
A Nevada-based casino table games developer, manufacturer and distributor is wanting to reassure worried shareholders after the company’s California ‘suitability to do business’ liberties were revoked by that state’s Gambling Control Commission recently.
Defending Letter
Galaxy Gaming CEO Robert Saucier has sent a four-page missive to investors, claiming that all the issues decried by the Ca regulators within their decisions stemmed from a ‘predecessor entity that ceased business operation in 2009 and dissolved. The procedures failed to directly involve Galaxy,’ Saucier went on, adding that ‘it is business as usual [at Galaxy ] even as we continue to provide our products and solutions with no interruption.’
With Galaxy doing a great deal of its business in the Golden State especially with many Indian tribes who have casinos Saucier wished to guarantee clients and investors that Galaxy’s ‘gaming license with California tribes is unchanged and in good standing. Likewise, our status in all other jurisdictions we serve is additionally unchanged and remains in good standing. In fact, we continue to seek and find new licenses and approvals in additional jurisdictions,’ the letter went on to express.
Conflicting Stories
And this is where things have, um, a confusing that is little. All evidence points to the contrary because while Saucier emphatically states in his letter that the California Gambling Control Commission didn’t rule against him or his company in their recent closed regulatory meeting. In fact, it is 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. She’s got described him as ‘evasive, intentionally dishonest, and misleading in his response to questions.’ She adds that ‘in a highly managed industry such as gaming, the failure to be forthcoming with relevant information was inexcusable.’
Whatever Saucier is trying to persuade his minions of, it nonetheless appears that Galaxy Gaming LLC will not have the ability to run as a vendor that is tribal California following a Gambling Commission decision. In fact, he won’t even have the ability to request a reconsideration unless brand new evidence crops up.
Details of ‘Can’t Lose’ Promotion do not stay Well with Revel Customers
Enjoy Atlantic City ended up being designed as a Las Vegas-style resort in the city’s famous Boardwalk; however a start that is rocky the casino to file for bankruptcy simply ten months after it opened certainly one of the many disastrous starts for a casino in recent memory.
Summertime ‘Refunds’
That’s why Revel designed unique summer time promotions, in order to get players back through the casino’s doorways. Within an ad campaign that admitted things got off to a beginning that is rough Revel invited players right back in July, with the vow of a ‘can’t lose’ promotion on slot machines. In accordance with the ads, players would receive all of their losses back on slots through to the end of the month, a deal that many gamblers simply couldn’t pass up.
Unfortuitously, numerous players didn’t read the print that is fine. And whenever they discovered just what the promotion entailed, some weren’t pleased with just what they would to get their refunds.
‘I have a very definition that is different of ‘refund’ than the Revel and I also believe a most of other people would concur that a reimbursement implies you will receive a complete reimbursement of funds,’ customer Ed Conti told The Star-Ledger after visiting Revel. ‘ I do not feel it’s right.’
Read the Fine Printing
The fine print on the offer from the casino makes the promotion a little less incredible than it may look at first. Some of the restrictions are instead tame: gamblers must lose at least $100 to qualify, the loss rebates are capped at $100,000, and table game losses aren’t covered.
It’s the real manner in which the ‘refunds’ are provided to players that has Conti and others upset. Players can receive their refunds only https://myfreepokies.com/more-chilli-slot-review/ 5 percent at time, with every ‘block’ of 5 percent being available in one regarding the 20 weeks after the advertising ends. If a gambler doesn’t go to the casino in a given week, they won’t be able to receive that percentage of the refund. In addition, the refund doesn’t pay out in money, but in free play credits that could be used in the machines; it cannot be directly cashed away.
Some might say that the few conditions on an offer such as this one are to be expected: after all, it would be foolish to think that a casino could simply give back most of its winnings to customers, even over a short time period. But, the fact that the details associated with the ‘refund’ program are flashed on television ads for merely a second and in very little print could mean that Revel is skirting laws on clarity in advertising, if not really breaking them.
Whatever the appropriate standing of the ad, the type associated with advertising has turned off one or more gambler from visiting Revel once again.
‘When we told my mom relating to this she said, ‘That’s not what the ad on TV said,” Conti said. ‘My mom hasn’t gone to the Revel and will not go in the future.’
Federal Theft Trial Begins for Former Pequot Tribe Chairman
Michael Thomas, a disgraced previous Mashantucket Pequot Tribal country chairman, happens to be facing federal theft charges involving inappropriate use of a tribe-issued bank card during hus tenure from 2003 to 2009. Thomas, who chaired the Indian tribe that owns Connecticut’s Foxwoods Casino, is charged with utilizing the company card to personally rack up $80,000 in limousine service costs to get his mother to and from her appointments that are medical according to your prosecutor’s opening statements at his trial.
Costly, Substantial Limo Rides
$80,000? That have to’ve been close to 200 round trips, by our conservative estimation. Thomas’ protection is he decided Mom could only see the doc arriving via limo that he was having financial hardships when. The real charges took destination for 2 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 protection attorney, Paul Thomas, says it is up to the jury to determine if those costs were really prohibited.
‘Was it impermissible to charge travel with respect to his ill, dying mother to get treatment?’ said defense attorney Thomas. Nice touch, there. The lawyer added that tribal leaders frequently buy gifts for high rollers with these cards, though what that is due to his mother, we’re maybe not completely sure. Irrespective, it appears that Michael Thomas never submitted required expense states detailing his ill mother’s limo solution. Also not assisting the chairman that is former instance ended up being testimony from Barbara Poirier, the tribe’s manager of wellness services, whom noted that the tribe makes transportation services available for members who have to reach and from medical appointments.
Dirty Laundry…or underwear
Additionally apparently perhaps not for Mom there had been some Victoria’s Secret credit fees made towards the account that is tribal. Probably for a rain party ceremony or something, we’re guessing. Prosecutors brought to tax that is light showing Thomas’ income of $863,000 in 2008 had fallen to $354,000 by 2009, therefore obviously anyone could connect to their suffering.
Defendant Thomas has pleaded maybe not accountable to one count of theft from A indian tribal organization, and to two counts of theft concerning an Indian tribal government getting federal funds. His brother Steven Thomas that is being tried separately was also indicted early this year. 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 for the tribe’s natural resources department.
Your family that steals together, appeals together? That’s lot of wampum.
UK Debt Collector Makes Bad Casino Bets Using Collected Funds
A Coventry, UK debt collector decided it was a good idea to gamble away a £6,000 (over $9,000) agreement which he had recovered from the debtor on behalf of his employer, to be able to recover his or her own £30 ($46) petrol bill.
Maybe Not Licensed to Steal
Unfortunately for him, this is perhaps not a good clear idea after all. In reality, it was probably the stupidest decision he ever made, as he’s now been sentenced to 12 months in jail, suspended for 2 years, and is forced to do 80 hours of unpaid work for his employer, and spend right back settlement to your 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 profit February year that is last after being instructed to get two £6,000 contracts for Face 2 Face, an organization that executes warrants and recover debts on behalf of utility companies.
Upon collecting the debts, it had been Chatha’s task to deposit the funds into the company’s account within a day. However, seizing the chance to create a little money that is extra the 34-year-old alternatively deposited just one of the contracted amounts, and tottered on over up to a local casino where he gambled away all the money during the period of several days.
When questioned by authorities, he attempted to claim that it had been all just an easy banking error, and that one £6,000 deposit had been compensated over the counter, even though the other was deposited towards the Face 2 Face account via a deposit machine that is automated.
Surveillance Video Tells the Tale
However, whenever police took to the CCTV footage through the bank branch, they determined that Chatha was in fact making a false testimony, and eventually tracked him down again in February in 2010, after he had changed their address, and unveiled their findings, which left him no choice but to admit their actions and admit the theft.
‘we had a need to buy 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. I spent some cash to invest in my petrol costs, and ended up being then wanting to get the money back without anyone knowing, so I went up to a bookmakers and a casino,’ he said, incorporating that utilizing the force of attempting to win back his losses, ‘We tried it all.’
The judge, however, ended up beingn’t buying it.
‘ I do not believe your account of what happened, but I can’t be sure exactly what did occur to it,’ claimed Judge Richard Griffith-Jones upon sentencing the debt collector. ‘It is very important that this didn’t continue for a period that is long of. It was one impulsive act to take the money, and you pleaded responsible during the first opportunity.’