I am not trying give you a hard time but we all know the answer. You remain silent while people are banging their heads off the wall - it just ain't right - and the bottom line is not one person here would have sent one penny to Panam if it were not for you. I would imagine that you are trying to work something out but you should be vocal in what you are attempting to do.
Lander-
Yeah. I think the figure was something like 13 dimes or so. He said he paid them, even though it was less than his "settle figure" (just to make them more liquid to pay off the other players).
However, one thing wasn't brought up. When Shrink took their advertising banner off the site, did he refund any advertising fees (if any) they may have paid in advance?
Yeah. I think the figure was something like 13 dimes or so. He said he paid them, even though it was less than his "settle figure" (just to make them more liquid to pay off the other players).
However, one thing wasn't brought up. When Shrink took their advertising banner off the site, did he refund any advertising fees (if any) they may have paid in advance?
Seymour,
As Lander previously posted, I owed Pan Am money and settled earlier than what was agreed upon so that some more gamblers could get paid...
TheRx.com fulfilled its contractual agreement with regards to advertising, and had PanAm not been slow paying, we'd have still kept them up on this site...
Unfortunately, everyone who trusted my judgement with regards to Pan Am is getting hurt and I take full responsibility for allowing this to happen...
I only wish there was a better way to prevent these things from happening in the future...
THE SHRINK
As Lander previously posted, I owed Pan Am money and settled earlier than what was agreed upon so that some more gamblers could get paid...
TheRx.com fulfilled its contractual agreement with regards to advertising, and had PanAm not been slow paying, we'd have still kept them up on this site...
Unfortunately, everyone who trusted my judgement with regards to Pan Am is getting hurt and I take full responsibility for allowing this to happen...
I only wish there was a better way to prevent these things from happening in the future...
THE SHRINK
good post truth,
That's the mentality of the US right now I'm not the one to blame for my own stupidity it's always someone else.
reality check Shrink just puts up their banner gives you his PAID opinion about that and you jackasses follow that.... You get burned it's your own damn fault for following blindly.
Do your own research befor eyou send ANY book your hard earned cash.. And if you can't afford to lose it due to a stiff job don't ****ing bet offshore.
That's reality... Now grow up and be pissed at yourselves that sent your cash to stiff joints not some Shrinky dinky ex website owner that got greased to give his opinion on a newly starting book
That's the mentality of the US right now I'm not the one to blame for my own stupidity it's always someone else.
reality check Shrink just puts up their banner gives you his PAID opinion about that and you jackasses follow that.... You get burned it's your own damn fault for following blindly.
Do your own research befor eyou send ANY book your hard earned cash.. And if you can't afford to lose it due to a stiff job don't ****ing bet offshore.
That's reality... Now grow up and be pissed at yourselves that sent your cash to stiff joints not some Shrinky dinky ex website owner that got greased to give his opinion on a newly starting book
this is from betus.com
Betus.com is fully Licensed & Bonded.We've been a leader in the offshore gaming industry for over 10 years.
Now how many of you are going to play there because they are bonded. If you were playing at panam because of the bond, you made a mistake. More reasonable assumption would have been that their managment team should have been able to raise more money to fund the book, than they did. I think thats what caught most people by suprise. These guys should have known what it would cost to get them going, and they could even survive one football season albeit a bad one. CLearly they knew they were having major probelms, becasue they kep offering 20% bonuses. There is now way you can make money by advertising a 20% bonus and reduced vig in the forums.
I'm just lucky I got out early enough. back in the spring I wasn't so luck with PTS.
Betus.com is fully Licensed & Bonded.We've been a leader in the offshore gaming industry for over 10 years.
Now how many of you are going to play there because they are bonded. If you were playing at panam because of the bond, you made a mistake. More reasonable assumption would have been that their managment team should have been able to raise more money to fund the book, than they did. I think thats what caught most people by suprise. These guys should have known what it would cost to get them going, and they could even survive one football season albeit a bad one. CLearly they knew they were having major probelms, becasue they kep offering 20% bonuses. There is now way you can make money by advertising a 20% bonus and reduced vig in the forums.
I'm just lucky I got out early enough. back in the spring I wasn't so luck with PTS.
"Unfortunately, everyone who trusted my judgement with regards to Panam is getting hurt and I take full responsibility for allowing this to happen..."
Shrink- An amazing statement and my opinion of you has been bumped up. Think that takes some balls to say that.
I personally think that each person needs to due their own due diligence in these situations and not rely on any one opinion.
Fishead made a great thread in regard to risk/reward and think it should govern players in where they decide to post up.
I hope all players are treated fairly in this situation and good luck.
Shrink- An amazing statement and my opinion of you has been bumped up. Think that takes some balls to say that.
I personally think that each person needs to due their own due diligence in these situations and not rely on any one opinion.
Fishead made a great thread in regard to risk/reward and think it should govern players in where they decide to post up.
I hope all players are treated fairly in this situation and good luck.
"I personally think that each person needs to due their own due diligence in these situations and not rely on any one opinion."
Interesting - Buzz, exactly how does one go about doing that if one does not live in Costa Rica, Panama, etc, or has personal knowledge of the folks involved behind the scenes? Someone who lives in the U.S., for instance, and is not part of that 'in' group? I keep hearing this advice but if 'insiders' like the OTHER Buzz at SBR and the Shrink are snookered (SBR had them as B- as late as Jan. 21), that leaves only 2 possibilities:
(1) The advice you give for 'due diligence' is okay to a point (the most obvious stuff, like a 'deposit only' book and the worst books), but past that point it has absolutely no meaning whatsoever and is only trotted out once a book starts to float belly-up - yet I have not yet heard one good piece of 'diligence' you might have suggested that players perform that would have avoided panam (and waiting for 365 days for a book to succeed is NOT due diligence). I'm curious as to WHAT 'due diligence' SBR performed when they had rated panam so highly as of January 21?
(2) That SBR and the Shrink performed no 'due diligence' worthy of the name - they simply took some people at their word - so if that's true, exactly how are the rest of us supposed to truly examine a book?
I have chump change at panam compared to a lot of people, so I'm not bitching now about the cash (it was a 'risk-reward' situation) - but I am bitching about these 'after the fact you should-have-dones'.
p.s. SBR just posted this today:
"02/05/04 BetPanAm lowered from D- to F+"
I guess the 'early' rush to judgement vis-a-vis panam wasn't that early.
p.s. I edited this as I'd mistaken the 2 Buzzes - apologies to both.
[This message was edited by Jazz on February 05, 2004 at 01:05 PM.]
Interesting - Buzz, exactly how does one go about doing that if one does not live in Costa Rica, Panama, etc, or has personal knowledge of the folks involved behind the scenes? Someone who lives in the U.S., for instance, and is not part of that 'in' group? I keep hearing this advice but if 'insiders' like the OTHER Buzz at SBR and the Shrink are snookered (SBR had them as B- as late as Jan. 21), that leaves only 2 possibilities:
(1) The advice you give for 'due diligence' is okay to a point (the most obvious stuff, like a 'deposit only' book and the worst books), but past that point it has absolutely no meaning whatsoever and is only trotted out once a book starts to float belly-up - yet I have not yet heard one good piece of 'diligence' you might have suggested that players perform that would have avoided panam (and waiting for 365 days for a book to succeed is NOT due diligence). I'm curious as to WHAT 'due diligence' SBR performed when they had rated panam so highly as of January 21?
(2) That SBR and the Shrink performed no 'due diligence' worthy of the name - they simply took some people at their word - so if that's true, exactly how are the rest of us supposed to truly examine a book?
I have chump change at panam compared to a lot of people, so I'm not bitching now about the cash (it was a 'risk-reward' situation) - but I am bitching about these 'after the fact you should-have-dones'.
p.s. SBR just posted this today:
"02/05/04 BetPanAm lowered from D- to F+"
I guess the 'early' rush to judgement vis-a-vis panam wasn't that early.
p.s. I edited this as I'd mistaken the 2 Buzzes - apologies to both.
[This message was edited by Jazz on February 05, 2004 at 01:05 PM.]
Thanks, SD - well, Buzz has the bully pulpit at SBR and I've seen this same advice trotted out not only by him in this topic but by others - yet I am mystified as to how your average Joe can do this diligence when SBR, the Shrink, and others who supposedly are in a far better position to know fail continually.
p.s. Sorry, Buzzsaw, cokehead and SD pointed out it's Ravanuagh with that, not you - must be getting old - lol - apologies - I'll correct it. But the general point is still valid - for all those clamoring for us to do the diligence, please enlighten us as to exactly what to do.
p.s. Sorry, Buzzsaw, cokehead and SD pointed out it's Ravanuagh with that, not you - must be getting old - lol - apologies - I'll correct it. But the general point is still valid - for all those clamoring for us to do the diligence, please enlighten us as to exactly what to do.
