Full Tilt Petition

I hope all players get their funds back but feel that a petition is pointless. Fulltilt has been badly run and the funds have been mis-managed,.

What if Tilt don't have enough to refund everyone?

If they re opened tomorrow then there would be a mass withdrawal pretty much forcing the closure of the company.

Fulltilt needs players playing on it's site, but the players would 100% withdraw their money if they had access to do it...Thus it is a vicious circle that doesn't seem like it can have a happy ending.

People need to serve time for this 'White collar' crime.

GL

JPJ is correct.

The thing that could save them is huge (and I mean huge) investment which can cover the inevitable flood of withdrawls when they reopen.

There is also the colossal lack of trust - what percentage of former depositors are going to have the confidence to redeposit after what has happened?

Troubling times indeed.

I've heard rumours (and that may be all it is) that players are going to have to play through any funds before they can withdraw it - if that is correct I can see very few people wanting to bother and they could never recover...

Here's the latest if anyone is interested.

Wednesday
July 13, 2011In a press release dated 12th July 2011 the Alderney Gambling Control Commission (AGCC) revealed its scheduled hearing in London regarding the suspension of Full Tilt Poker's license will be a public hearing to be held at the Park Plaza Victoria Hotel at 10 am on 26th of this month.

Full Tilt's license has been suspended by the AGCC since June 29th "following an indictment by the US government and its subsequent failure to satisfy AGCC that its activities inside and outside the US were in order". Since this time Full Tilt have been in discussions with the AGCC regarding a potential refinancing of the site involving an as yet unnamed third party.

Whatever the nature of these discussions and any other business the AGCC have had with the owners and representatives of Full Tilt Poker, all will be revealed in just over a fortnights time as all are welcomed in to witness the outcome of the hearing.

Executive Director of AGCC, André Wilsenach, said: “AGCC’s choice to hold a public hearing in to the future of Full Tilt Poker demonstrates our willingness to act transparently and we will welcome members of the public and the media. As ever at all times, our primary concern is the protection of the player

tinca tinca  14 Jul 11 18:13


Executive Director of AGCC, André Wilsenach, said: “AGCC’s choice to hold a public hearing in to the future of Full Tilt Poker demonstrates our willingness to act transparently and we will welcome members of the public and the media. As ever at all times, our primary concern is the protection of the player

......................

Although probably correct in their actions they have actually done the opposite. They've probably ended up screwing the players rather than protecting them. And whilst this is totally Fulltilts fault the AGCC shouldn't make these claims. Also with them suspending FTs licence for a month they have to realise that FTilt have office/Staff/overheads that still have to be paid within that month, and with no income you probably know which 'pool' that money has come from [:(]

JPJ there has obviously been some less than good business practices occurring but at least people will have a platform to voice their concerns.

Tinca.

I agree mate, although you can guarantee how these public enqiries go.

There will be no 'known' FullTilt representatives there, just lawyers and management who will never answer a question openly. It will be along the lines of "We are working to address the situation and hope to have answers within a short time frame"

And if you ask the AGCC anything they will hide behind the Data Protection Act or just speil out some well frased business line to appease unhappy customers.

I really wish the best to all that are owed money.

I think you're missing the point, JPJ.

The petition is to serve to the AGCC to remind them of THEIR obligations as the licence issuer. Where Full Tilt have failed, the AGCC must pick up the pieces and take action to seize any assets/liquid, and to ensure that before any restructure that there are measures put in place to ensure player funds are instantly available and protected from then on. Currently, the heat is on Full Tilt and the AGCC are hiding behind this when the fact is they ALLOWED them to operate like that. So it's to ensure they take EVERY appropriate measure to maintain their integrity and not just provide lip service by holding a hearing to placate those that are affected and then allow Full Tilt an easy exit.

This is directed towards the AGCC who must now stand up to their obligations - as they have the power and reputation to maintain.

I didn't think the AGCC had any authority to seize assets or freeze bank accounts mate. I'd be amazed if they did.
What they have done is remove the license. FullTilt could still have theoretically carried on trading without this license if they used different servers, plus the license removal meant that the money processes became impossible without it..... But i don't think they have any authority beyond and above what they have done.
Their comment about player protection is based on them thinking they are protecting new customers by not letting them deposit, and protecting existing customers from depositing more, but unfortunately they have only harmed players with money on there.
If they really wanted to help and protect existing players then they certainly wouldn't have planned the review a month after the suspension.

Full Tilt Hearing Adjourned Until September
Written by: JoytoysCategory: Report     Full Tilt, black friday, AGCCTuesday
July 26, 2011Today started with high expectations for all those hoping that there may finally be the beginnings of an outcome in the ongoing Alderney Gambling Control Commission/Full Tilt license suspension case.  As the FTP lawyers finally faced their AGCC counterparts in London at a "public" hearing at the Victoria Park Plaza Hotel around 150 members of the press and public gathered to witness proceedings.

The hearing was of particular interest to the countless players who’s aggregated approximately $150,000,000 in deposits to Full Tilt Poker are currently awaiting withdrawal following Black Friday (and subsequently “Black Wednesday” in Europe).

The day started ominously for all those expecting, or at least hoping for, a full public hearing when Full Tilt’s lawyers, lead by Martin Heslop QC, began proceedings by announcing that they would like the hearing to be adjourned. Not only did he seek an adjournment but also that the case, when heard, should be heard in private as any “publicity would be prejudicial to the interest of justice”.

Interestingly at this early stage it emerged that FTP currently owe the AGCC $250,000 in unpaid fees and the very clear implication from FTP’s lawyers was that if they were not going to regain their license then they would most likely default on any such payment. If however, there was a chance of the license being reinstated then Mr Heslop contended that the outstanding payments would be made within seven days.

Full Tilt’s lawyers also wanted to make their case for such an adjournment to the AGCC representatives in private and after a short deliberation this was accepted. Cue moderate outrage from the gathered press and public, the most vocal of whom was UK pro player Harry Demetriou who shouted “What about the interests of the players? Why you are protecting this corrupt company” before storming out of proceedings (before being escorted out). Demetriou’s sentiments were echoed (although in more hushed tones) by the general populous as the assembled throng were politely removed from the venue while the application was heard.

To avoid a long and rather tedious story of  “non” announcements, delays, private meetings, delays, public meetings, delays and so on and so forth the upshot of all the to-ing and fro-ing was a decision to adjourn the hearing until no later than 15th September, the reason cited being that it would be “in the interests of justice and the best interest of Full Tilt customers to adjourn”.

Although the AGCC stressed that they did not enter into the decision lightly (quite obviously as it took them the entire day to finally give their verdict) one wonders why they made this hearing public at all? To the public and press it seemed fairly academic once the pre-application was underway that this would be the inevitable and predictable outcome.

Full Tilt have once again succeeded in alienating their customers who were seeking answers, explanations and assurances but who’ve only really been left wondering if and when they will see their money again.

In their defence however one can see why Full Tilt’s lawyers were so keen to have this made a private affair. Given that the best chance of a Full Tilt bail-out seems to hinge on the successful completion of a substantial sale of FT stock to a third party investor, then it is presumably in FT’s interest in keeping the details of such a potential transaction under wraps, as in such negotiations confidentiality is naturally paramount. Although it is very, very easy to understand the frustration of the players who want answers it is probably for the best that details be kept confidential until any such deal is rubber-stamped, as this is the best chance for the players to get their money back.

I should imagine however that Full Tilt’s customers would be less concerned with the other likely reason for the Full Tilt’s lawyers pleas to adjourn and hold in private –  namely that the two alleged principals of Full Tilt are facing serious federal charges in the United States and presumably feel that proceedings in public could potentially prejudice these individuals interests.

So, what have we learned from today’s “public” hearing? Well, other than FT owing the AGCC a quarter of a mill in fees, frankly nothing.

So much for the AGCCs' transparency in this case

SO the corrupt and inept management of Tilt who have run this goldmine into the ground now want more time to secure a deal for investment or sale. The only thing that we can be sure of is that any deal/sale would be done to line the already bulging pockets of these crooks and without a care in the world for the customer who is funding this all.
The FTilt product is beyond repair imho, and if the company re-opened tomorrow you can be sure that there would be a 'rush on the bank' forcing the company to close because of lack of capital. And any investor must realise that ploughing money into them is like flushing money down the toilet.
Personally i think this will go down the following route... The Lawyers will stall as long as possible whilst trying to secure the sale of Tilts valuable assets (Asset stripping)These will be sold and a deal will be done with 'Tiltware' to supply the software for the company that buys the assets. Fulltilt will then become bankrupt and the customer will be screwed over as usual.... The new company will open under a different but probably similar name/style etc, will be owned by some offshore company (Fronted by people not associated by Ftilt) that is eventually owned by Lederer/Bitar/Ferguson etc........ Tiltware (Also owned by Lederer/Bitar/Ferguson) will supply software/expertise....
So in summary.....Customers will get fckd over.....Ftilt goes bust.......New company starts up with same owners although we're supposed to believe they are new.......Lederer/Bitar/Ferguson...Ivey? continue to make millions....

I hope for everyones sake I have this 100% wrong......... One time [;)]

If I had money on FullTilt I would issue a County Court Judgement for the Sum involved. You would be 100% guaranteed that FTilt would fail to attend court, thus meaning that the court would rule in my favour and allow me to take bailiffs into 'PocketKings' premises to take goods to the value of.

Yeah, looks pretty much all over

Full tilt only had a gold ine because they were acting illegally in allowing US players on their site. They did not have a good site and their promotion's were non existent

Would like to know what ABU AL-HASAN AL-MAWARDI has to say on it all as thought he was a big FT fan.

Godfather77: 29 Jul 11 07:03

Full tilt only had a gold ine because they were acting illegally in allowing US players on their site. They did not have a good site and their promotion's were non existent

.....................

I assume you're joking mate. FullTilt was the second biggest poker site World Wide, behind Pokerstars. They had the Second biggest turnover and the second biggest profit. If it was just due to allowing American customers then Pokerstars would be in exactly the same situation, but the reason they are not is because FullTilts' funds have been mis-managed.

I can't argue about their promotions because i don't play online, but you have no argument that they had a 'good' site, the numbers speak for themselves.

Log In
HomeNewsFeaturesUseful LinksAbout Subject: PokerFTP’s Financial Relationship with Two Pros
July 29, 2011 - 3:36 PM EDT
By Noah Stephens-Davidowitz
From June 2009 until April 2011, Phil Ivey borrowed money from Full Tilt Poker at least eighteen times, totalling at least $10,715,000, repaid loaned money to the poker site at least five times, totalling at least $5 million, and was paid at least $1.2 million by the site in various marketing payments and perks. Over a non-contiguous eighteen-month period from 2008, 2010, and 2011, David Benyamine earned at least $800,000 from the poker site in salary, wages, and marketing payments and made at least $750,000 in loan payments to FTP. These numbers only include transactions that were noted on Ivey’s and Benyamine’s Full Tilt Poker account, so they likely do not tell the whole story.

Subject: Poker has obtained access to Ivey’s and Benyamine’s account history on Full Tilt’s internal systems. Because of the way that this data is organized and because of problems that we had accessing additional data as a result of the effective shut down of Full Tilt Poker on June 29th, we do not have as much data as we’d like. For example, we do not have data on most player-to-player transfers or other transactions that are done in the system without notes,1 we do not have much data for Ivey before June of 2009, we have two very small gaps in our coverage for Ivey, and we have a large gap in our coverage for Benyamine.2 Most importantly, we have no information at all about any transactions that may have happened through any medium other than their FTP accounts, so any transactions that occurred by bank wire or cash, for example, are not included.

However, the data that we have obtained provides a rare glimpse into how Full Tilt conducted business.

Contents
1.Ivey's Loans
2.Benyamine's Debt in 2008
3.Benyamine's Transactions in 2010 and 2011
4.Ivey's Other Payments
5.Conclusion

Ivey’s Loans
Phil Ivey was regularly taking large loans from Full Tilt Poker, typically either for $500,000 or $1 million, for as far back as we have data. (The earliest loan that we know of is a late 2008 loan for $1 million. However, our coverage before June of 2009 is very incomplete.) This may be what Tiltware refered to as “a large sum of money he owes the site” that the company alleged Ivey had declined to repay during their heated public dispute related to Mr. Ivey’s (now withdrawn) June 1st lawsuit against the company. The loans are each marked as an “advance” and many are marked as having been approved by Rich Bitar, Ray Bitar’s brother who handles some of the company’s interactions with its sponsored pros.3

Early in the data, Phil Ivey’s account was frequently debited directly for some, though not all, of the money that he was loaned there. For example, Ivey borrowed $3 million in six $500,000 installments spread throughout July and August 2009. He then repaid $1 million on October 29th, borrowed another $500,000 on November 13th, and then made two separate $1 million repayments on November 20th and 22nd respectively.4 Ivey’s results on the datamining site HighstakesDB suggest that he earned approximately $5 million in cash games on Full Tilt Poker in October and November of 2009, so this success may be the reason that he repaid. (Ivey went on to borrow $1 million on November 29th.)

However, this pattern stops. The last repayment in our data (for $1 million) happened in the spring of 2010, but after this date, Ivey received eight additional loans, ending in January 2011 and totalling $3,215,000, bringing the total difference between loans and repayments in our data to $6,215,000.5 It is of course possible that Ivey repaid some or all of this debt off of the site, but Tiltware’s reference to a “large sum that he owes the site” and Ivey’s historical pattern of repaying through his account suggest that he did indeed owe the site money as recently as June 1st.

Though some of these loans were made after significant losses in Full Tilt’s cash games and some of the repayments after significant wins, there appears to be no obvious connection. However, many of the loans and repayments occurred during periods of increased high stakes activity in general on Full Tilt. For example, the series of loans and repayments in November 2009 appear to correlate well with the high stakes cash games that ran frequently during that time period, mostly involving Isildur1. So, it is possible that these loans were used to finance the high stakes play of other players.6

Benyamine’s Debt in 2008
In 2008, David Benyamine apparently owed Full Tilt Poker money, and at least some of this debt was being repaid directly from his salary, wages, and bonuses. This is quite clear from the notes on his FTP account. He received many payments from Full Tilt during this time period directly into his account, and almost all of them were taken out of the account on the same day with the note “for a loan collection.”7

In 2008, Benyamine received directly to his account a $15,000 per month base salary, roughly $12,000 more per month on average from rakeback and hourly wages, roughly $4,000 per month in logo bonuses and other marketing bonuses, and roughly $10,000 per month in other payments. So, assuming that our sample is typical, his annual earnings sent directly to his FTP account were roughly $500,000 at the time. (It is of course likely that he received money off of the site as well.) However, it appears that almost all of this was going directly back to the site to repay Benyamine’s debt.

In addition to these regular payments, Benyamine repaid $125,000 in June 2008 and another $450,000 in September. HighstakesDB shows that these payments happened immediately after a $1.3 million win and a $1 million win respectively. So, he may have decided to make these payments from his Full Tilt account as a result. (He also was successful in live tournaments in June, so that might have contributed to his decision to repay that month or encouraged him to pay off more of his loan offline.)

In October, an alert (a message that appears in red at the top of the screen when a Pocket Kings employee looks at an account) was added to Benyamine’s account: “Notify Rich Bitar of any outgoing transfers over $300k, otherwise he is allowed to transfer in and out.” This note came after a large loss on Full Tilt; Benyamine lost $1.7 million over a few days according to HighstakesDB.

Benyamine’s Transactions in 2010 and 2011
By 2010, the situation had changed fairly significantly. Benyamine was receiving a $41,667 per month base salary ($500,004 per year), a 178% increase from two years earlier. This number does not include the amount that he made from rakeback, his hourly wage, marketing, and various bonuses. He continued to have this salary paid to his FTP account until Black Friday, but it was no longer being collected to repay his debt.

However, he evidently still owed some money. Until April 15th, his rakeback and hourly payments were still being deducted the day that he received them, but he was playing less so these numbers were smaller, averaging only about $1500 per month. He also borrowed the relatively tiny sum of $5,000 on March 11th and repaid it exactly a month later.

On May 2, 2011, seventeen days after most US players lost the ability to withdraw from their Full Tilt accounts, Benyamine, whose account is clearly registered in the United States, withdrew about $5,500 for travel expenses. This withdrawal was labeled differently than other withdrawals: “Seize: $5500. Other – General. WD: $5500 to cash for travel expenses.”8 This choice of a different label may have to do with the fact that this is a post-Black Friday withdrawal.9

In June, multiple sources told Subject: Poker that they overheard Benyamine on his cell phone at the Rio, asking where he should go to collect money for his tournament buy-ins. So, it appears that he was still receiving money from Full Tilt Poker a month ago, and he apparently conducted some of these transactions offline.

Ivey’s Other Payments
Loans were of course not Full Tilt Poker’s only financial relationship with Phil Ivey. Ivey is an important member of Team Full Tilt, and Subject: Poker has confirmed the widespread belief that he is one of the owners of the poker site. Many of the payments that resulted from these two relationships likely did not go through Ivey’s Full Tilt Poker account. However, many did. These provide a rough picture of how Full Tilt Poker paid its sponsored players, how the owners of the poker site paid themselves, and how the company’s behind the poker site handled money in general.

Ivey was paid well for televised appearances. He received $170,000 for wearing a Full Tilt logo during his appearances on Poker After Dark‘s most recent season, which amounted to about 25 hours of poker at the Aria Resort & Casino this past November.10 He received $25,000 “for London Press” and $5,000 “for press at WSOPE” this past September,11 $50,000 for wearing a logo during his second place finish in the 2010 Aussie Millions 100,000 AUD tournament, and a few more similar payments. Given how often Ivey wore Full Tilt’s logo on television during this time period, it is likely that he received many such payments via other methods.

Ivey also received $450,045 “for Aussi [sic] Millions Buy-ins per Rich” in the winter of 2009-2010. However, the buy-ins for the Aussie Millions that year summed to only 150,500 AUD or about $135,450 at the rates from the time period, not including two 1000+50 AUD rebuys. So, presumably this money was for something else as well, possibly for buy-ins to the televised Aussie Millions Cash Game.12 This is the only payment for buy-ins that Ivey received directly to his Full Tilt account during this period.

There is also a whole category of payments that Subject: Poker is unable to explain. Every month, Ivey received some amount, usually between about $15,000 and $25,000, which was typically labeled either “Player Pool Payment,” “Marketing Pool Payment,” or something similar. The payments average about $17,500 per month (or about $200,000 per year), but they vary quite a bit, from $9300 for March 2009 to $25,690 for October 2010. Here’s a typical example, dated December 22, 2010: “Cash Deposited initiated RE: Marketing or Promotion. Admin Comments: DEP: Nov2010 Marketing Player Pool Payment of $25326.” Note that the payment for November 2010 (and all other months) was made at the end of the following month. This is similar to how rakeback was paid and suggests that the amount depends on the events of the month. (In contrast, Benyamine’s salary was always paid at the beginning of the month mentioned in the note.) Subject: Poker chose to include this information in the hopes that one of our readers might be able to explain it and that this information might be helpful to the readers.

Conclusion
If these transactions were exceptional, then they would not represent a significant cost to Full Tilt Poker. However, Team Full Tilt has fourteen members, including Ivey, and there are 159 Full Tilt Pros, including Benyamine, plus a number of sponsored players with other titles. So, if these relationships are typical or even exist for a relatively small number of sponsored pros, these loans and payments could have represented a very significant cost to the site. Many of the Team Full Tilt members are widely believed to be owners of the site, and many of Full Tilt’s sponsored players are friends of the owners and/or their gambling partners. So, there was a risk of a conflict of interests when Full Tilt management chose how to compensate sponsored players.

However, it is not clear to us if these types of relationships between Full Tilt Poker and it’s sponsored pros are common. We looked into Ivey’s and Benyamine’s accounts first because Full Tilt accused Ivey of owing the site money and Benyamine was accused by Nick Rainey of the same on the Quad Jacks broadcast. So, there’s at least some reason to think that these relationships are unique. Subject: Poker was unfortunately unable to gather more information to determine definitively how common this was, but we will keep looking.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I, Noah Stephens-Davidowitz, recognize that this article contains personal information about real people who live real lives, and I sincerely regret any harm that my choice to publish this article may do to their personal lives. It was not my intention to hurt Mr. Ivey or Mr. Benyamine.
I chose to publish this article in spite of this negative because I feel that Full Tilt Poker’s financial interactions with its sponsored pros are relevant to those who are currently owed money by the site. I feel that these facts are particularly relevant to those who are owed money by the site because many of Full Tilt’s sponsored pros were owners of the site, friends of owners of the site, and/or gambling partners of owners of the site. Suffice it to say that I did not come to this decision lightly, and it was a topic of much thought and debate–a month’s worth.
My initial intention was to collect a large amount of data and to use this to print general facts, such as how common loans were and for what amounts, how much Full Tilt Pros were typically paid, and how much an episode of Poker After Dark typically cost the site. In this way, I could convey better information to our readers without having to use any names or reveal any personal detatils. However, Full Tilt’s internal servers went down on June 29th along with many of their user-facing servers, and to my knowledge, they are still down to this date. I waited a month for the servers to come back online so that I could gather further information, but I finally decided that waiting any longer would be a disservice to Subject: Poker’s readership.

I chose to name Ivey and Benyamine rather than leave them anonymous because I felt that their stories were sufficiently unique to make their names necessary to tell the story properly. Many of our readers would have guessed who they were from the descriptions, and leaving their names out would not provided our readers with proper context.

It was my decision alone to publish this article, and any criticism for doing so should be directed to me.

Subject: Poker’s readers should continue to expect us to follow the story of Full Tilt’s financial situation, but I hope to be able to tell that story without including more personal information in the future.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited on 7/29/2011 3:41 PM EDT: Fixed improper wording in the sentence about total Aussie Millions buy-ins.
Edited on 7/29/2011 5:13 PM EDT: Fixed a typo and clarified that Benyamine’s base salary in 2010-2011 was not his only source of income from Full Tilt.
Edited on 7/29/2011 10:16 PM EDT: Fixed a typo.

Footnotes
1.Most player-to-player transfers and typical player withdrawals and deposits are done automatically with no notes from personnel and therefore do not show up in our data. Very large deposits and withdrawals are done manually and large withdrawals do show up in our data. Mr. Ivey also made some small withdrawals that were done manually and therefore also appear. ↩
2.In order to protect our sources, we are being deliberately vague about some details and some facts have been changed slightly. We do not feel that anything we’ve done for this purpose should cause confusion. ↩
3.A typical loan was labeled “$500,000.00 Cash Deposit initiated RE: Loan Collection. Admin Comments: DEP: 500k advance per Rich Bitar.” The rather confusing label of “Loan Collection” was chosen from a drop-down menu and likely represents the closest-to-correct choice for a loan. (At least one loan was labeled instead as simply “initiated RE: Other,” and Benyamine’s loan collections are confusingly labeled “Requested by Customer.” In general, employees appear to have been quite lax with these records. Labels given to some different transactions include “Requested by Customer,” “Logowear,” and “Marketing or Promotion.”) The system marks almost all transactions as either “DEP” or “W/D”, where “DEP” was simply used to represent anything that increases the account balance and “W/D” the opposite. The part after this, e.g. “500k advance per Rich Bitar,” was written manually and varied in syntax and detail. ↩
4.The remaining $500,000 balance from this series of transactions is not accounted for elsewhere in our data, so it is possible that the balance still remains, that it was repaid off of FTP’s servers, or that it was taken out of other transactions. It is also possible that Mr. Ivey already owed Full Tilt money before this series of transactions began. ↩
5.This number includes data that is not mentioned elsewhere in our article. ↩
6.Subject: Poker was unable to obtain information about player-to-player transfers from this time period. ↩
7.For example, on June 3rd, 2008, the following notes appear: “$19,412.54 Cash Deposit initiated RE:Rakeback. Admin Comments: DEP: MAY08 Pro Rake/Hourly Payment of $19,412.54″ followed by “$19,412.54 Cash Withdrawal initiated RE: Requested by Customer. Admin Comments: W/D: $19,412.54 to CASH for a loan collection of Rake/Hourly payment.” This is quite typical. The labels “RE:Rakeback” and “Re:Requested by Customer” were chosen from a drop-down menu. The choice of “Requested by Customer” is strange because there is an option for “Loan Collection,” and the fact that these transactions happened quite often and always on the same day as the initial payment suggests that Benyamine was probably not personally requesting all of these transactions. However, the labels from the drop-down menu appear to not have been chosen carefully in general, so this likely just represents carelessness. In the admin comments, the system marked almost all transactions as either “DEP” or “W/D”, where “DEP” was simply used to represent anything that increases the account balance and “W/D” the opposite. The part after this, e.g. “$19,412.54 to CASH for a loan collection of Rake/Hourly payment,” was written manually and varied in syntax and detail. ↩
8.We changed the amount slightly here to protect our sources. ↩
9.This is the only time in the documents that the label “Seize” was used. The same employee who processed this transaction processed other similar transactions with a different label. The “Seize” label was usually used when money was taken from a player’s account without his consent. For example, it was used when a player was caught cheating, a deposit failed, or rakeback was overpaid. ↩
10.Ivey appeared in three different events in the most recent season: a $100,000 freezeout that aired in five hour-long episodes and in which Ivey placed second, a Pot-limit Omaha cash game that aired in ten hour-long episodes, and a No Limit Holdem cash game that also aired in ten hour-long episodes. The payment for his wearing a Full Tilt Poker logo during these appearances came in two parts: a $100,000 payment on November 7th marked “for Poker After Dark Logo Bonus” and a $70,000 payment on November 11th marked “logo bonus for Poker After Dark.” ↩
11.Subject: Poker was unable to find any particularly unique interviews with Mr. Ivey that match these descriptions from the time period, but we found a few brief interviews, such as this one. ↩
12.Subject: Poker was unable to find how much Ivey had won or lost in this game. If anyone has this data, please contact us at team@subjectpoker.com or leave a comment. ↩

Is this why Phil needs the money

...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hYsCemYyGQ&feature=related