The lawyer representing the online poker brand Full Tilt has made a statement in defense of new allegations that the poker company was only a cover for a $400 million Ponzi scheme.
Attorney Jeff Ifrah had this to say, “Banks fail all the time for not having sufficient funds to cover customer deposits but yet no one refers to such bank failures as Ponzi schemes. There was no Ponzi scheme at Full Tilt Poker, players were not investors in the company, they were never promised any type of high return on their deposits, these players just wanted to play poker and Full Tilt provided such a source.”
However, it has been found that in 2010 Full Tilt Poker was unable to meet the demands of the withdrawals that were being requested by its players. Then the company was shutdown in 2011 by the Federal Government in the US along with PokerStars, who has either totally paid back all their customers or are in the process of paying back.
This newest charge brought on by U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara that Full Tilt was not a legitimate poker company but just a cover for a world wide Ponzi scheme has started a major controversy between what is considered legal and illegal acts made by an online gaming establishment. Because Full Tilt and hundreds of other online gaming sites promise to keep players accounts secure, and that their money is available for withdrawal at anytime.
It would seem to me that any site not able to do either of these two requirements that they offer is in fact operating illegally or at the very least unprofessionally. Full Tilt Poker was considered one of the best in the online poker industry, but these latest accusations, if found true, would take all credibility away from the site as being professionally run and not to be trusted by players ever again.
The three individuals that have been charged with lining their own pockets with player’s monies will have to answer to these charges in the coming days. The civil complaint that has been levied against each person makes sure that if these men received any type of distribution at the time when the company was not able to pay its own players, then they will need to defend whether those payments should or should not be subject to seizure as the new amendment in the civil complaint now alleges.
By Patricia C. Senior Editor casinoplayersreport.com
Full Tilt Pokers Attorney stated in an ABC News story that even if the Federal Government in the US proves their case and such distributions should be forfeited, it still does not confirm or prove that a worldwide Ponzi scheme was taking place. He went on to say in the interview that, “The inflammatory remarks made by the New York Prosecutor in this case has nothing to do with the allegations in the amended civil complaint and the reasons and timing for these statements are most unfortunate.” Full Tilt Poker’s Attorney Ifrah also said that he believes Full Tilt may have mismanaged their company and may have made poor decisions”.