Bodog
These guys and everyone else gets shut down and then "properly" licensed and taxed online casinos set up shop. Corporations like MGM, Harrahs etc wont stand to pay taxes and licensing fees if there are companies operating in plain view not following the rules. Bodog and the like got plenty of years at the trough and now its time to pay up.
At this time I have no comment, but just know that I'm on top of it and hope to have something to say about it soon.
Quote: WizardHello all. I attended the World Game Protection conference here in Vegas on Mon-Wed this week. .
Is it true the speakers wear funny hats and clown noses
to distract you from the fact that this years conference
is just a watered down version of last years conference?
1) Nobody has been arrested at this time. That article's title is wrong. They later clarify it is only arrest warrants.
2) It is believed Ayre is in Antigua or Philippines. Wherever he is, he is safe from extradition. If what Bodog did is legal in the country he is residing in, it will not satisfy any extradition treaty in place. I am sure he planned well ahead for this day.
3) While there were several forfeitures signed off on, it does not appear any money was actually seized. The Bodog.com domain appears to be the only asset that was actually taken. The reason the feds can take that .com is because it is assigned by Verisign, a U.S. company that has an agreement with the government.
4) Bodog stopped using the .com in May 2011. That is because PokerStars/Full Tilt Poker/Absolute Poker/Ultimate Bet all lost their .coms on Black Friday. Many U.S. facing gaming sites moved to .eu or .ag domains. Bodog forwarded the .com to Bodog.eu, which is out of the reach of the U.S. American players play on the brand Bovada.lv, a Latvian domain also out of the reach of the feds.
5) Bovada is operated on the Mohawk reservation, far out of the reach of the U.S.
6) This investigation involved the Anne Arundel County Police who have been a part of many online gambling busts. They get kickbacks from the feds for doing it.
7) This is the same U.S. Attorney's office that indicted Bookmaker.com and friends in May 2011. All but one of those indicted companies still operates today with a different domain name.
This is really nothing to worry about IMO. If anything, Ayre seems like the kind of guy that might actually fight this although he has taken some shots at Jay Cohen for doing the same thing. Cohen was founder of WSEX and lost at his trial for essentially the same crime about ten years ago.
Quote: PokeraddictI have written extensive articles about the indictment. I write for the online poker industry. There are a few points that are important here:
.
How come Ayre was indicted for crimes committed
up till 2012, when he sold the brand in 2007? The CEO
of MMGG said in 2009 that Ayre was not involved with
the company. If MMGG ran Bodog and owned the brand,
how did they escape indictment? How did the gov't
make bets with Bodog.com and get paid by Bodog.com
in Jan if the site has been dormant since last May?
What about the serious money laundering charges,
they're the real issue here. This is a serious crime and
you didn't address it. The .com seizing is nothing
compared to the money laundering.
I appreciate what you wrote, but there's nothing new
there. Every single point you made is easily found
in the articles written since Monday on this subject.
Quote: PokeraddictI have written extensive articles about the indictment. I write for the online poker industry.
It's not clear what the effect on Bovada will be. Any insight?
Quote:How come Ayre was indicted for crimes committed
up till 2012
The indictment stated that the Bodog investigation ran until January 6, 2012. I do not believe that it specifically states that Calvin Ayre committed the crime all the way up until that day, just the company. The indictment is very vague though. The two charges do not have dates of the alleged crimes, just the actual crimes.
Quote:If MMGG ran Bodog and owned the brand,
how did they escape indictment?
MMGG appears to be closely related to the actual government of the Mohawk reservation. Indicting them would be pointless. Maybe they think they whole thing is a smokescreen and that Ayre never dropped his interest in the company. Ayre has rubbed a lot in the government's face, I have to think he had a bullseye.
Quote:What about the serious money laundering charges,
they're the real issue here. This is a serious crime and
you didn't address it. The .com seizing is nothing
compared to the money laundering.
I was just addressing how this affected the Bodog/Bovada business. I don't think it does at all. The indictment was related to two companies owned by Kenneth Wienski called JBL Services Inc and ZipPayments Inc and $100 million in transactions processed. Wienski got indicted back in 2008 but his case disappeared from the dockets. A good assumption is that he rolled but maybe the case got sealed some other way. During my research I could not find any resolution in the case beyond asset forfeitures. This case seemed to have disappeared.
Quote:I appreciate what you wrote, but there's nothing new
there. Every single point you made is easily found
in the articles written since Monday on this subject.
Many of which I wrote and based on reading the indictment and the seizure notice. Sorry that you did not like me clearing up a lot of misinformation in this thread. One article linked from this thread says Ayre and others were arrested, others thought Bodog was seized. Another person said "bodog.com has not been a $play site since long before Black Friday". All of those are wrong.
Also, none of these articles were live on Monday. The domain order was signed on Monday, but was executed well after business hours. The indictments were released on Tuesday morning.
Quote: EvenBob
What about the serious money laundering charges,
they're the real issue here. This is a serious crime and
you didn't address it.
IMO money laundering is not a serious crime. It's a bullshit crime set up to catch people the government believes are doing something illegal but they can't catch any other way.
Quote: Pokeraddict5) Bovada is operated on the Mohawk reservation, far out of the reach of the U.S.
It's time for the US to dust off those Canadian invasion plans. It's the 200 year anniversary of the War of 1812, after all, and the Kahnawake reserve's only 35 miles from the US border. Just get a drone to bomb a few of those buildings and call it an "accident". Problem solved.
Quote: pacomartinIt's not clear what the effect on Bovada will be. Any insight?
Probably nothing as it appears no assets were seized beyond the domain name that forwarded to .eu. I would not keep meaningful money there, but I would still put them in the top 3 safest poker room networks for U.S. players. As for sports books, Bovada is still going to be in the top grades. Bookmaker (Betcris) went through this very thing in May 2011 and did not miss a step. I feel sure Bodog/Bovada/Ayre already had an action plan for when this day came. I doubt they miss a beat.
In this environment, I would be nervous having any kind of life changing money on a U.S. facing gambling site. With Bodog/Bovada, I feel the risk is much lower than average though.
Quote: boymimboIt's time for the US to dust off those Canadian invasion plans. It's the 200 year anniversary of the War of 1812, after all, and the Kahnawake reserve's only 35 miles from the US border. Just get a drone to bomb a few of those buildings and call it an "accident". Problem solved.
It's happened before
Quote: Pokeraddict
The indictment stated that the Bodog investigation ran until January 6, 2012. I do not believe that it specifically states that Calvin Ayre committed the crime all the way up until that day
Sure it does. It doesn't say the investigation went till
2012, it says the crimes were committed till 2012:
{BODOG ENTERTAINMENT GROUP S.A., d/b/a BODOG.com,
CALVIN AYRE,
JAMES PHILIP,
DAVID FERGUSON, and
DERRICK MALONEY,
INDICTMENT
COUNT ONE (Conducting gambling business)
The Grand Jury for the District of Maryland charges that:
From at least on or about June 9, 2005, through at least January 6,
2012}
It says Bodog WAS those 4 men indicted and they committed
the crimes. 'Just the company', as you put it, is those 4 men.
How is that possible when Ayre sold the company to MMGG
in 2007? There has to be a lot more going on that the gov't has
enough proof of, to convince a Grand Jury to issue indictments.
Quote: EvenBobSure it does. It doesn't say the investigation went till
2012, it says the crimes were committed till 2012:
{BODOG ENTERTAINMENT GROUP S.A., d/b/a BODOG.com,
CALVIN AYRE,
JAMES PHILIP,
DAVID FERGUSON, and
DERRICK MALONEY,
INDICTMENT
COUNT ONE (Conducting gambling business)
The Grand Jury for the District of Maryland charges that:
From at least on or about June 9, 2005, through at least January 6,
2012}
It says Bodog WAS those 4 men indicted and they committed
the crimes. 'Just the company', as you put it, is those 4 men.
How is that possible when Ayre sold the company to MMGG
in 2007? There has to be a lot more going on that the gov't has
enough proof of, to convince a Grand Jury to issue indictments.
You are drawing a conclusion there. The crime was allegedly committed by the company during that time and the men all were involved at some point during that time frame. The indictment was very vague though. As you seem to imply, it may also mean the whole Ayre sale was a smokescreen. If it was, nothing like that is mentioned in the indictment. The indictment involves the sports betting, money laundering, payment processing, the informant, the media reseller and federal agents wagering and payments. It makes no mention of a possible smokescreen sale. It would really be irrelevant anyway because he was involved during the time frame that the crimes were allegedly committed, even if he was not involved with the company at the end.
Quote: PokeraddictYou are drawing a conclusion there.
Indictments don't usually have a lot of meaningless
words in them. They come right to the point. There's
a reason they go on and on about all the money spent
on resellers and other things. Its important and its
money they're going after, what other reason would there
be. And if there never was a sale to MMGG, why would
they mention something that never happened. They just
go after the real owners, they don't need to explain anything.
I don't find it all that vague. It says what the crimes are and
who committed them and when they were committed. Whats
vague about that.
Quote: PokeraddictIt seems that you are drawing conclusions,.
And you're not?? You concluded that everything
will be fine with Bovada. Based on what? Last
year everybody said all would be well with Bodog.
Quote: EvenBobAnd you're not?? You concluded that everything
will be fine with Bovada. Based on what? Last
year everybody said all would be well with Bodog.
I've known PA for a very long time and he has a lot more knowledge on these issues than you do.
Quote: JimMorrisonI've known PA for a very long time.
I'm pointing out he didn't really say anything, just
stated some known facts, and concluded Bovada
would be just fine. Based on what? I want to know
that Bovada will be fine too, but the more I read, the
more unsure I am. Want some shocks? Research
the people other than Ayre who were indicted, see
who they are and what they do and did in the past.
This thing is a spiderweb of smoke and mirrors, no
wonder the thing took 6 1/2 years to put together.
Quote: EvenBobI'm pointing out he didn't really say anything, just
stated some known facts, and concluded Bovada
would be just fine. Based on what?
Based on his many years of experience in this industry.
Quote: JimMorrisonBased on his many years of experience in this industry.
You just made me laugh out loud, that doesn't happen
very often. I'm afraid I need more than platitudes and
wishful thinking. Facts are much better than feelings
where money is concerned.
Quote: EvenBobYou just made me laugh out loud, that doesn't happen
very often. I'm afraid I need more than platitudes and
wishful thinking. Facts are much better than feelings
where money is concerned.
It's cool, most people laugh out loud when they read your all your ramblings.
Quote: JimMorrisonIt's cool, most people laugh out loud when they read your all your ramblings.
At least I don't come here and say the indictment is 'very vague',
meaning he doesn't understand what it means. Then conclude
from reading the 'very vague' document that everything will
be just fine. He says several times its vague and yet everything
is great. Whatever...
Between your posts in this thread, and posts I have seen in other threads, your posts are full of misinformation. I find it interesting that you challenge my writing ability, gaming industry knowledge, and legal coverage, but yet post things like Doyle Brunson's poker room shut down in 2006.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/8513-are-there-poker-millionaires/#post127071
Quote:I don't know about Brunson. I've heard he doesn't
retire because he can't afford to. I do know in 2006
he had a period where he didn't have a winning
session for 4 months and that was the same year
they shut down his poker site with all the rest. He
was financially strapped and said he was thinking
of getting out for good.
DoylesRoom was open all the way through 2011 when it became Americascardroom but are still owned by the same company that owned them since they left Cake Poker's network. Doyle wanted his name off of the poker room. In May 2011, the feds seized their domain in the Bookmaker.com indictment, but they continued to operate under a .ag until the rebranding. Doyle did not own it anyway, he just licensed his name.
You also posted earlier in this thread that Ayre said Bodog stopped taking US bets in May 2011, when in fact the brand accepted them until December 2011 and the rebrand, managed by the same people that managed Bodog, still take them today. MMGG has been managing the U.S. Bodog brand from Mohawk since a few months after the UIGEA passed. I assume that you misunderstood Ayre's statement that the domain was not used since May 2011. There is a huge difference between the two.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/online/8499-bodog/#post126798
You then announced in the thread that Calvin Ayre was arrested in Canada which was not true. Anyone in the industry knows he is not in Canada.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/online/8499-bodog/#post126805
You then did not know why the .eu and .co.uk domains could not be seized by the feds:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/online/8499-bodog/4/#post127033
You are then confused that the other Bodog brands operate outside the U.S. and can still be found in Google, even with the .com seized
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/online/8499-bodog/4/#post127051
This thread is a serious matter. I showed up to clear up misinformation, most of it came from you. I found it ironic that you then posted that I added nothing to the conversation that was new, then wanted to challenge my coverage and knowledge of the event, when you have been posting false information about it. This may sound like a personal attack, but I can only assume that you took offense to being shown up. I am sorry, but the false information in this thread needed to be addressed and corrected.
Quote: PokeraddictThis thread is a serious matter.
I get it. You're job is to show the indictment is a joke,
we're not supposed to take it seriously. I'm wrong
about everything, you're here for damage control.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Quote: boymimboIt's time for the US to dust off those Canadian invasion plans.
In 1866 (...) After crossing the Niagara River into Ontario they defeated a small group of Canadian militia.
I understand amongst the rest there is a concern about their funds.
Quote: pacomartinIt's not clear what the effect on Bovada will be. Any insight?
None, Calvin Ayre & Bodog Brand have nothing to do with Bovada.lv, its owned by a completely separate company than any of the bodog brand licensees.
Quote: JimMorrisonI've known PA for a very long time and he has a lot more knowledge on these issues than you do.
Somebody comes on here and lays out the facts in a concise manner that we can all understand. How dare you, PA!
Quote: BodogBeckyNone, Calvin Ayre & Bodog Brand have nothing to do with Bovada.lv, its owned by a completely separate company than any of the bodog brand licensees.
I respectfully disagree. Who will the Justice Department now pursue ?? If not Bovado, WHO !!
Its all about evasion of USIT.
Quote: EvenBobI get it. You're job is to show the indictment is a joke,
we're not supposed to take it seriously. I'm wrong
about everything, you're here for damage control.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Seriously Bob? THAT'S your response to a clear and concise repudiation of wrong information? (I'm not saying you did it intentionally - rather in the spirit of electronic communication). Come on, man!
BTW - I thought you were getting rid of your broke down, humpy bumpy computer and getting something that doesn't lay out your text like a 1982 Brother Dot Matrix printer....
Quote: BozAs I stated before, we all know that the US government considers ANY online gambling illegal and anyone who plays on these sites needs to be prepared to lose 100% of their money at any time. There is no magic wand that will keep any company (and your money) safe if they are the next target of the feds.
Not after December 23 they don't. The Wire Act only applies to sports betting. According to this morning's G2E webinar, except in states that expressly outlaw online gambling, it's legal. UIGEA only applies to "unlawful" Internet gambling, and if it's not unlawful in your state, it's beyond the reach of the UIGEA. As of Dec. 23, the DOJ is on the record as saying they won't prosecute non-sports matters under the Wire Act. And if you look at the recent indictments, none of them were really about the Wire Act anyway.
I live in a state where online gambling is illegal, but if you don't, as far as I'm aware, you're free to play online.
Quote: MathExtremistNot after December 23 they don't. The Wire Act only applies to sports betting. According to this morning's G2E webinar, except in states that expressly outlaw online gambling, it's legal. UIGEA only applies to "unlawful" Internet gambling, and if it's not unlawful in your state, it's beyond the reach of the UIGEA. As of Dec. 23, the DOJ is on the record as saying they won't prosecute non-sports matters under the Wire Act. And if you look at the recent indictments, none of them were really about the Wire Act anyway.
I live in a state where online gambling is illegal, but if you don't, as far as I'm aware, you're free to play online.
This is a very liberal interpretation of what the feds position on the Wire Act is. Technically, if something is not illegal then it is legal. In that sense, yes, the Wire Act could not be used in a state that does not explicitly outlaw internet gambling. The problem is that any state with casinos is going to have requirements to operate such as location restrictions, game restrictions, policies on how to handle problem gambling, employment etc. These casino states require a license after proving the casino has qualified and there is a massive fee attached to those licenses. These online poker rooms are not licensed in these states, even if poker is otherwise legal.
States without casinos are going to have laws that specifically deal with what is illegal. While rake free home poker games would be allowed in most non casino states, commercially raked poker games are not. Maybe a rake free subscription based site would pass the legal requirements, but a commercially raked poker game is going to be just as illegal over the internet in those states as it would be live.
The past has shown that if something is illegal in real life, it is illegal over the internet as well. That seems especially true with any form of gambling. It does not take a specific internet gambling law to charge someone, Black Friday defendants are charged with violating an obscure New York State anti gambling law, which then brought the additional punishment of the UIGEA.
When the feds stated that online poker did not fall under the Wire Act, it was in answering a question from Sen. Reid and Kyl specifically asking about future legalized online poker, or at least inferring it. They were using a previous decision based on online state lottery processing. This change in opinion does not affect the fed's position on current US facing poker sites like Merge Gaming and Cake. When another state legalizes online poker down the road, they can freely network with Nevada or any other state that has already passed it without interference from the feds.
Having an agent going to the track to place bets for you is illegal.
On February 28, 2012, U.S. federal authorities indicted Calvin Aire and three other Canadians connected to Bodog. Warrants were issued for their arrest. In addition, the domain bodog.com was seized. As an advertiser of Bodog for years, and now Bovada, I have been asked multiple times for comment. In particular, players want to know if their money with Bodog and Bovada is safe.
First, this is all much ado about nothing. The four indictments were for people who live safely outside the United States and who had no plans to come to the United States. For an arrest to be made, they would need to be on U.S. soil. Since the arrest of Jay Cohen, who ran a sports book out of Antigua, owners of Internet casinos have largely stayed away from the U.S. In this case, the Bodog indictments are no additional inconvenience.
Second, the seized domain, bodog.com, was owned by Bodog but had been dormant since they made the switch to bodog.eu. Bodog services players outside of the United States, whom I'm sure will have no difficulty finding them. Bovada services players in United States, and they were unaffected by Tuesday's events.
Third, Bovada is owned and operated by the Morris Mohawk Gaming Group, based in Kahnawake, Quebec, Canada. They use the domain bovada.lv, which is registered in the country of Latvia. U.S. authorities have no authority over Bovada or its domain.
Fourth, player funds are kept out of U.S. banks, are diversified, and are secure. Bodog has never missed a payment in its many years of operation.
Fifth, I'm assured by my contacts at both brands, Bodog and Bovada, that everything there is business as usual.
Not many operators accept U.S. players at this point, and of the few that do, I feel Bovada is the safest and most fun place to bet on sports, poker and traditional casino games. So I continue to stand behind my endorsement of Bodog and Bovada. Some states do prohibit Internet gambling, so individuals may wish to research the law in their own jurisdiction before playing.
Quote: PokeraddictThis is a very liberal interpretation of what the feds position on the Wire Act is. Technically, if something is not illegal then it is legal. In that sense, yes, the Wire Act could not be used in a state that does not explicitly outlaw internet gambling.
Here's a link to an AGA op-ed.
Quote: Rick Santorum
I’m someone who takes the opinion that gaming is not something that is beneficial, particularly having that access on the Internet. Just as we’ve seen from a lot of other things that are vices on the Internet, they end to grow exponentially as a result of that. It’s one thing to come to Las Vegas and do gaming and participate in the shows and that kind of thing as entertainment, it’s another thing to sit in your home and have access to that it. I think it would be dangerous to our country to have that type of access to gaming on the Internet.
Freedom’s not absolute. What rights in the Constitution are absolute? There is no right to absolute freedom. There are limitations. You might want to say the same thing about a whole variety of other things that are on the Internet — “let everybody have it, let everybody do it.” No. There are certain things that actually do cost people a lot of money, cost them their lives, cost them their fortunes that we shouldn’t have and make available, to make it that easy to do.
Quote: pacomartinRick Santorum seems to be against internet gaming.
Of course he is against it. Anyone know Romney's position? My best guess he will avoid taking a stance.
Quote: pacomartinRick Santorum seems to be against internet gaming.
The only thing worse than a left-wing nanny state is a right-wing nanny state. Well, not worse, exactly, but equally as bad.
Quote: WizardAnyone know Romney's position? My best guess he will avoid taking a stance.
It changes hourly.
Quote: Wavy70It changes hourly.
Are you sure about that? I thought it was every three and a half hours. ;)
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-march-1-2012/pill-bill---volume-1---blunt-amendment-debate (hope that's the correct link)
Quote: WizardOf course he is against it. Anyone know Romney's position? My best guess he will avoid taking a stance.
He's already stated he's against it.
Not an issue for me this November.
Quote: WizardHere is my statement on the events last Tuesday.
Any comment on companies receiving advertising money? This activity was named; there seemed to be some sort of hint that it was not going to be good for such companies.
Quote: JimMorrisonIMO money laundering is not a serious crime. It's a bullshit crime set up to catch people the government believes are doing something illegal but they can't catch any other way.
Amen
Unintended humor is the funniest kind.Quote: Wizard..Anyone know Romney's position?
Quote: odiousgambitAny comment on companies receiving advertising money? This activity was named; there seemed to be some sort of hint that it was not going to be good for such companies.
Hey Wiz you took any money from Bodog for advertising? Hows extradition between Nevada and Maryland?
