In this week’s Rabbit Hunt (brought to you by CardRunners), Mark and I focus on two primary stories: PokerStars vs the ACC & Lock Poker’s Super-Fiasco. And we wrap up with a quick look at the questions surrounding Nevada gaming technology provider Iovation.

Check it out here at CardRunners or here on iTunes.

As promised, here are a few links to the stories we reference on the podcast (along with a bit of additional relevant material from other sources):

PokerStars vs the ACC

• Diamond Flush broke the story.
• Details (and copy) of the complaint and temporary restraining order from QuadJacks.
• Reports that Caesars is considering selling the Showboat.

Lock Poker’s Super-Fiasco

• Backstory and more backstory.
• Original revision of transfer policy
• Two pros leave Lock
• New-new transfer policy

Other / Misc

• NV interactive gaming provider Iovation linked to Ultimate Bet?
• 2+2 thread on Iovation and Ultimate Poker.

The post Are You Locking Kidding Me? Rabbit Hunt for May 10th, 2013 appeared first on Online Poker Report.

The Merge Network is apparently expanding up their policy of ring fencing their player pools between sites. This move is not a complete shock as some network skins have segregated a select number of ring games since 2011.

It was somewhat common knowledge among experienced players that Players Only and Sportsbook.com skins had ring fenced certain games to only allow their players to face off against one another. This reason for this is obvious – to stop more experienced players from taking the sports bettor’s or casino player’s money at the tables. These players are far more profitable to the sites than your average grinder, and it behooves these skins to keep these types of players in action.

New ring-fencing at Merge rooms?

However, on May 1^st, the skins may have taken their actions a bit further. There is no official word from the Merge Network or their flagship skin Carbon Poker, so these accusations are coming from players on network rooms.

2+2 was ablaze with discussions late last week with players wondering what happened to the player numbers at both Sit n’ go tournaments and Limit Hold’em games. So far, Carbon representatives have not answered players’ questions in regards to the drop in player numbers. Many players reported seeing SNGs and LHE cash games available on Sportsbook and Players Only skins, but the players/tables not appearing on Carbon Poker or Aced.

Traffic stats at PokerFusePro for Merge (which views Merge from Carbon Poker) do show a dip around April 1st, but Merge was already on a downward trend prior to the dip so it’s tough to conclude much regarding ring-fencing from the data.

Carbon, and perhaps Merge management may not have much of a say if Sportsbook/Players Only has made this move. They seem to be able to do what they wish their specific player pool, without repercussions from the network.

Ring fencing and player segregation was once unheard of in online poker, but many rooms in recent years have adopted some form of the practice.

• In March, Party Poker recently began hiding certain tables from more experienced players and in an effort to keep players of the same skill level playing against each other.
• Full Tilt Poker also added “New to the Game” tables which is a scaled down approach of player pool segregation. Players can play up to 2000 hands at these tables before they have to move to normal tables.

What’s next for Merge?

The move by some of Merge’s skins came as a shock to players who wondered what prompted such a move and are still wondering about the specifics. After all, there has been no official announcement on these changes leaving players in the dark. Are more changes coming? Is this a permanent move?

For now, US online poker players are dealt another blow with SNG and LHE players specifically angered by these moves. The SNG segregation is especially shocking and unheard of in the industry. The early results of this move have seemed to hurt the liquidity of SNGs at Carbon Poker/Aced heavily.

Though, a full segregation of player pools amongst certain skins seems unlikely – it may be a realistic possibility. Former Merge skin, and now Revolution Gaming room Lock Poker made the move in early February to ring fence $1/$2 ring games and higher from the rest of the network.

The post Merge Network Further Segregates Player Pools appeared first on Online Poker Report.

UPDATE 5/2/13: PokerStars spokesperson Eric Hollreiser has released a formal statement via Twitter. This statement – combined with yesterday’s oddly short statement from the ACC – suggests there’s possibly more to this situation than meets the eye.

Note especially Hollreiser’s use of “purported” below.

In December 2012, The Rational Group (d/b/a PokerStars) entered into a purchase agreement for the acquisition of the Atlantic Club. (1/5)

— Eric Hollreiser (@erichollreiser) May 2, 2013

Several days ago we received a purported notice of termination of this agreement from the current owners of the Atlantic Club (2/5)

— Eric Hollreiser (@erichollreiser) May 2, 2013

It was the Rational Group’s expectation and understanding, based on the ongoing dealings between the parties that the closing date …(3/5)

— Eric Hollreiser (@erichollreiser) May 2, 2013

would be extended to allow the transaction to be completed. (4/5)

— Eric Hollreiser (@erichollreiser) May 2, 2013

The Rational Group remains entirely committed to resolving this situation and to our investment in New Jersey. (5/5)

— Eric Hollreiser (@erichollreiser) May 2, 2013

With that in mind, consider this excellent point from Dave Behr:

@opreport well it’s weird that they signed in Dec and had an april 26 CP to get the ICA, which takes upwards of 120 days.

— Dave Behr (@ftrainpoker) May 2, 2013

Weird indeed.

Original story follows:

After reports yesterday that PokerStars missed a key conditional deadline in its pending deal to purchase the Atlantic Club Casino, word today from the ACC indicates the deal is dead – at least for now.

The story was first reported by John Brennan:

Breaking: PokerStars deal to buy Atlantic Cllub casino in AC officially dead, casino says

— John Brennan (@BergenBrennan) May 1, 2013

Excerpt from a statement by Atlantic Club Casino COO Michael Frawley:

“Our purchase agreement with PokerStars has been terminated. The Atlantic Club remains committed to the aggressive pursuit of the opportunities presented by online gambling.”

‘The advent of New Jersey’s online gaming legislation has changed Atlantic City’s future for the better and The Atlantic Club is absolutely going to be a part of that future,”

Timeline of PokerStars’ attempt to purchase the ACC

The timeline of PokerStars’ (apparently failed) attempt to purchase the ACC is a strange one:

• Dec 2012 – Reports emerge that PokerStars is in negotiations to purchase the ACC.
• Jan 2013 – PokerStars confirms they have reached a conditional agreement to purchase the ACC.
• Jan 2013 – Reports from several sources indicate that PokerStars filed their application for an Interim Casino Authorization license with NJ state officials at the end of December. The filing of the application would trigger a 90-day review window.
• March 2013 – AGA files a brief opposing PokerStars’  interim application. PokerStars files a brief in response.
• March 2013 - PokerStars asserts that Caesars had offered to sell them the Rio and the WSOP.
• March 2013 – Reports reveal that PokerStars’ Interim Authorization application – thought to be already filed – is actually not complete.
• April 2013 – PokerStars actually completes the Interim Authorization application. No word on what caused the delay.
• April 2013 – The WSJ reports that PokerStars’ deal for the ACC has “expired without a new contract in place, according to people familiar with the matter”. The expiration was due to a condition in the contract that required PokerStars to have secured the Interim Authorization by April 24th.
• April 2013 – The ACC announces the contract to purchase has been terminated.

Deal “really” dead? PokerStars done in NJ?

While certainly not a positive development for those who wish to see PokerStars operating in New Jersey, the news is hardly a death knell for the site’s chances to be a part of regulated online gambling in the state.

For example, this news could simply be part of a negotiating ploy on the part of the Atlantic Club Casino. It’s also possible that PokerStars could participate in the state as a software provider in partnership with a licensed operator, a role that does not require ownership of a land-based casino. Finally, PokerStars could always seek to purchase another NJ property, although the list of bargain-priced gambling halls looks pretty thin after the ACC.

Not everyone is certain that the deal has completely fallen through. Howard Stutz of the LVRJ tweeted these responses to the news:

I was at the Atlantic Club last week; PokerStars folks were still upbeat about the transaction @bergenbrennan @opreport @unlvgaming

— Howard Stutz (@howardstutz) May 1, 2013

Via @ap – Atlantic Club COO Michael Frawley says PokerStars deal is off “in accordance with its terms” but did not provide further details.

— Howard Stutz (@howardstutz) May 1, 2013

… and in a story on NJ.com that preceded Brennan’s, online gambling proponent State Sen. Raymond Lesniack said:

“I wouldn’t believe anything right now and just wait until the decision from the Division of Gaming Enforcement [...] What I know is that the opponents of PokerStars are out there in full force trying to prevent them from operating in New Jersey.”

Again, note that Lesniack’s comments were in response to the WSJ story about the missed deadline, not Brennan’s report that the deal is dead.

I will update this story as events warrant.

The post PokerStars Deal for New Jersey Casino “Dead” or Dead? appeared first on Online Poker Report.

The original version of this story incorrectly reported that the online poker amendment passed the House with the online poker amendment intact. This was an error on my part.

A late-hour push to regulate online poker in Massachusetts failed last week, as the Massachusetts House passed their version of the state budget without an online poker amendment attached.

You can find more details regarding the House’s proposed budget for FY 2014 (H.3400) here. Fiscal year 2014 starts on July 1st, 2013.

It was an amendment to that bill (Amendment #365) – filed only weeks ago – that sought seeks to establish a system for regulating online poker in the state. Full text of the amendment here.

Some highlights of the proposed regulations:

• License fee would cost a minimum of $10mm, credited against tax payments.
• Companies must launch online gambling within 30 days of getting a license or face a $25mm penalty.
• A “bad actor” clause restricts companies who accepted bets after passage of the UIGEA.

The Massachusetts House passed their $34mm budget bill late last week.

The post Massachusetts House Passes Budget Without Online Poker Regulation appeared first on Online Poker Report.

John Brennan was the first I saw to question New Jersey’s official estimates regarding online gambling revenue.

As Brennan and others have noted, there’s a considerable gap – nearly a billion dollars  - between what the state is projecting for first-year online gambling revenue ($1.2 billion) and forecasts from analysts.

So who’s right? And what exactly can we expect in terms of online casino revenue – and therefore tax revenue – in the initial year of regulated online gambling in New Jersey?

Before I take a whack at that question, a few important notes:

• New Jersey’s official projections are for their 2014 fiscal year, which begins in July of 2013.
• The size of an online gambling market is generally expressed in Gross Gaming Yield (GGY), which is the net casino revenue after player winnings (but not promotions or other costs) are paid.
• New Jersey’s base tax rate for online gambling is 15% of GGY. Casinos must also pay a 2.5% tax into the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (or an additional 5% to the state, but that option appears rarely exercised). It does not appear that the state is including this additional tax in their projections.

Comparing NJ online gambling market estimates

Let’s start with a quick comparison of New Jersey’s estimates and a selection of industry research reports.

That’s a pretty broad range.

Eliminate the NJ projections (because they just restate Wells Fargo), add up all the other scenarios and you’re looking at an average estimate of about $412mm in GGY for New Jersey’s first calendar year offering online gambling.

Chuck out NJ, the highest and lowest projections and the consensus forecast for year one online gambling GGY for New Jersey operators becomes $261mm.

New Jersey and the United Kingdom

GamblingData, sister site of information provider GamblingCompliance, based its New Jersey report on data from the Italian market. So I thought a back-of-the-napkin modelling of New Jersey based on the UK gambling market might provide further context for the above projections.

• The UK online gambling market had a GGY of £1.71b in 2011, according to a GamblingData.com report. Subtract sports betting from that total and you’re at roughly £1b (or about $1.5b in USD).
• The UK has a population of ~53mm, of which roughly 80% are legal gambling age for a gambling population of 43mm.
• 56% of adults participated in some non-lottery gambling in UK in 2010, and among active casino players, 39% played online. I wasn’t able to find corresponding numbers for New Jersey, but it’s worth noting regardless.
• NJ has a population of ~9mm and about 72% are of legal gambling age for a gambling population of 6.5mm.
• The gambling population of NJ is about 15% the size of the gambling population in the UK.
• Applying that ratio to GGY in the UK suggests New Jersey’s market could generate about $225m annually - fairly close to GamblingData’s low-end estimate of $235mm.

This is obviously a very crude analysis. But it nonetheless indicates that high-end estimates for New Jersey are not supported by comparisons to mature, online gambling markets with high participation rates.

Arguments for low-end estimates

The clear conclusion at this point: New Jersey’s official estimates are inconsistent with both analyst estimates and data from comparable markets.

But there are additional arguments supporting a GGY projection on the low end of – and perhaps even lower than – consensus projections:

• Online gambling seems unlikely to launch by the start of fiscal year 2014 (July 2013), so New Jersey probably won’t have a full calendar year to hit projections (more on that below).
• NJ had a lower-than-average participation rate in online poker pre-Black Friday (per research by Kahlil Philander & Ingo Fiedler).
• Mobile betting is driving no small part of worldwide growth, and it’s unclear if New Jersey will have a full slate of mobile options at launch.
• Companies may choose to launch with a limited lineup of games due to technical, economic regulatory and / or marketing concerns, depressing participation and revenue.
• Companies will need time to acquire the data that will allow them to optimally target customers.
• Unlicensed online casino operators will siphon off some level of market share. They are entrenched in search results via affiliates and don’t face the same cash out problems online poker sites face.
• Unforseen complications could delay launch.

Arguments for high-end estimates

Of course, there are some reasonable points that can be raised to support a higher-end estimate for the first year of regulated online gambling in NJ (although not enough to lend credence to New Jersey’s official projections):

• The novelty factor of regulated online gambling will potentially drive participation rates (temporarily) higher.
• The massive amount of (free) press surrounding launch will likely have a similar impact.
• PokerStars is an X factor. The presence of PokerStars in New Jersey could super-charge both PR and the novelty factor.
• Casinos will almost certainly front-load their promotions (and marketing) at and around launch in an attempt to secure market share.
• Casinos already have larger and sophisticated customer lists to work with.
• “Online poker tourism” – residents of other states moving to, or setting up a part-time residence in, to play online poker – could allow New Jersey to punch above its population weight.
• There’s already some adoption of online gambling in New Jersey status quo via online horse race betting.

So what it’s worth?

I agree with (just about) everyone else – New Jersey’s official estimates are driven far more by political need and budgetary magic math than by sober, rational analysis of the market.

But how far off are they? Two important conditions impact that answer.

The PokerStars impact

First, I believe that PokerStars will have  a material impact on the size of New Jersey’s online gambling market. The company has the software, the expertise and the customer list to immediately command substantial market share in New Jersey. But I think PokerStars also expands the market; the interest in their return, the pressure PokerStars places on competitors to offer more value to players and their proven marketing savvy all suggest PokerStars can bring players into the market that might otherwise pass.

Assuming PokerStars gets the nod from regulators, and that the launch of real-money gambling takes place  within a month or two of the start of the fiscal year, I think we can reasonably expect a $250mm -$300mm GGY for New Jersey’s first year.

The fiscal year impact

Those are both big assumptions. The bigger of the two is that the state of New Jersey will be ready to launch real-money online gambling by (or near) to the start of their 2014 fiscal year in July 2013.

I don’t have any first-hand information regarding how far along regulators are in New Jersey, but from a public perspective a July launch seems implausible at best. No licenses have been issued and regulations have yet to be promulgated, reviewed & adopted. In fact, we don’t even know what games are approved for online play in New Jersey.

Every month that NJ delays beyond the start of the fiscal year chops somewhere between $20mm – $25mm from their GGY potential for (fiscal) year one.

My estimate

New Jersey certainly has the potential do $300mm+ in the first calendar year following launch. If PokerStars is part of the equation, I could see that number moving up toward $330mm.

But on the question of the likely GGY for fiscal year 2014, I’d imagine we’ll end up looking at a number much closer to $150mm – $200mm. Given the progress to date, I just can’t see a full-fledged launch until fall 2013 at the earliest. And even that could prove optimistic.

In this scenario, the State of New Jersey is overstating expected revenue from online gambling for FY 2014 by roughly $1b, and, ergo, overstating tax revenue by about $150mm.

The post So What Is New Jersey’s Online Gambling Market Really Worth? appeared first on Online Poker Report.

A sudden shift in strategy on the part of bwin.party today, as the company announced intentions to shut off new signups from over a dozen countries.

The announcement was made via email to affiliates. As of the end of April, all of the bwin.party online gambling brands, including PartyPoker, will stop accepting new registrations from the following countries:

Argentina, Armenia, Belarus, Brazil, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia and the Ukraine.

Players from those countries can still sign up – for now

But players from those countries who already have an account will be able to continue to access the full range of bwin.party products.

So, if I’m understanding it correctly, players from the impacted countries can make an account before the end of April and still be able to access bwin.party products going forward.

Why is bwin.party making this decision?

The email did not offer any insight into the reasoning behind bwin.party’s decision, citing only “commercial reasons” for the change. The consensus appears to be that the company is motivated by legal concerns / a desire to scrub the company prior to regulatory scrutiny in the United States:

Bwin.party begins grey market exit strategy bit.ly/13mx6uo

— eGaming Review (@egamingreview) April 19, 2013

@joetall @opreport & PKR announced today it’s closing Belgium. Betfair, Party & others all doing this as they shift away from grey markets.

— James Barnes (@JamesBarnesEsq) April 19, 2013

Of the countries listed, only Greece was mentioned in the “Regulatory Overview” section of Party’s 2012 annual report.

bwin launches in Belgium

Today also brought a second announcement from bwin.party: The company’s Belgian site, bwin.be, is now “fully licensed for all products in Belgium,” per a separate email sent to affiliates a few minutes before the email announcing the soon-to-be-banned countries.

The bwin.be launched earlier this week. It’s not clear if there’s any connection between the launch of the Belgian site and the decision to shut off sign ups from the aforementioned countries.

Below find the full text of the announcement sent to affiliates of bwin.party:

Dear affiliate partner!

Please note that due to commercial reasons, as of 30.04.2013, we will no longer be accepting new traffic for any of our brands from the following countries:

Argentina, Armenia, Belarus, Brazil, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia and the Ukraine.

Please remove all relevant bwin.party marketing materials from your website by 30.04.2013.

Commission on existing traffic in these markets will continue to be paid according to our Standard Terms and Conditions.

We thank you for your co-operation and would like to apologise for any inconvenience that these changes may cause.

Should you have any queries, please contact us at: affiliate@bwinpartypartners.com

All the best,
Your bwin.party partners team

The post bwin.party Suspending New Signups in Over a Dozen Markets appeared first on Online Poker Report.

After an incredibly slow month for online poker regulation in the U.S., things look to be picking back up as lawmakers return from session and holiday breaks.

Here’s a quick overview of state-based efforts to regulate online poker in the United States as of April 16th, 2013.

States with active online poker bills

California

The state has two live bills seeking to regulate online poker – SB 51 and SB 678, but there has been a near-total lack of new information regarding either in the last two months or so. SB 678 remains a placeholder bill, providing little in the way of specifics. SB 51 is a reintroduction of a bill that failed to gain traction in 2012.

Illinois

SB1739 is the much-talked about bill that would bring a variety of regulated online gambling to Illinois, including poker. The bill remains the subject of much debate among Illinois politicians and members of the state’s land-based gambling industry.

Meanwhile, another bill related to online gambling – SB1955 – has been amended to broaden the scope of online games the Illinois Lottery can offer. The bill was originally designed to allow the Illinois Lottery to offer Lucky Day Lotto, My3, Pick 3, and Pick 4 games online, but the amendment expands that list to all “draw-based” games.

What’s a “draw-based” game for the purposes of this bill? Per the amendment text: “games where a series of numbers or characters are determined to be the winning numbers or characters by a mechanical or computerized random number generator at a drawing time specified by the Department.”

Massachusetts

A recent amendment to the state’s budget bill in the House seeks to regulate online poker.

No recent movement on either of other two bills, one for online casino games and one for online lottery sales, that remain in committee.

Texas

A number of poker-related bills are in play. But even backers think the prospects of any gambling expansion in Texas are slim.

States with bills set to be introduced

Pennsylvania

Still no movement on the bill Rep Tina Davis has been talking about introducing for a few months now. Even if the bill was introduced, the consensus is that passage would be a long shot. Probably reasonable to shift this into “abandoned / stalled” by next month.

States with abandoned / stalled online poker efforts

Hawaii

Relaunched in February, Hawaii’s bill to regulate online gambling died in committee a month later.

Iowa

Iowa’s online poker efforts failed to advance by a critical legislative deadline and are now dead for 2013.

Kansas

A bill that sought to ban online poker (while expanding land-based gambling) was voted down in the Kansas Senate in April 2013.

Mississippi

An attempt to regulate online poker died in committee back in February 2013.

New York

A last-minute attempt in March 2013 to push through online poker regulation as part of the state budget came up short.

States that have passed online poker bills

Delaware

While NJ and NV steal the media thunder, Delaware has been making steady progress toward going live with real-money online gambling. The state announced over a dozen license applications last week and is targeting a late September date for launch.

New Jersey

All indications are that New Jersey is moving aggressively toward developing and releasing regulations that would allow operators to apply for licenses and offer online gambling to players in NJ. The status of PokerStars’ filing with NJ authorities remains unclear and could remain unresolved well through the summer.

Nevada

Hiring and marketing continues to accelerate at Caesars, Ultimate Poker and other major Nevada operators. Last week, WSOP.com became the first major site to solicit beta testers for real-money online poker software in Nevada. And Ultimate just announced the signing of Antonio Esfandiari.

Misc / other

Florida

A new law aimed at sweepstakes cafes has forced subscription-based poker sites out of Florida.

Louisiana

A nascent effort to study the feasibility of regulating online poker is underway.

Washington

An attempt to decrease the penalties for playing poker online failed in February 2013. A  new grassroots effort seeks to both undo those penalties and regulate online poker in Washington State.

The post Online Poker in the States: April 16th, 2013 appeared first on Online Poker Report.

Chad Elie, who is in the middle of a five-month jail sentence stemming from online poker’s Black Friday, has filed a civil suit against lawyer Jeff Ifrah.

The suit claims that Ifrah, who was allegedly paid some $4 million by Elie for various legal services, gave “misleading advice to further his own pecuniary interests.”

You can read a text-searchable copy of the complaint here.

Elie is being represented in the suit by the Chattah Law Group.

Some excerpts from the complaint:

15. Once indicted as part of the Black Friday Indictments, throughout the course of discovery with the US Attorney’s Office, Elie discovered the gruesome truth, that his own lawyer, Defendant, misrepresented him; That Ifrah hid critical documentation that had said
documentation been disclosed to Mr. Elie, Mr. Elie would have never continued to process poker.

16. It was clear that Ifrah, used his position and esteem in the internet gaming industry to further his own economic endeavors insofar as to give Mr. Elie wrong advice regarding poker processing so that he could make a windfall from Elie, Full Tilt Poker and Pokerstars; then hid his involvement in same in violation of 18 USC § 1001 when he provided information about his Clients to the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.

45. Defendant received in excess of $1,000,000.00 (One Million USD) in commission payments from Elie’s company as Defendant’s “cut” from the processing poker payments with the Banks.

46. It is clear that Defendants activities in both representing Full Tilt Poker and Pokerstars and Elie (and 21 Debit) were clear conflicts of interests whereby Defendant was continuously benefiting from his representation of both Companies.

47. Defendant specifically mislead Elie regarding the legalities of processing poker so that he can continue to receive monies (commission payments) from Elie.

49. The most egregious act Defendant engaged in however, was providing testimony and information against Mr. Elie and others to the United States Attorney’s Office in the Investigation leading to the Black Friday Indictments, including but not limited to his own Clients’ indictments.

First reported by Forbes.

The post Chad Elie Sues Jeff Ifrah appeared first on Online Poker Report.

The 95-page indictment against Legendz Sports released yesterday by the DoJ contains a litany of charges against over 30 individuals.

Among the charges is a reference to what most would interpret as affiliate activity.

The section in question is located in Count 1 (Racketeering Conspiracy), subsection lllll (p.44), and reads:

On or about January 31,2013,defendant GREGORY WILSON ”PATCHMAIN” ROBERTS maintained a website for his company, Greg Roberts’ National Consensus Sports Handicapping, listing 256-546-4080 as his telephone number and Legendz Sports as a recommended sports book. All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1962(d).

That particular aspect of US code makes it “unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section.” Those subsections concern racketeering activity and collection of unlawful debts. Full text of the section here.

These are only charges. They do not indicate guilt.

More details of Robert’s alleged activity

Earlier in the indictment (p.7), Roberts is described as:

Defendant GREGORY WILSON “PATCHMAIN” ROBERTS was an agent and sports touter of Legendz Sports operating out of Alabama

No other person named in the indictment is described as a “touter.”

Roberts is further described as the owner of a “commission account” (p.29) connected to Legendz, another term that doesn’t appear anywhere else in the indictment.

Interestingly enough, Robert’s alleged “commission account” is referenced in 2007. But his website doesn’t come into the indictment timeline until 2013. And there’s no direct connection I could find between his website and said commission account, nor are there any details in the indictment of payments received by Roberts related to promotion of Legdendz via a website or any other means.

Roberts is also named in Count 2 (Illegal Gambling Business) and Count 3 (Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering).

In terms of frequency and severity of alleged activity, Roberts would appear to be a fairly minor player. The indictment makes only 3 specific additional references to Roberts’ alleged activity in connection with Legendz:

ddd. On or about May 9, 2008, defendant GREGORY WILSON “PATCHMAIN” ROBERTS contacted the Legendz Sports VIP Services telephone number twice;

cccc. On or about January 26, 2009, defendant GREGORY WILSON “PATCHMAIN” ROBERTS sent or caused to be sent a check for $10,000.00 to Legendz Sports;

11111. On or about February 2,2012,defendant GREGORY WILSON “PATCHMAIN” ROBERTS traveled to Panama to conduct business with Legendz Sports;

While it’s impossible to comment on the veracity of these allegations, what does seem clear is the government believes Roberts acted in ways that fall well outside the normal activities of a typical online gambling affiliate.

As for forfeiture, Roberts is identified in all three forfeiture counts.  Property listed is not associated with any specific defendant, so it’s impossible to tell what property belonging to Roberts the government might be targeting. Owners of targeted bank accounts are identified and Robert’s name does not appear in the list of accounts provided by the government.

The affiliate aspect of the indictment was originally brought to my attention by Gambling911.

The website in question

The website mentioned by the indictment – Consensus900.com – is still functional. There are three names listed on the contact page, including Roberts’. While we have no idea who the other two individuals actually are, it’s interesting to note that Roberts uses his real name on the page and the indictment contains no mention of anyone named “Doug” or “Sherry.”

The company listed on the contact page – National Consensus, Inc – appears to be a business first formed in Alabama in 1989. Here’s the AL secretary of state record for a National Consensus Inc with Greg Roberts as the registered name.

There are no obvious references to placing online sports bets in general or any Legendz brands specifically on the site.

Legendz domains still functioning

Unlike Black Friday, many of the domains associated with this indictment do not appear to have been seized by the DoJ. As of this article, several of the dot-com domains mentioned in the indictment are still redirecting to the primary dot-eu site for Legendz.

The post Legendz Indictment Includes Affiliate Activity appeared first on Online Poker Report.

UPDATE 4/15: On the 2nd anniversary of Black Friday, Ray Bitar pled guilty in a Manhattan court via videolink.

His plea was accepted and he was sentenced to time served (meaning that he will serve no additional jail time). He will also surrender $40mm in cash along with other property and assets.

Per DiamondFlush, Bitar pled guilty to two charges – a UIGEA violation and a charge related to bank/wire fraud.

Original story follows.

Definitely one of the odder twists in the Black Friday saga.

As first reported by the Wall Street Journal, former Full Tilt Poker head Ray Bitar has reached a deal with United States authorities that will allow Bitar to avoid serving any jail time.

The twist: Bitar is apparently in urgent need of a heart transplant or an artificial heart due to a severe medical condition. The specifics of his condition are unknown.

Vague word of Bitar’s health problems initially emerged in March 2013 when he was reportedly granted a continuance for a scheduled pre-trial hearing on medical grounds.

The basics of Bitar’s deal (which has yet to be publicly filed or approved by a judge) per Dave Behr at FlushDraw.com:

• Bitar will surrender roughly $40mm in assets
• Bitar is likely – although not guaranteed – to avoid serving  jail time
• Bitar will plead guilty to two as-yet-unspecified felonies

At the top end of the sentencing range for the collective charges levied against him, Bitar was facing what amounted to a life sentence.

The tentative date for Bitar to enter his plea and detail his misdeeds is April 19th.

Bitar’s settlement is not altogether different from the deals reached by his former Full Tilt co-workers Howard Lederer and Chris Ferguson. All three deals involved substantial monetary forfeitures but no jail time.

But given the severity of the charges Bitar was facing relative to Ferguson and Lederer, it seems inconceivable that Bitar would have been able to secure such a deal in the absence of a critical health issue requiring immediate and extreme attention.

Some early reaction from around Twitter:

Most shocking news today is discovery Ray Bitar actually has a heart

— Randy Dorfman (@RandyDorfman) April 8, 2013

Shame about Ray Bitar needing a heart transplant; wish Dr. Kevorkian was still around to operate.

— Tony Dunst (@Bond_18) April 8, 2013

In before a sorry series of comedy and celebration over Ray Bitar’s death that will make the community look awful.

— Marco Valerio (@AgentMarco) April 8, 2013

I am fine with Ray Bitar receiving leniency because he needs a heart transplant. He has a tough road ahead of him.

— Mucking Aces (@muckingaces) April 8, 2013

The post Bitar Pleads Guilty, Avoids Jail appeared first on Online Poker Report.