happened, what they are doing to fix the problem, etc., and then invite an entire independent group from the poker community to come down to verify the accuracy of what AP is representing. AP is not doing that. Instead, they appear to have invited an admitted "25 year old kid", who also happens to have technical knowledge and been instrumental in uncovering the cheating at AP, down for a "feel good" visit to their offices in Costa Rica. This is a PR move by AP, nothing more. [/ QUOTE ] 
|
|
#552
10-24-2007, 01:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AP Visit: I\'m going to Costa Rica
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I want to know as much as I can. The depth and scope of the impropriety, namely. Wouldn't it be nice to have some cold hard fact to go with all the rampant speculation? Was it $700k over the last three months, or $7-million over the last five years? Scott and AJ, or a motley crew of cheats in CR, Panama, Montana, and Miami? Just 363, or numerous 'superuser' observer clients? [/ QUOTE ] I think everyone reading these forums agrees and would like to know more. The best way for that to happen is to bring the site to its knees financially. The people who know the answers to these questions at some point will present those answers. There is a book to be written about all of this. Someone is going to make money off of this story. If you think that one dude going down to Costa Rica for a week is going to provide you with those answers, you are naive. When Absolute Poker is finished as a business and people scatter, that's when the real facts will start to emerge. [/ QUOTE ] The majority of people who play on AP either don't know about the scandal, or don't care enough to stop playing there. Yeah, most of the people on 2+2 have stopped playing there, but they represent only a small percentage of everybody on the site. The only way to significantly hurt AP financially is to dig up FACTS that will bring them down, either through legal action or other means.
|
|
#553
10-24-2007, 02:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AP Visit: I\'m going to Costa Rica
[ QUOTE ]
Alternatively, Nat could be part of a rogue splinter group at AP that enlisted the cheaters, outed them, and "investigated" the improprieties to earn the trust of the poker community, all to get the executives fired so that they could install their own regime. [/ QUOTE ] It would be like a 911 conspiracy times a thousand
|
|
#554
10-24-2007, 02:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AP Visit: I\'m going to Costa Rica
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] To all you naysayers coming out of the woodwork.... There is absolutely no downside to Nat and/or others visiting AP's offices. Short of them locking Nat into a room and brainwashing him so he comes back spewing "Absolute is innocent", where's the harm in this visit? If Nat can see first hand how many employees they have, how secure the operation is, what their security staff have to say, etc... where's the harm? As far as taking Absolute down, it ain't gonna happen. The best we can hope for is that they take what happened seriously enough to fix the holes in their system, pay back the victims and make every effort to be as transparent as possible in the future. Absolute will suffer, their cash flow will take a big hit from this. Expecting any more is naive and unrealistic. I agree that AP should go down in flames. I agree that this scam probably reaches to the very top of AP's foodchain. But, proving this and bringing them to justice will likely never happen. History has shown that big companies rarely die in the face of scandal. Companies like Absolute who operate under veils of secrecy and dummy corporations in an unregulated industry like ours are very difficult to get to. If they're willing to allow Nat into their private offices, I say go for it! [/ QUOTE ] Not sure which avenue is best to take since adanthar et all haven't shared all the inside info yet, but if putting Absolute out of business would be best for poker, then go for it - don't sit there and say "history shows blah blah, its too difficult, yada yada" That's weaksauce man. It most certainly can be done. It isn't like Absolute has a monopoly on poker or anything. [/ QUOTE ] Weaksauce? LOL! How much have you done to "put Absolute out of business"? [/ QUOTE ] I don't conduct business with them. If everyone else followed suit, they'd be out of business. Is this concept too hard for you to grasp? [/ QUOTE ] Is that it???? You don't play there, end of story???? Come on!!! Get real you [censored]. Grasp the concept that many others have worked their asses off spreading the word (me included) to those who don't read 2p2 or p5. Spend less time trolling and more time doing something worthwhile.
|
|
#555
10-24-2007, 02:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AP Visit: I\'m going to Costa Rica
|
|
#556
10-24-2007, 02:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AP Visit: I\'m going to Costa Rica
(sorry if this has already been said, I didn't read the whole thread but here goes
 Regarding Nat doing this for money: fine by me Nat being a credible source: seems very likely Expecting full disclosure from Absolute or a one week dog~and~pony show?: my guess dog and pony. Will the playing public forgive and forget?: probably Should the public forgive and forget: Absolutely.......NOT! IMO it just sends the message to other online sites that this type of mismanagement is without consequences.... Here's to an orchestrated 2+2 boycott of Absolute for-never!
|
|
#557
10-24-2007, 02:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AP Visit: I\'m going to Costa Rica
[ QUOTE ]
p.s. Anyone thinking it's NOT a good idea for Nat to go is really, really dumb. [/ QUOTE ] Not entirely. I don't think he should go, but it has nothing to do with the purpose of the visit, either from his or AP's perspective.... it has to do with how a completely different agency, ie the DOJ, is going to view him when he goes into an offshore illegal operation, recieves compensation for "services", and then sets foot back on US soil. Unless he gets some really solid legal advice and possibly some guarenteed assurances otherwise, I'd say he shouldn't go.
|
|
#558
10-24-2007, 02:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AP Visit: I\'m going to Costa Rica
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Nat, not sure if this was already covered, but is this happening because AP executives contacted you to do this? you said "contacts" or something in your OP invited you. [/ QUOTE ] The people who got me in touch with AP don't really want to be named. Basically anyone involved here doesn't want to be named, it's kinda annoying, but that's how this business is. [/ QUOTE ] So if you can't disclose this information, how the hell do you plan to disclose the information like El Diablo described? Bottom line is Absolute FAILED it's customers; and should be punished with the only fitting penalty. OUT OF BUSINESS.
|
|
#559
10-24-2007, 02:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AP Visit: I\'m going to Costa Rica
Nat,
This was written and quoted earlier: "AP could come clean with an open letter to the poker community explaining everything that they know about the situation, including names of the cheaters, how it happened, what they are doing to fix the problem, etc., and then invite an entire independent group from the poker community to come down to verify the accuracy of what AP is representing. AP is not doing that. Instead, they appear to have invited an admitted "25 year old kid", who also happens to have technical knowledge and been instrumental in uncovering the cheating at AP, down for a "feel good" visit to their offices in Costa Rica. This is a PR move by AP, nothing more." eph makes some good points there. Perhaps you could pressure them into releasing a letter of that nature in advance of your trip? Then you go down to give your impression of things after people have had a chance to discuss the letter and give you some followup questions.
|
|
#560
10-24-2007, 02:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AP Visit: I\'m going to Costa Rica
My response to Nat's age being a factor....
My son is 25. He owns his own home, has a great job, works his tail off, is the most level headed person I know and I would trust him to represent me in any situation. Nat appears to have those same qualities. I trust him to remain a champion of the cause in the face of any tricks or bribes AP may place in his path. I believe he will come through with a full and unbiased report. I trust he'll make valid suggestions to the current management and ask the tuff questions. I trust Nat will come away with much more knowledge about the "enemy" than he currently has. Age has nothing to do with this discussion. Nat should never had made that remark.
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
