Home Articles Books Coaching Free Stuff About

Full Tilt Poker, Massive Global Ponzi Scheme

Don't miss one article! Subscribe to the Full Feed RSS or get NPA in your inbox.

It’s official. The DOJ has branded Full Tilt Poker as a “massive global Ponzi scheme.”

I had my suspicions of this back in April when the DOJ said that Full Tilt could resume operations outside the US if they returned the US-based players’ money. Full Tilt responded with a series of statements that boiled down to “Players’ money, huh? You mean you want us to just return all of it?”

But I have to admit I didn’t anticipate the scope of the fraud. The DOJ complaint alleges that Full Tilt maintained $390 million in player deposits while having only $60 million cash on hand. Where did the rest of the money go? Directly into the pockets of company principals Howard Lederer, Chris “Jesus” Ferguson, Rafe Furst, and Ray Bitar to the tune of $440 million over the past four years.

Sounds like a massive global Ponzi scheme to me. I have a couple thoughts about this.

Prohibition creates criminality

When you prohibit something, you necessarily create criminal enterprises. This is just as true with online poker as it has been with alcohol in the 20s and drugs today. I’m willing to give Lederer, Ferguson, and company enough benefit of the doubt that when they launched Full Tilt Poker in 2004, they were not intending to preside over a massive criminal conspiracy. Those were the heady days when poker was absolutely exploding and money was raining from the heavens. They likely just saw an opportunity to launch a business and went for it.

Then came the UIGEA in 2006, and Full Tilt made an important decision. They chose to remain in the United States market when other more established sites like Party Poker withdrew. This decision nearly instantly catapulted Full Tilt from being a second-tier site into being one of the top two poker sites in the world. But it also meant that, as time went on, they would be facing more and more enforcement measures in the United States designed to shut off the fire hose of money.

The government squeezed and squeezed, and instead of doing the responsible thing and admitting that they could no longer do legitimate business in the United States, Full Tilt doubled down on their decision and started going further and further outside the lines to keep the money flowing.

It was likely during this period that these four named in the complaint came to the realization that Full Tilt Poker was not a business built for the long term. It would eventually get squeezed to death by the US Government. And that left them with a choice. They had hundreds of millions of player deposits under their control. When the bottom fell out of the business, as it inevitably would, who should get the money? Should they simply return hundreds of millions to players all over the world and say, “Thanks guys, we’re glad we could do the right thing and return your cash”? Or would that money look better stashed away in a web of personal offshore accounts?

The people who ran Full Tilt Poker were criminals. That much is now clear. But I think that they didn’t set out to be criminals. If the US Government hadn’t taken such a myopic stance toward online poker from the UIGEA in 2006 up to Black Friday in April of this year, Full Tilt would have been free to operate as a legitimate business, and the temptation to convert this enterprise into a Ponzi scheme would have been one I think those who ran Full Tilt may have been able to resist.

To me it’s clear that online poker should be legal worldwide. If it had been, Full Tilt players might have their money today. So I blame the crooks at Full Tilt for this, but I also blame shortsightedness in the Federal government.

This does bring up one final cautionary point. Any business—legal or illegal—that accepts deposits and maintains balances one behalf of people can be turned into a Ponzi scheme almost at the flip of a switch. And any stressor that causes ones of these businesses to falter, one as simple as a loss of competitiveness, can create the temptation for the owners to transfer cash reserves to a bank in the Caymans. Then one day you’ll wake up to a message on their website that says, “Thanks for the cash, guys, it’s been fun.”

Play live poker

This is a big black eye for online poker, no doubt about it. But to me as I alluded to above, I think it’s really a big black eye for any business that accepts deposits, and particularly for those that are subject to government scrutiny and pressures. The fact that Full Tilt ran online poker games as opposed to, say, selling online ads is nearly incidental. Poker, the game, really has nothing to do with it.

So how about live poker, guys? No deposits required. Little to no cheating at the small stakes. Plenty of dead money. Free drinks. And a whopping $1/hour in comps. It really ain’t a bad deal.

I’ve always prefered live poker. Yes, online poker was much more lucrative, particularly pre-UIGEA. But it’s never been about the money for me. Sure, I make my living at poker so I’d better win money at it, but I don’t need $440 million in cash distributions to be a happy man. Unless you’re trying to make a mortgage payment on the Empire State Building each month, live poker offers the opportunity to make a nice side income (or even full income) with few of the pitfalls you’ll find online.

And nowadays live poker is spread in most states of the US and many countries worldwide. Chances are you live within a reasonable drive of a cardroom. Give it an honest shot. You might come to like it.

And an update on my upcoming book release

Lastly, a plug for my new book. How To Read Hands At No-Limit Hold’em is the only book anywhere that teaches you that critical no-limit skill, hand reading, step-by-step and in depth. It’s written with all those live small stakes games in mind, so when you do go play live poker, you’ll have a big edge.

How To Read Hands breaks down the thought process used by top no-limit players and shows you how to apply it to example hand after example hand. Read this book, and you’ll be finding new and lucrative bluffs and value bets in no time. It comes out October 18th, and preordering begins here at Noted Poker Authority on October 4th. Just two weeks until you can order your copy. Get psyched.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

19 Responses to “Full Tilt Poker, Massive Global Ponzi Scheme”

W.C.
@ Tue Sep 20, 2011 02:18:23 PM
1

These are some of the questions

1. Will the DOJ try to recover any of the funds paid to the owners (like Lederer etc..) and then return it to players?

2. Will the DOJ make the same kind proclamation about UB/Absolute?

3. How many other famous players are going to get dragged through the dirt, indicted, etc.. before it’s over?

4. How is that many of the biggest online gambling sites for sports, horses etc.. are still operating in the US when they probably handle WAY more money than any of the poker sites?

BradleyT
@ Tue Sep 20, 2011 02:37:42 PM
2

The whole thing is unfolding almost like a movie script.

Also – psyched!

Patrick Minton
@ Tue Sep 20, 2011 02:42:28 PM
3

“I think it’s really a big black eye for any business that accepts deposits, and particularly for those that are subject to government scrutiny and pressures.”

I don’t agree with this. Ponzi schemes are pretty rare in LEGAL business sectors, even though business that accept deposits are not, mostly because the penalties for running them are harsh and the regulatory procedures abound to prevent it.

The problem is, as you say, that this was an unregulated business run offshore. In a regulated business, this kind of thing wouldn’t be commonplace at all.

Ed Miller
@ Tue Sep 20, 2011 02:51:37 PM
4

I don’t know, man, there have been a lot of enormous scams in “legitimate” regulated industries in the past decade+: Enron, Tyco, Worldcom, Madoff, HealthSouth are obvoius examples. I consdier LTCM to be a scam too even though it’s not clear to me that even the people running it understood that’s what it was.

Definitely not saying that every business that goes on the rocks will go Ponzi or some other type of scam, but the temptation is certainly there, and there is definitely a history of non-poker corps that handle money like hedge funds, insurance corps, banks, and so forth morphing into scams to keep the money flowing.

miko
@ Wed Sep 21, 2011 05:43:09 AM
5

hmm… this doesn’t initially look that bad to me…
I know that commercial banks hold only a small percent of all deposits and lend/invest the rest of it. Otherwise, a “run on the bank” would not be able to bankrupt it.
Another obvious example, Social Security. That fund is empty (or pooled into the rest of the countries obligations and since were in debt as a country…)
Were running SS off expected future cashflow which fulltilt may or may not have alot of.
Calling them Ponzi at this moment seems a bit harsh

sirfwalgman
@ Wed Sep 21, 2011 07:45:52 AM
6

Live poker is awesome.. um yeah, but that 2h car ride kind of sucks.. I am hoping downtown Boston gets a casino with the recently passed bill. I may have to wait a few years though. (http://www.cardplayer.com/poker-news/12034-massachusetts-state-legislature-passes-casino-bill)

Interestingly enough there are provisions for online gambling in the bill… not sure what the final thing will look like.

lou krieger
@ Wed Sep 21, 2011 08:43:23 AM
7

Nice analysis and post. I’m in complete agreement with you on this topic, with your views of the perps and the government too. It’s sad to say, but Lederer, Ferguson, et.al. had everything but the ability to resist tempatation. How incredibly sad.

Good luck on your new book.

________
Lou Krieger

Joseph
@ Wed Sep 21, 2011 10:10:01 AM
8

Great write-up; the Ponzi scheme headline really shocked me! (Although I gave up on realistically thinking I’d get my FT funds back a while ago…)

I really agree with your point that prohibition creates criminality, and that the foggy status of poker in the US really facilitated all of this mess.

And re: live poker, I’d love to do it, but I primarily play lower-stakes limit, and not only would I be improperly bankrolled, I really can’t find any games in my area! I’m afraid poker is going to have to be a recreational thing for me (a few NL games here and there), at least for the foreseeable future.

Robert G.
@ Wed Sep 21, 2011 12:35:15 PM
9

Yeah, one wonders about Ultimate Bet. I don’t have any money there, but a good friend does.

I am psyched about the book.

Ed Miller
@ Wed Sep 21, 2011 02:40:16 PM
10

@miko: Four points.

1. It wouldn’t have been unreasonable for Full Tilt to have invested some of the float like banks and insurance companies do. Problem is, what they invest it in would need to be safe and liquid. That’s obviously not the case.

2. The Feds alledge that Full Tilt “invested” a lot of the float into cash distributions to the owners. I’m not the biggest fan of the Federal government, but know that the DOJ’s batting average when they file allegations like this is really really high.

3. The fact that Full Tilt credited $130 million to players’ accounts without receiving the money (a phenomenon well-documented on 2+2 months before Black Friday) means it’s a slam dunk that this business was not on the up-and-up.

4. I’ve seen the apologists already come out and say, “It wasn’t a scam, guys, it was just terrible mismanagement.” When you’re handling $400 million of other people’s money, the line between terrible mismanagement and scam, in my opinion, does not exist at all. If you want the upside of running a $400 million business that accepts deposits, then you simultaneously accept the responsibility that if things go really south, your “mismanagement” is criminal. That’s not quite how the law works, but IMO it’s how it should work.

JJS
@ Wed Sep 21, 2011 03:21:37 PM
11

I think Ed’s analysis is spot on. The claim that Tilt was doing the same thing that banks do is just ludicrous. If you disagree, then go to your local bank and tell them that you want to take out a personal loan so you can take the money to Vegas and gamble with it. Let us know how far you get with that.

I think the difference between Stars and Tilt is that Stars is run by business people, whereas Tilt was run by poker players, i.e. gamblers. The people running Tilt gambled that they could live “high on the hog” with players money and not get caught, and they lost that gamble. The people running Stars were able to pay back the players money and absorb the losses that resulted from black Friday, as a properly run business should be able to do.

@ Wed Sep 21, 2011 04:04:49 PM
12

[...] ruin things by using player account balances like a personal bank account.  I also agree with Ed Miller’s points, although I do feel strongly that there are still reputable online sites out there (and I put my [...]

JamesDabear
@ Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:24:48 PM
13

Until they’re caught, prosecuted and the money returned… they haven’t lost yet.

Dueces Wild
@ Sat Sep 24, 2011 03:07:32 PM
14

It shouldn’t be a surprise that these sites operated with fractional reserves, given that most of the money going in would never come out anyway, let alone all at the same time…. Your bank can’t pay off all its depositors at the same time either … not even close.

Bill Sheridan
@ Fri Sep 30, 2011 06:07:43 AM
15

No excuses, please. PokerStars was subject to the same environment and did the honorable thing.

FTP, if the principals hadn’t been so greedy AND criminal could still be operating a very profitable business, just like PS is.

Bill Sheridan
@ Fri Sep 30, 2011 06:08:19 AM
16

PS, I will be buying your book.

Ed Miller
@ Tue Nov 01, 2011 09:48:13 AM
17

A non-poker company that accepts deposits and may have run afoul of regulations (H/T Bill Rini): MF Global misused customer cash

Nick
@ Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:50:56 PM
18

So it’s the government’s fault that the Full Tilters stole the deposits. Interesting concept but I think you have lost your mind. They went wrong the day they decided not to place player’s money in escrow. They saw a pot of gold, easy for the pickings and they bit the apple. May they rot in hell for a thousand eternities.

xvzgrxofzonv
@ Mon Apr 15, 2013 11:31:14 PM
19

wjnrobveprft

Leave a Reply




You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>