A casino that is nevada-based games developer, maker and distributor is attempting to reassure worried shareholders following the company’s California ‘suitability to complete company’ rights had been revoked by that state’s Gambling Control Commission recently.
Galaxy Gaming CEO Robert Saucier has sent a four-page missive to investors, claiming that all the issues decried by the Ca regulators in their decisions stemmed from a ‘predecessor entity that ceased business procedure in 2009 and dissolved. The proceedings did not straight involve Galaxy,’ Saucier went on, incorporating that ‘it is business as usual [at Galaxy ] once we continue to offer our products and solutions without the interruption.’
With Galaxy doing a great deal of its business in the Golden State particularly with many Indian tribes who have casinos Saucier desired to assure customers and investors that Galaxy’s ‘gaming license with California tribes is unchanged and in good standing. Likewise, our status in most other jurisdictions we serve is additionally unchanged and remains in good standing. In fact, we continue steadily to seek and get licenses that are new approvals in additional jurisdictions,’ the letter went on to express.
And this is where things get, um, a little perplexing. Because while Saucier emphatically states in their letter that the Ca Gambling Control Commission don’t rule against him or their company in their current closed regulatory conference, all proof points to the contrary. In reality, it’s the CEO’s very past that is checkered misstatements, witholding information, and providing misleading information that appears to have gotten him into the pickle in which he now finds himself. So who’re investors to believe?
According to Administrative Law Judge Catherine Frink, not Saucier. He has been described by her as ‘evasive, intentionally dishonest, and misleading in their response to questions.’ She adds that ‘in a highly managed industry such as video gaming, the failure to be forthcoming with relevant information ended up being inexcusable.’
Whatever Saucier is trying to convince his minions of, it nonetheless appears that Galaxy Gaming LLC will no longer be able to operate as a tribal vendor in California following the Gambling Commission decision. In reality, he will not also be able to request a reconsideration unless new evidence crops up.
Details of ‘Can’t Lose’ Promotion do not Sit Well with Revel Customers
Enjoy Atlantic City had been designed as a Las Vegas-style resort on the city’s famous Boardwalk; but a rocky start caused the casino to file for bankruptcy just ten months after it opened one of the most disastrous starts for a casino in recent memory.
That’s why Revel designed summer that is special, so that you can get players right back through the casino’s doorways. In an advertisement campaign that admitted things got off to a rough beginning, Revel invited players straight back in July, with the promise of a ‘can’t lose’ promotion on slot machines. In accordance with the ads, players would get all of their losses back on slots until the end of the thirty days, a deal that many gamblers simply couldn’t pass up.
Regrettably, many players didn’t browse the small print. And when they found out what the advertising entailed, some weren’t happy with what they’d to get their refunds.
‘we possess a various definition of the ‘refund’ compared to the Revel and I also believe a most of others would agree that a reimbursement implies that you will receive the full reimbursement of funds,’ customer Ed Conti told The Star-Ledger after visiting Revel. ‘ I do not feel it is right.’
Read the print that is fine
The fine print on the offer from the casino makes the promotion a little less amazing than it may seem initially. A number of the restrictions are instead tame: gamblers must lose at the very least $100 to qualify, the loss rebates are capped at $100,000, and table game losses aren’t covered.
It’s the manner in which the ‘refunds’ are given to players that has Conti and others upset. Players can receive their refunds only 5 percent at time, with every ‘block’ of 5 percent being offered in one for the 20 weeks following the advertising ends. If a gambler doesn’t visit the casino in a given week, they won’t manage to receive that percentage of their refund. In addition, the refund doesn’t pay out in money, but in free play credits that could be used in the devices; it cannot be directly cashed down.
Some might say that a few conditions on an offer similar to this one are become expected: after all, it might be foolish to think that a casino could simply give back each of its winnings to clients, even over a short period of time. Nevertheless, the fact that the details of the ‘refund’ program are flashed on television ads for just a 2nd and in very print that is small mean that Revel is skirting laws on clarity in marketing, if not really breaking them.
No matter what the legal standing of the ad, the type associated with promotion has turned off at least one gambler from visiting Revel once more.
‘When we told my mother about this she stated, ‘That’s not just what the ad on TV said,” Conti stated. ‘My mom hasn’t gone to the Revel and will not go as time goes on.’
Federal Theft Trial Begins for Former Pequot Tribe Chairman
Michael Thomas, a disgraced former Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation chairman, is now facing theft that is federal involving inappropriate utilization of a tribe-issued charge card during hus tenure from 2003 to 2009. Thomas, who casinopokies777.com chaired the Indian tribe that owns Connecticut’s Foxwoods Casino, is charged with using the business card to personally rack up $80,000 in limousine service costs to get his mother to and from her medical appointments, according towards the prosecutor’s opening statements at his trial.
Expensive, Considerable Limo Rides
$80,000? That has to’ve been close to 200 round trips, by our conservative estimation. Thomas’ defense is he decided Mom could only see the doc arriving via limo that he was having financial hardships when. The charges that are actual spot for two years between 2007 and 2009 just as the tribe began grappling with tighter available funds after being struck by both the recession and more neighboring states’ land casino competition.
Thomas’ unrelated defense lawyer, Paul Thomas, says it’s as much as the jury to find out if those costs had been really banned.
‘Was it impermissible to charge travel on behalf of their sick, dying mother to get treatment?’ said defense attorney Thomas. Nice touch, there. The lawyer added that tribal leaders often buy gifts for high rollers with these cards, though what that is due to his mother, we’re not totally sure. Irrespective, it seems that Michael Thomas never submitted required expense reports detailing his sick mother’s limo solution. Additionally not helping the chairman that is former case ended up being testimony from Barbara Poirier, the tribe’s director of health services, who noted that the tribe makes transportation services available for members who need certainly to reach and from medical appointments.
Dirty Laundry…or Lingerie
Also apparently not for Mom there were some Victoria’s Secret credit fees made towards the tribal account. Probably for a rain dance ceremony or something, we’re guessing. Prosecutors brought to tax that is light showing Thomas’ income of $863,000 in 2008 had dropped to $354,000 by 2009, so naturally anybody could connect to their suffering.
Defendant Thomas has pleaded maybe not guilty to 1 count of theft from an indian organization that is tribal and to two counts of theft concerning an Indian tribal federal government getting federal funds. His brother Steven Thomas that is being tried separately was also indicted early this 12 months. Steven Thomas, who acted as the Piquot’s tribal treasurer, has been charged with theft of more than $700,000 between 2005 and 2008, while acting as assistant director of the tribe’s natural resources department.
Your family that steals together, appeals together? That’s lot of wampum.
UK Debt Collector Makes casino that is bad Using Collected Funds
A Coventry, UK debt collector decided it in fact was a good idea to gamble away a £6,000 (over $9,000) agreement which he had restored from the debtor on behalf of his employer, so that you can recover his or her own £30 ($46) petrol bill.
Not Certified to Steal
Unfortunately for him, this was maybe not a good notion after all. In reality, it was most likely the stupidest decision he ever made, as he’s now been sentenced to 12 months in jail, suspended for two years, and is going to be forced to do 80 hours of unpaid work for his company, and pay straight back compensation to the sum of £3,600.
Sandeep Chatha pleaded guilty to stealing the cash after their employers noticed the missing sum and called in police.
Chatha took the opportunity to steal the money in February year that is last after being instructed to get two £6,000 contracts for Face 2 Face, a business that executes warrants and recover debts with respect to utility companies.
Upon collecting the debts, it absolutely was Chatha’s job to deposit the funds in to the company’s account within twenty four hours. However, seizing the opportunity to make a small money that is extra the 34-year-old instead deposited one of the contracted quantities, and tottered on over to a regional casino where he gambled away all the money over the course of several days.
When questioned by police, he attempted to claim that it was all just a simple banking mistake, and any particular one £6,000 deposit had been paid over the countertop, whilst the other was deposited to the Face 2 Face account via a deposit machine that is automated.
Surveillance Video Tells the Story
However, when police took to the CCTV footage from the bank branch, they determined that Chatha was in reality building a false testimony, and finally monitored him down again in February this season, him no choice but to admit his actions and own up to the theft after he had changed his address, and revealed their findings, which left.
‘we needed seriously to pay for petrol while I was working,’ said Chatha, who chose to represent himself. ‘I wasn’t thinking straight. It was never my intention to simply take it all. We spent some money to fund my petrol expenses, and was then attempting to get the amount of money back without anyone knowing, so I went up to a bookmakers and a casino,’ he stated, adding that because of the force of attempting to win his losses back, ‘I used it all.’
The judge, however, ended up beingn’t buying it.
‘ I don’t believe your account of what happened, but I can’t be certain exactly what did occur to it,’ stated Judge Richard Griffith-Jones upon sentencing the debt collector. ‘It is essential that this would not continue for a period that is long of. It was one impulsive act to take the money, and you also pleaded bad during the first opportunity.’