Counterfeit chip theft in Monaco
I know in America chips are extremely hard to counterfeit. Seems like something is either different or fishy here with this case in Monaco.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3370148/British-gamblers-jailed-Monaco-casino-scam-cashed-fake-chips-allowed-2million-made.html
- they didn't make the chips, they were available @ 10 a piece. how come nobody else was using them or was caught using them?
- the 3 guys were put on VIP/player list and were given comps. don't they track VIP buy-ins and winnings?
- why were they allowed to keep the other winnings?
Quote: andysif
- why were they allowed to keep the other winnings?
Probably because the casino couldn't prove that in the previous sessions they used the fake chips.
Quote: DRichProbably because the casino couldn't prove that in the previous sessions they used the fake chips.
i would speculate there is probably a law somewhere that says that if you were proven to have commit a fraud against a casino, they can forfeit all your previous winnings, even if they can't prove it.
and thats only if they don't have proofs, but in practice they should have tapes that shows their buy-in, sessions and cash outs. if they consistently cash out more than their buy-ins + winnings, then thats the proof.
Quote: andysifi would speculate there is probably a law somewhere that says that if you were proven to have commit a fraud against a casino, they can forfeit all your previous winnings, even if they can't prove it.
Definitely no laws like this in the U.S. but obviously I don't know the laws in all jurisdictions.
Quote: andysifand thats only if they don't have proofs, but in practice they should have tapes that shows their buy-in, sessions and cash outs. if they consistently cash out more than their buy-ins + winnings, then thats the proof.
You are probably giving surveillance a lot more credit than they deserve. Many places only keep the recordings for 30 to 90 days unless they have a reason to keep it longer. I can't wait to hear the details of this because clearly there is more to it. For the authorities to say it was ingenious makes it clear to me that it wasn't as simple as we think.
Quote: DRichDefinitely no laws like this in the U.S. but obviously I don't know the laws in all jurisdictions.
You are probably giving surveillance a lot more credit than they deserve. Many places only keep the recordings for 30 to 90 days unless they have a reason to keep it longer. I can't wait to hear the details of this because clearly there is more to it. For the authorities to say it was ingenious makes it clear to me that it wasn't as simple as we think.
While i have no doubt that's what they do, I find it very hard to understand, given that nowadays everything are stored in computers.
How much is a 10T hard disc? Is probably worth less than 1 hand in some VIP room.
Its not like in the 90's when you have to reuse the tape or something.
Quote: andysifWhile i have no doubt that's what they do, I find it very hard to understand, given that nowadays everything are stored in computers.
How much is a 10T hard disc? Is probably worth less than 1 hand in some VIP room.
Its not like in the 90's when you have to reuse the tape or something.
I think you underestimate the amount of storage space that would be needed.
High definition images from approx. 1500 cameras running 24 hours a day - I don't know what the terabytes would look like but begin adding up the number of hard drives and physical storage space you would need to hold them and then there is the record keeping and documentation to organize that.
When I worked in Hollywood, part of my job involved the tracking of digital information from film sources and just having a hundred hours from one or two cameras became a dedicated chore.
Quote: darkozI think you underestimate the amount of storage space that would be needed.
High definition images from approx. 1500 cameras running 24 hours a day - I don't know what the terabytes would look like but begin adding up the number of hard drives and physical storage space you would need to hold them and then there is the record keeping and documentation to organize that.
When I worked in Hollywood, part of my job involved the tracking of digital information from film sources and just having a hundred hours from one or two cameras became a dedicated chore.
just a rough estimate, from my exp watching porn on the internet.
1 hour approx = 1 G
1500 cameras running 24 hrs, lets call it 40T per day. HD cost ranges from around 25-50 per T, so that would be 1000-2000 per day.
while not exactly cheap for individuals or small enterprise, 1000-2000 a day is hardly anything for a casino.
Quote: andysifjust a rough estimate, from my exp watching porn on the internet.
1 hour approx = 1 G
1500 cameras running 24 hrs, lets call it 40T per day. HD cost ranges from around 25-50 per T, so that would be 1000-2000 per day.
while not exactly cheap for individuals or small enterprise, 1000-2000 a day is hardly anything for a casino.
You are not factoring in the storage of the storage.
The hard drives store the images - you also have to store the physical hard drives somewhere.
40T on hard drives kept for years aren't going to be inside the surveillance room. So now you have to have a storage facility that keeps the drives. The drives can't simply be thrown on the shelf. If the whole purpose is to retrieve the images from specific cameras then you need a dedicated system for compiling where everything is been placed on the shelf.
Of course, this is exactly the way Hollywood film vaults work. I have experience with them. So, there are a lot of associated costs with storage of digital images that go beyond just the cost of terabytes.
Casinos generally don't consider their footage worth anything except as evidence in a specific case (Hollywood studios see value in the footage they are storing) so I don't see any casino going to the trouble of doing all that.
Quote: darkozYou are not factoring in the storage of the storage.
The hard drives store the images - you also have to store the physical hard drives somewhere.
40T on hard drives kept for years aren't going to be inside the surveillance room. So now you have to have a storage facility that keeps the drives. The drives can't simply be thrown on the shelf. If the whole purpose is to retrieve the images from specific cameras then you need a dedicated system for compiling where everything is been placed on the shelf.
Of course, this is exactly the way Hollywood film vaults work. I have experience with them. So, there are a lot of associated costs with storage of digital images that go beyond just the cost of terabytes.
Casinos generally don't consider their footage worth anything except as evidence in a specific case (Hollywood studios see value in the footage they are storing) so I don't see any casino going to the trouble of doing all that.
well, yes and no.
while that is the cost you have to bear if you are doing it yourself, I think lots of tech company are willing to set up some cloud services that do it for you. Tried Google. Just around 1500/mth for 40T.
(don't know if i am getting it wrong. it's like 30 times cheaper than doing it yourself ??)
Quote: andysifwell, yes and no.
while that is the cost you have to bear if you are doing it yourself, I think lots of tech company are willing to set up some cloud services that do it for you. Tried Google. Just around 1500/mth for 40T.
(don't know if i am getting it wrong. it's like 30 times cheaper than doing it yourself ??)
That' a huge cost.
You came up with 40T based on 1500 cameras running 24 hours so that's one day of footage.
You're saying 40T cost around 1500/mth. So, $1500 X 365 (that's 24 hrs footage which equals 40T at $1500 per month) = $547,500
Over half a million for the storage of say, every day, from last years footage. Wait - you said $1500 per month, right, so now multiply $547,500 by 12 months.
Hmm, and you keep adding a new day to that, I don't think the casinos will tolerate that.
40T is stored at $1500 per month. That's the footage from one day.
For the year, that's $1500 x 12 = $18,000 just to store the footage from a single day for the entire year.
$18,000 x 365 = $6,570,000 to store all the footage from 1500 cameras taking 24 hrs surveillance for every day from last year on the cloud for just one 12 month period.
Quote: darkozOr to make the math a bit easier,
40T is stored at $1500 per month. That's the footage from one day.
For the year, that's $1500 x 12 = $18,000 just to store the footage from a single day for the entire year.
$18,000 x 365 = $6,570,000 to store all the footage from 1500 cameras taking 24 hrs surveillance for every day from last year on the cloud for just one 12 month period.
you are right. i forgot about the accumulation of every day.
but back to the article, how can management let 3 mil of counterfeit chips went thru and not notice ?
shouldn't chip count be done periodically? or is 3 mil just "too small" to notice?
This is a perfect example of what happens when a reporter unfamiliar with gambling tries to write a story.
So, the article says fake "counterfeit" chips were purchased for $10 and then exchanged at the Monaco casino as $1,000 denominations. Totally confusing how this could happen as most of us know.
So, what actually happened was the cheats "brought in" (not brought) the chips of a color at a roulette table assigning them $10 denomination. They ratholed a chunk of those and colored out.
Then, a confederate who had the chips went to the table an hour or so later and requested the same color but assigning them $1,000 denomination which apparently was allowed at this casino.
As the article says, they were comped heavily (obviously the high roller was) all the while he was sneaking in the ratholed chips with $990 profit per chip.
The article says they didn't have to pay the entire amount back and that may be because legit gambling was occurring (the high roller needed to make bets as part of his cover) so perhaps that had something to do with that.
However, this is NOT a counterfeiting scheme as first reported.
Quote: darkoz
Then, a confederate who had the chips went to the table an hour or so later and requested the same color but assigning them $1,000 denomination which apparently was allowed at this casino.
is this normal practice at other casino? i would assume not.
I wonder how long had this been going on. Same age old question: when you find something as lucrative as this, do you take a little bit everyday for as long as possible or hit it big time once and flee.
Quote: DRichDarkoz, thanks for the clarification. I believe this is an old scam that I have read about before at Roulette.
It is an old scam. Richard Marcus was surprised the casino in Monaco was unprepared for it but that's probably why they were targeted.
Quote: GWAEI think I would do 18 months for 2 mil
Prison in Monaco? Probably nicer than my house.
Quote: darkoz
So, what actually happened was the cheats "brought in" (not brought) the chips of a color at a roulette table assigning them $10 denomination. They ratholed a chunk of those and colored out.
Then, a confederate who had the chips went to the table an hour or so later and requested the same color but assigning them $1,000 denomination which apparently was allowed at this casino.
.
Seems totally impossible. It's too stupid to even imagine. I think you/he/she means bought in for let's say red colored roulette chips given a $10. per chip value. Then kept some of them when changing back for cash chips. Then later, (an hour!), the same red colored chips are now $1000. each as a high roller bought in and wanted red etc.. Could have been a different(higher limit) table? Slips in five or ten of the earlier rat holed red chips and like that, for a year or two, gains over a million dollars/euros. Just seems far to simple. There would have been an excessive number of red colored chips in the chip bank at a different table for starters. Or of course, a shortage at the first table which had to be noticed? Oh well. Almost a funny story.
Quote: NokTangSeems totally impossible. It's too stupid to even imagine. I think you/he/she means bought in for let's say red colored roulette chips given a $10. per chip value. Then kept some of them when changing back for cash chips. Then later, (an hour!), the same red colored chips are now $1000. each as a high roller bought in and wanted red etc.. Could have been a different(higher limit) table? Slips in five or ten of the earlier rat holed red chips and like that, for a year or two, gains over a million dollars/euros. Just seems far to simple. There would have been an excessive number of red colored chips in the chip bank at a different table for starters. Or of course, a shortage at the first table which had to be noticed? Oh well. Almost a funny story.
I think you are making it more complex than it was.
They buy-in on a table for $10 per chip, 3 of them, each a different colour. They each rat hole 5 chips.
The hi-roller goes over to the table, buys in for $1000 a chip and gets assigned a colour where he has the matching colour. Boom, you're up $5k instantly. IF the colour doesn't match, you make a couple of low variance bets and walk away. A smart team would wait until the only colour not in play was one they had available. $2.7m with +$5k sessions is only 540 sessions. No reason they wouldnt get 3-5 sessions in over a 25 hour period.
Quote: charliepatrickThey would have to pocket 20 of each colour (otherwise there would be an incomplete stack when the first player(s) cashed in). The other thing is whether, in Monaco, they use cash chips at [French] Roulette rather than each player having their own colour at American Roulette.
The incomplete(or extra) stack was my point as well.
In French Roulette there is only one zero. I don't think there is any other difference? I've played at a single zero/French table elsewhere and they had color chips for each player. Never in fact seen a roulette table without colors.
Quote: HeyMrDJI think you are making it more complex than it was.
They buy-in on a table for $10 per chip, 3 of them, each a different colour. They each rat hole 5 chips.
The hi-roller goes over to the table, buys in for $1000 a chip and gets assigned a colour where he has the matching colour. Boom, you're up $5k instantly. IF the colour doesn't match, you make a couple of low variance bets and walk away. A smart team would wait until the only colour not in play was one they had available. $2.7m with +$5k sessions is only 540 sessions. No reason they wouldnt get 3-5 sessions in over a 25 hour period.
I think...worldwide...you can pick your color from what's available. However, to avoid suspicion perhaps they allowed the dealer to pick the color for him/them. You get away with it the first time, then the second...well you get better and bolder I'm sure. Usually doesn't take a year to detect such a scam but here we have proof it did...
Not at French Roulette - essentially they use roulette-only cash chips. The one shown was used for Trente et Quarante when I went many years ago. They use larger valued ones for roulette.Quote: NokTangI think...worldwide...you can pick your color....
Quote: charliepatrickNot at French Roulette - essentially they use roulette-only cash chips. The one shown was used for Trente et Quarante when I went many years ago. They use larger valued ones for roulette.
So without different colors, how do they know which player to pay?
Or else its boxed high level chips that are worked in to the "inventory" where auditors merely count the boxes.
Quote: FleaStiff
Or else its boxed high level chips that are worked in to the "inventory" where auditors merely count the boxes.
So you have say 100 boxes of $500.usd chips and someone on the inside works in one box of call it $5.usd chips into the box and the switch isn't discovered for a long time(if ever)?
