A question for Dutch Boyd
steve
flame him
I am wondering what you and your initial investors startup money was? I
know a bank will not loan you money without some of your own; usually at
least 25%. so how much of it was bank loans? how much out of your
pockets? and did you owe money to non players when the site failed? such
as the bank.
** Posted via RGP ACCESS at http://www.LiveActionPoker.com
** $50 Deposit Bonus at Pacific Poker
click here: http://www.LiveActionPoker.com/pp
Mister Poker
most of it came from friends and family loans that we are still paying
off.
Dutch Boyd
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
steve
I've been following the threads about this for a while now and I have to
say it appears to me that anyone who lost money in this venture has
noone to blame but themselves.
unless Russ guaranteed a certain amount of your deposits would be
insured, which he didn't he does not have to make good if the company
went under and there was not enough money in the liquidation to cover
everything. when the assets of a company are liquidated unless you have
contacted a lawyer and put yourself on a list to be paid, the money
generated from the assetts goes to the largest creditors. usually banks
and companys are smart enough to make sure they are written into the
sale of the assetts.
as players you were merely investors in this site, if you put money in
the stock market and the company fails you lose. if your brother borrows
money from you to open a store and it fails you lose. same scenario
here.
i truely believe he wanted it to work, who among us wouldn't want to own
a poker site at that age.
I know people who were so called "screwed" out of much more money than
anyone on that site in far more legal arenas. lets not forget internet
poker is illegal in most locales. sort of like getting flour instead of
cocaine. when you deal with illegal things you should safeguard
yourself. i blame the players who left exhorbitant amounts in their
accounts for what happened to them.
i'm not defending what happened even though i KNOW i will be thoroughly
criticsized, i'm just trying to bring some things to light
#1 other people are owed money not just players
#2 theres really nothing technically illegal with what happened; the
company failed people got hurt thats it
#3 anyone who thinks Russ Boyd is not sorry for what happened is wrong
in my opinion, if he really didn't care he would not defend himself and
respond to these posts. any physciatrist will tell you that
so now everyone can tell me what an idiot i am for somewhat defending
him (even though i am not) but i've been here long enough to know how it
works
I'm just wondering what you will say if in 5 years rakefree.com is the
most legit best run site on the net?
Wade C
1.Players aren't investors; and
2. Accepting player funds after the site is irrevocably headed for failure
is criminal (or should be).
.. essentially a Ponzi operation at that point.
"steve" <steve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f4292e1$0$196$7586...@news.frii.net...
> so the players on the site are not the only ones who haven't been paid.
>
> I've been following the threads about this for a while now and I have to
> say it appears to me that anyone who lost money in this venture has
> noone to blame but themselves.
>
<snip blathering post>
susan
> most legit best run site on the net?
How can it possibly be the most legit best run site if he is involved?
7stud
That's like saying if you deposit money at a bank, you are an investor in
the bank. It that's true, then how come you don't get money deposited to
your account when the stock price appreciates, or automatic deductions when
the stock price goes down?
Were the players who deposited money getting a percentage of the future
profits? Exactly how were they investors then? If they were taking the
risk that the company could go under and they would lose all their money,
what was the return on their capital going to be for taking on that risk?
7stud
legitimate business plan. After all, if you give money to a company, say a
small investment firm, and subsequently they use your money to pay high
returns to previous investors instead of investing your money as you
directed, then that's tough on you if the business fails and you lose all
your money. Most people, however, would consider that fraud and criminal
conduct. And in fact, most countries around the world prosecute people who
do that.
Dutch Boyd engaged in similar criminal activity: people deposited money to
their accounts for their exclusive use as stakes in poker games, and Dutch
Boyd took the money and spent it. Now, depositing money with someone you
don't know in an uninsured offshore account and trusting that they won't
steal it may be naive, but if someone steals the money it doesn't mean it
wasn't a crime.
"steve" <steve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f4292e1$0$196$7586...@news.frii.net...
NWBurbsCouple
>> most legit best run site on the net?
I'll say I'm grateful to have lived long enough to see pigs fly.
lucas67
feel for the players who lost money. Businesses fail, and I am sure that
Russ wanted this business to succeed as much as any of the players who
lost money on the site.
Now, with that said, a lot of the anger you are seeing is a result of how
Russ handled things as his business began failing and how he continues to
deal with these issues since the business folded. He has repeatedly blamed
others, and chosen not to accept options that could have repaid some or
all of this debt. He has displayed the arrogance you would expect from a
young kid and for the most part continues to blame others for Pokerspots
demise and will not shoulder much of the blame.
I do not think he intentionally scammed others, or is an evil guy, but he
is kind of non-chalant when speaking about those who he owes money to. It
is my opinion that he should make it his ongoing mission to pay these
people back. Before he even considers another business, he needs to make
good to the many Pokerspot players who are due money. If this take all his
life to do, then so be it. Any future poker winnings should be used to pay
these players back. Until then, his reputation will proceed him and any of
his other future business endeavors will suffer because of it. Of course
this is all just my opinion. Feel free to flame me if I am missing the
mark here.
On Aug 19 2003 10:15AM, steve wrot
> so the players on the site are not the only ones who haven't been paid.
>
> I've been following the threads about this for a while now and I have to
> say it appears to me that anyone who lost money in this venture ha
_________________________________________________________________
arlo payne
Boyd paying back what a fucking joke!
steve
$100,000 and gives you very little usually 1% on the 12% avg they make
on your money
7stud wrote
That's like saying if you deposit money at a bank, you are an investor
in
the bank. It that's true, then how come you don't get money deposited to
your account when the stock price appreciates, or automatic deductions
when
the stock price goes down?
when you put money into a new company poker site whatever, where do you
geniuses think that money goes? into the owners pockets. he has to use
it for payroll and whatever other expenses he has. they say it takes at
least 1 year to see a profit from a new company usually longer.
steve
2. Accepting player funds after the site is irrevocably headed for
failure
is criminal (or should be).
who decides when the site is headed for failure?
what if by doing this the site survived?
I am not a boyd front you can check some previous posts where i take a
couple of shots at him, in jest!
I am just sick of 15 threads on the same subject you people lost money i
understand that.
if you want to do something useful, instead of threatining the person
you feel is responsible(vigilantes!!!!!meant in jest) why don't you
start a thread about ways to safeguard yourself from this in the future.
wayne crimi
That is correct unless there was some fine print that you didn't know
about.....
If someone is not returning the player's money, IMO that is a criminal act.
"Wade C" <wco...@primetech.net> wrote in message
news:vk55s3f...@corp.supernews.com...
wayne crimi
"7stud" <n...@no.com> wrote in message
news:bhu7ni$357sk$1...@ID-203571.news.uni-berlin.de...
wayne crimi
on that, I have a better question. Why isn't he in jail yet?
"steve" <steve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f4285bb$0$195$7586...@news.frii.net...
RussTheThiefBoyd
RussTheThiefBoyd
susan
with OUR money, this whole matter would probably never be mentioned again.
It's his arrogant attitude, and flaunting how much money he won that has
myself and others pissed off. Other sites have absconded with players
money, and you seldom hear of them again.
"Sam Croy" <s...@NOSPAMblueflintcat.us> wrote in message
news:q5b5kvkabjs96ei2t...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 15:54:20 -0600, "7stud" <n...@no.com> wrote:
.
> 1. You don't see any real gambler's here crying about pokerspot.
> 2. Because as someone else already pointed out... it is stupid to
> leave large amounts of money in an offshore account when you don't
> even know who own's it or if it is legal.
> 3. Professional gambler's at pokerspot were most likely only burned
> for "someone else's" money anyway.
> 4. Most people on RGP have probably pissed away more money on wine
> women and whatever that they ever lost at Pokerspot.
> Unless you have enough balls to take care of Dutch yourself or enough
> money to hire it done, quit yer fucking bitching and move on.
>
>
>
> -- Sam Croy
>
Siam
>From: "7stud" n...@no.com
>Date: 8/19/2003 3:16 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <bhu7ni$357sk$1...@ID-203571.news.uni-berlin.de>
>
>In your view of the business world, a Ponzi scheme or Pyramid scheme is a
>legitimate business plan. After all, if you give money to a company, say a
>small investment firm, and subsequently they use your money to pay high
>returns to previous investors instead of investing your money as you
>directed, then that's tough on you if the business fails and you lose all
>your money. Most people, however, would consider that fraud and criminal
>conduct. And in fact, most countries around the world prosecute people who
>do that.
>
>Dutch Boyd engaged in similar criminal activity: people deposited money to
>their accounts for their exclusive use as stakes in poker games, and Dutch
>Boyd took the money and spent it. Now, depositing money with someone you
>don't know in an uninsured offshore account and trusting that they won't
>steal it may be naive, but if someone steals the money it doesn't mean it
>wasn't a crime.
>
site has no clue about what an being an investor means. They are stakeholders,
but absolutely not investors in a site.
However, I don't think it is necessary to have 100% of the player's money
available at all times. In should be based on a % of cash-ins and outs on a
historical and trend basis plus a significant buffer for anything unsual. That
is how I would run it.
With zero regulation though I would of course feel best with 100% of the
players funds in a separate account.
Cheers
CSI Minneapolis
"NWBurbsCouple" <nwburb...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20030819181920...@mb-m25.aol.com...
steve
i'm wondering about any non disclosure deals made when the company was
liquidated. he may be saying these things because he has too. just a
thought
once again i am not defending what he did, merely stating you have no
legal rights to accuse him or get money from him personally. i am just
so sick of russ this and dutch that, lets move on to something that has
happened in the last year please!
he actually has quite a slander case forming here! again meant in jest
** Posted via RGP ACCESS at http://www.LiveActionPoker.com
** $100 Deposit Bonus at http://www.FabulousPoker.com
steve
think of the word!
** Posted via RGP ACCESS at http://www.LiveActionPoker.com
** $100 Deposit Bonus at http://www.FabulousPoker.com
steve
rest of you should do, and move on.
when i first read the threads about what happened with pokerspot i felt
bad for anyone who lost money.
after the constant whining and crying about what can i do, what can i
do, i no longer feel bad. its like listening to a 50 year old drunk
woman blather on and on EVERY SINGLE DAY about how she dumped a guy who
became a millionaire. you made a mistake now you have to live with and
deal with it. if the only way you can deal with it is by blasting Russ
on this forum I once again feel very bad for you :~(
my last Dutch Boyd post
Steve
Lee Munzer
"steve" ...
> you are an investor in that bank! the bank insures your investment up to
> $100,000 and gives you very little usually 1% on the 12% avg they make
> on your money
Wow, 12%? No wonder my MAFB stock outperforms my Amgen shares:-).
This bank-to-PokerSpot.com stakeholder comparison is not a good analogy. I
look at depositing money in Party, UB, P'Stars, or Paradise as a relatively
high / no safety net risk when comparing depositing money at B. of A. or
Citigroup... especially after the mid-to-late eighties S&L "lessons
learned".
I'm a "depositor" at Citigroup (a checking account) and at several gaming
sites including Pokerstars.com. I'm also an "investor/shareholder" since I
own common shares of Citigroup (C-NYSE) held in street name at Fidelity. My
risk of loss in my bank account is negligible since, if Citigroup goes the
way of Enron or Global Crossings, I will wait in line as the FDIC returns my
checkbook balance which is well under the limit of $100,000. We all have
various opinions on how safe my $2,400 sitting in my P'Stars account is, but
we all agree there's no FDIC or SIPC to back it up.
SIPC? The Citigroup shares in my Fidelity account would be worthless if the
shares fell to zero, but let's assume instead of C going under, Fidelity
does. Investors with Fidelity accounts are insured for $500,000 under SIPC.
For anyone holding more than half a million in a Fidelity account, the
remainder is insured by Fidelity through an organization such as Lloyds of
London. While this might be considered a weak link by a very conservative
person, I'm comforted that the total customer assets held by Fidelity now
exceeds $1,400 billion.
Lee
Railz
If anyone ever deposits any money with this "site" (Hint Russ: get someone
who can design a decent site instead of a page that looks like it came
from 1992 Yahoo) when it goes live, you might want to check the whois
first:
Why would a legit company want to falsify their whois info? Would you send
money to a poker site who's address is listed as "10JQKA Fifth Street"?
In short - if you have nothing to hide, why hide it?
NWBurbsCouple
>money to a poker site who's address is listed as "10JQKA Fifth Street"?
Fifth Street? Positively! Not.
mb
when you deposit money in your bank account you are investing in this bank
because the bank is in the business of using your money to make profit.
however when you deposit money in a poker site you are not investing this
money, you are giving this money in trust. poker site is in the business
to make profit from rake not from gambling with your deposit.
7stud
> mark here.
> Now, with that said, a lot of the anger you are seeing is a result of how
> Russ handled things as his business began failing
No need to flame, but yes you are totally missing the mark. This was not a
dot.com failure where they were hemorrhaging the investor's cash on
marketing and taking in zero income, and then failed. You could blame
something like that on mismanagement, an unrealistic business plan, or a
slew of poor business decisions. The investors might be pissed off but that
was the risk they took.
No, Dutch Boyd was a guy who committed fraud and stole money from people who
deposited money to be used for their accounts only. No one who deposited
money was aware that their money would be used as the float to run the
business, nor did they agree to assume the risks something like that
entails. Think about it: what depositor would agree to take all the risk of
failure with no reward? That's the position Dutch Boyd put the players in.
>I do not think he intentionally scammed others, or is an evil guy,
Dutch Boyd admitted he lied, and he told his customer service people to lie
about what they were doing with the deposits. He knew he was stealing when
he took the first customer deposit and spent it. If you don't think that's
intentionally scamming people or that it's evil, then you are mistaken.
"lucas67" <anon...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:3f42a1c7$0$209$9a6e...@news.newshosting.com...
Gary Carson
>
>i truely believe he wanted it to work, who among us wouldn't want to
own
>a poker site at that age.
Of course he wanted it to work. Whenever I stick a gun in the clerks
face and rob a 7/11 I want it to work.
If he started with 80k then his business plan was a plan for a scam.
Float on credit card deposits is very large, there is no way 80k was
enough without planning on using player deposits as working cash.
Sure he wanted the scam to work, he didn't want it to blow up, but it
was still a scam from the git go.
>
>#1 other people are owed money not just players
So Boyd has no qualms about stealing from freinds and famailies.
>
>#2 theres really nothing technically illegal with what happened; the
>company failed people got hurt thats it
It was a fraud from the begginning, he used player deposits as working
capital and didn't disclose that.
>
>#3 anyone who thinks Russ Boyd is not sorry for what happened is
wrong
>in my opinion, if he really didn't care he would not defend himself
and
>respond to these posts. any physciatrist will tell you that
He cares that it didn't work. He cares that it might harm his next
internet venture. He doesn't care about the people he stole from.
Gary Carson
minus200
Investors take risk and expect to be rewarded for taking that risk. As a
frequent investor, I can tell you that the greater the risk - the greater
the POTENTIAL return must be.
compare that to a customer that makes a deposit for a product and when the
business goes belly up he discovers his "deposit" is gone. Now we hear the
Mr Boyd is paying back his investors BUT nothing to the people that had
money in their accounts. Seems like he has the process backwards. In truth,
I doubt that he had $80,000 to start with and I doubt his "investors" (if
any) were left out in the cold.
The lies about credit card companies and the different stories that Mr Boyd
told to the players when they did not get their check changed from day to
day. As a frequent player at the site, I got the impression that pokerspot
was in trouble and contacted them about a possible buy out. I got a phone
call in less than a day. When he discovered we were not interested in
investing but a straight buy out, he went away. No pigeon to fleece here I
guess. I am doubtful that my group would have gone for investing in a
foreign country but the potential rewards were so great that we were
prepared to spend $5000 to $10,000 to see if this was a business for us.
If we are to believe what Mr Boyd has said - he sold pokerspot
The big bad buyers backed out and left him holding the bag. This from a
person who claims he has a law degree and his a genius by his own claim. If
we are to believe him - he turned down one of two offers because it was not
enough. If all this is true - the players money was to be honored by the
new owners (either offer) of pokerspot and he was to get some of his
investment back. Here he had an opportunity to save players money and to
recoup some of his losses and the alternative was to lose it all. Which did
he choose? Put all this together and what conclusions can you reach?
Either all his stories are lies or Mr Boyd is a FOOL or con man/thief. Could
a person who went to college at 12 years old and in law school at 18 be a
fool? I know my part of contacting him about a possible buy out is true.
Other than that, I am just telling the story as told by Mr Boyd (they do
tend to change to suit his mood). He was never interested in saving the
players money, he was just interested in what was in in for him. I am sure
he will conjure a story to cover this and it will begin with "Once upon a
time...."
I still go to my mail box every day expecting to see my check from pokerspot
steve wrote:
> so the players on the site are not the only ones who haven't been paid.
>
> I've been following the threads about this for a while now and I have to
> say it appears to me that anyone who lost money in this venture has
> noone to blame but themselves.
>
> unless Russ guaranteed a certain amount of your deposits would be
> insured, which he didn't he does not have to make good if the company
> went under and there was not enough money in the liquidation to cover
> everything. when the assets of a company are liquidated unless you have
> contacted a lawyer and put yourself on a list to be paid, the money
> generated from the assetts goes to the largest creditors. usually banks
> and companys are smart enough to make sure they are written into the
> sale of the assetts.
>
> as players you were merely investors in this site, if you put money in
> the stock market and the company fails you lose. if your brother borrows
> money from you to open a store and it fails you lose. same scenario
> here.
>
> i truely believe he wanted it to work, who among us wouldn't want to own
> a poker site at that age.
>
> I know people who were so called "screwed" out of much more money than
> anyone on that site in far more legal arenas. lets not forget internet
> poker is illegal in most locales. sort of like getting flour instead of
> cocaine. when you deal with illegal things you should safeguard
> yourself. i blame the players who left exhorbitant amounts in their
> accounts for what happened to them.
>
> i'm not defending what happened even though i KNOW i will be thoroughly
> criticsized, i'm just trying to bring some things to light
>
> #1 other people are owed money not just players
>
> #2 theres really nothing technically illegal with what happened; the
> company failed people got hurt thats it
>
> #3 anyone who thinks Russ Boyd is not sorry for what happened is wrong
> in my opinion, if he really didn't care he would not defend himself and
> respond to these posts. any physciatrist will tell you that
>
> so now everyone can tell me what an idiot i am for somewhat defending
> him (even though i am not) but i've been here long enough to know how it
> works
>
> I'm just wondering what you will say if in 5 years rakefree.com is the
> most legit best run site on the net?
>
Bill Vanek
<s...@NOSPAMblueflintcat.us> wrote:
>1. You don't see any real gambler's here crying about pokerspot.
How would you know?
>3. Professional gambler's at pokerspot were most likely only burned
>for "someone else's" money anyway.
Congratulations. This has got to be the stupidest thing I've
read this year. What you seem to consider "someone else's
money", pro gamblers consider "income". Most folks don't
like to burned for their income. Can you think this through?
>4. Most people on RGP have probably pissed away more money on wine
>women and whatever that they ever lost at Pokerspot.
How would you know this? And why would this justify the
theft of their money?
>Unless you have enough balls to take care of Dutch yourself or enough
>money to hire it done, quit yer fucking bitching and move on.
I guess you told us. Do you play poker, BTW? You just don't
seem to have any grasp of the normal thinking regarding the
game.
PJ DiSanti
Any what?
You're an idiot, not because you can't spell worth a shit, but because
you're also too lazy to hit spellcheck when you know you're a poor speller.
Forget spelling, you're still an idiot.
PJ
--
'Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.' - Euripides
.sdrawkcab dootsrednu tub sdrawrof devil si efiL
"steve" <steve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f4292e1$0$196$7586...@news.frii.net...
PJ DiSanti
couple of shots at him, in jest!"
Just as any good buddy would do with another, we get it already ok?
PJ
--
'Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.' - Euripides
.sdrawkcab dootsrednu tub sdrawrof devil si efiL
"steve" <steve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f42a528$0$191$7586...@news.frii.net...
PJ DiSanti
managment team, if there is one, couldn't find their assholes with both
hands and a dog.
PJ
--
'Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.' - Euripides
.sdrawkcab dootsrednu tub sdrawrof devil si efiL
"NWBurbsCouple" <nwburb...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20030819181920...@mb-m25.aol.com...
> >I'm just wondering what you will say if in 5 years rakefree.com is the
> >> most legit best run site on the net?
>
AcesLow
in a new online site. We are doing what we can to protect players
from losing their money to a known scam artist.
And, you DO sound like a Boyd Stooge. If you aren't, then I recommend
backing off this thread. Unless you were there at the time, you can't
know how players are feeling over this. It could have been avoided
100 times over, but wasn't.
Do some research before you defend your buddy. Or, if you really
trust him, give him a few thousand and see what happens to it.
Boyd's Best Chip Trick: Making A few Thousand Racks dissapear at
once.
Dennis Altman
best to make sure Dutch Boyd does not succeed in any future online poker
ventures until he makes good on Pokerspot players.
Business do fail. Ethically Dutch should pay off his past clients before
he starts a new venture. Since his last venture failed, I will inform
as many potential players not to trust rakefree.com and any Dutch Boyd
Venture.
lucas67 wrote:
> I have also been following these threads for about a year or so, and I
> feel for the players who lost money. Businesses fail, and I am sure that
> Russ wanted this business to succeed as much as any of the players who
> lost money on the site.
>
> Now, with that said, a lot of the anger you are seeing is a result of how
> Russ handled things as his business began failing and how he continues to
> deal with these issues since the business folded. He has repeatedly blamed
> others, and chosen not to accept options that could have repaid some or
> all of this debt. He has displayed the arrogance you would expect from a
> young kid and for the most part continues to blame others for Pokerspots
> demise and will not shoulder much of the blame.
>
> I do not think he intentionally scammed others, or is an evil guy, but he
> is kind of non-chalant when speaking about those who he owes money to. It
> is my opinion that he should make it his ongoing mission to pay these
> people back. Before he even considers another business, he needs to make
> good to the many Pokerspot players who are due money. If this take all his
> life to do, then so be it. Any future poker winnings should be used to pay
> these players back. Until then, his reputation will proceed him and any of
> his other future business endeavors will suffer because of it. Of course
> this is all just my opinion. Feel free to flame me if I am missing the
> mark here.
>
>
> On Aug 19 2003 10:15AM, steve wrot
>
>
>>so the players on the site are not the only ones who haven't been paid.
>>
>>I've been following the threads about this for a while now and I have to
>>say it appears to me that anyone who lost money in this venture ha
>>I'm just wondering what you will say if in 5 years rakefree.com is the
>>most legit best run site on the net?
>>
>>
>>** Posted via RGP ACCESS at http://www.LiveActionPoker.com
>>
>>** $50 Deposit Bonus at Pacific Poker
>>click here: http://www.LiveActionPoker.com/pp
>
>
Jonathan Kaplan
>
>There is a ocntingent of people who I include myself, that will do our
>best to make sure Dutch Boyd does not succeed in any future online poker
>ventures until he makes good on Pokerspot players.
>
>Business do fail. Ethically Dutch should pay off his past clients before
>he starts a new venture. Since his last venture failed, I will inform
>as many potential players not to trust rakefree.com and any Dutch Boyd
>Venture.
>
this sentiment is very reminscent of something that happened about 20 years ago.
floor trading is a very specialized expertise, and it takes some considerable
time and intellect to learn how to be good at it.
once you are good at it, it is a very valuable skill.
floor traders are often "backed", especially early in their career. a typical
deal was the trader got 50% of the profit, the money/backer got 50% (with other
little payback clauses, etc.). (that deal has shifted alot in the last decade,
now the trader gets about 25%). sometimes, there were traders that didnt have
backing and kind of scraped along on too-small a capital base. there were often
backers looking for traders, but they didnt know where to go, floor traders dont
advertise usually. many Clearing firms acted as intermediaries, first in putting
backers in touch with "needy" traders, then serving as the accountant/bank for
the trading that resulted from that. it was in the interest of clearing firms to
find deals, cause that pumped up the commissions (and other business) they
received.
one problem was, many of the traders who needed backing were the less successful
traders, some of these had been bankrupted before. maybe they owed the clearing
firm some money even, and the best way for the clearing firm to get that debt
repaid was to find some backer for that bad/bankrupt trader and just hope the
deal worked out.
one monday in the mid-eighties, a trader appeared in a nearby pit, a trader no
one had seen for about a year, but we all knew he had "blown out" a few times
already. he was a "shooter", meaning he didnt really have skill, he just would
take big positions and hope they worked. at first, we all wondered where his
backing came from. since the trading community is very small, and many of us
(myself included) used the same clearing firm as this reappeared bad-egg, it
wasnt difficult to find out that he was backed by a retired dentist, one who
lived in Poughkeepsie NY. this dentist had heard about the huge returns that
many traders realized for their backers and he wanted in on the action. my
clearing firm had put the backer in touch with the shooter.
tuesday morning, a bunch of us were discussing the situation. a few people
thought someone should contact the backer (somehow) and tell him that the trader
he had hired was a loose cannon. others were of a mind to just say nothing,
after all, it is their business. but no one was quick enough to decide what to
do. by tuesday afternoon the shooter had sold huge amounts of a dangerous
straddle on a stock in his pit. the shooter only had about 400K of margin
ability in his account, and had already pushed to the limit. he was either going
to make a killing or be killed, and it was pretty much too late for anyone to do
anything about it.
by thursday afternoon, the straddle had exploded in value, the shooter had lost
over half a million dollars, and that was the last anyone ever saw of him on the
exchange.
we did hear his name again a few years later when he surfaced as part of a big
cocaine bust. wonder whatever happened to that guy, in the end?
should we have tried harder to contact the retired dentist?
in the Dutch Boyd case, maybe it is in the interest of the aggrieved creditors
to hope Dutch succeeds at his next venture and try to get him to recognize and
repay earlier debt, at least partially?
i wonder what the pokerspot debt would trade for, if there was a market for it?
would y'all sell your pokerspot debt to me if i bid you $.01 on the dollar?
just curious.
Jonathan
no matter where you go, there you are....
Edward Hutchison
"would y'all sell your pokerspot debt to me if i bid you $.01 on the dollar?"
I would feel guilty charging that much.
Edward Hutchison
Madison, MS
Point systems for evaluating poker starting hands:
http://PokerProfessor.homestead.com/links.html
Stacy, Rodney and Josie Black
who "blew out" to get re-backing. People unfortunately equate big P/L
swings with confidence and skill. I think that is crazy. This situation,
however, is different. Russ actually stole money from his customers. He is
a thief, and really should be in jail. If you trust him again, you get what
you deserve. Pokerspot debt at .05!
ps. Jan 2005 expiration
Based on all debt being paid back
However, the amount owed is way to little for this to trade. If Russ owes
100k, he could buy up all the debt through an intermediary, out of the blue
pay back all the debt, and clear his name for a few thousand dollars. He is
slick enough to do it don't you think?
"Jonathan Kaplan" <NutN...@aolspam.com> wrote in message
news:3bw1b.16840$cJ5....@www.newsranger.com...
Paul Phillips
Jonathan Kaplan <NutN...@aolspam.com> wrote:
>i wonder what the pokerspot debt would trade for, if there was a market for it?
>would y'all sell your pokerspot debt to me if i bid you $.01 on the dollar?
>just curious.
Fun question. Unfortunately it's a heisenquestion, because if someone
were to buy up the pokerspot debt I think it would make it much less likely
that it would ever be paid (if there is enough downside room to use the
words "much less likely.") If people sold their debt off, then even if
boyd made good on it to the new owners, the people originally screwed would
not benefit from that. They would probably be even more pissed that they
missed out on the eventual payout.
In other words, if the debt changes hands then boyd is truly in a no-win
situation. He would forever be stuck with his ruined reputation, with the
constant fear of a violent confrontation, with the knowledge that any
business ventures he enters into will be hounded by his victims. The only
apparent remaining reason to pay off the debt would be personal honor, and
that doesn't seem to be a huge motivator for him.
I bet you'd have quite a few takers at $.01 on the dollar. Remember that
boyd said that even if he took second in the WSOP that there would be no
restitution -- he had to win to pay off the debt. So a million bucks isn't
even enough. How long before he gets within reach of that kind of money
again? Don't hold your breath.
--
Paul Phillips | I wasn't kissing her, I was whispering in her mouth.
Vivid |
Empiricist |
all hip pupils! |----------* http://www.improving.org/paulp/ *----------
Gary Carson
>ps. Jan 2005 expiration
>Based on all debt being paid back
>However, the amount owed is way to little for this to trade. If Russ
owes
>100k, he could buy up all the debt through an intermediary, out of
the blue
>pay back all the debt, and clear his name for a few thousand dollars.
He is
>slick enough to do it don't you think?
I don't think he's slick enough to do it. He had an oppurtunity to do
that when he had the business on the market but wasn't interested in
dividing the assets among the creditors, he was just interested in how
much he could walk away with.
Unknown
<dennis...@wedmart.com> wrote:
>There is a ocntingent of people who I include myself, that will do our
>best to make sure Dutch Boyd does not succeed in any future online poker
>ventures until he makes good on Pokerspot players.
No entry found for ocntingent.
Did you mean contingent?
Suggestions:
contingent
ocn tingent
ocn-tingent
continent
continuant
incontinent
containant
uncontinent
Unknown
wrote:
>Fun question. Unfortunately it's a heisenquestion, because if someone
>were to buy up the pokerspot debt I think it would make it much less likely
>that it would ever be paid (if there is enough downside room to use the
>words "much less likely.")
No entry found for heisenquestion.
No suggestions were found.
SYeates485
>
>"would y'all sell your pokerspot debt to me if i bid you $.01 on the dollar?"
OK I'll sell you the first $1 please mail check
The Beet Man
<dennis...@wedmart.com> wrote:
>There is a ocntingent of people who I include myself, that will do our
>best to make sure Dutch Boyd does not succeed in any future online poker
>ventures until he makes good on Pokerspot players.
>
>Business do fail. Ethically Dutch should pay off his past clients before
>he starts a new venture. Since his last venture failed, I will inform
>as many potential players not to trust rakefree.com and any Dutch Boyd
>Venture.
Also, be sure to mention that this wasn't merely a "failed business."
If Pokerspot simply failed that would be one thing. But not only did
the business fail, Russ lied repeatedly about checks being mailed. (I
was waiting on 2 checks from Pokerspot and was told multiple times
that my checks were mailed, including 1 that was supposedly mailed
with 20% interest as a "good faith" gesture.)
The Beet Man
Kaplan<NutN...@aolspam.com> wrote:
>in the Dutch Boyd case, maybe it is in the interest of the aggrieved creditors
>to hope Dutch succeeds at his next venture and try to get him to recognize and
>repay earlier debt, at least partially?
Remember that Russ had a buyout offer that would have given him enough
money to pay back his debtors, but he refused to take the offer. Even
if Russ succeeds in his new venture, I have absolutely no faith that
I'll ever see that money again. As Paul pointed out, he said he'd
have to finish first at the WSOP to be able to pay anyone back--even
1.3 million wouldn't be enough.
>i wonder what the pokerspot debt would trade for, if there was a market for it?
>would y'all sell your pokerspot debt to me if i bid you $.01 on the dollar?
>just curious.
As someone else said I would feel guilty about taking that much. I
would feel guilty about taking any money for the debt, really.