Wild Bill your Article Sour Grapes isnt Accurate anymore.

[nets2k2]

SOUR GRAPES 11/05/03 - Wild Bill

It’s amazing how people act when sports books are in trouble. They have the nerve to complain about anything and everything even when another company comes to the rescue of that book.
Luckily, my losses with bad sports books have been nearly nothing. Yet, I can easily imagine how I would feel. I would be upset to a degree about losing money. But if another book bailed them out, the least of my worries would be a rollover agreement!

I mean come on, give me a break. I know you want your money and I know you aren't happy about the situation. But to just complain and say you are getting screwed is not the way to behave.

Getting screwed is when a book takes off with your money and you never see a dime. Being forced to rollover five times isn't the end of the world. After all, you were going to bet the money weren't you? Or were you just caught getting greedy going for a bonus. So now you are mad because you don't get your money right away?

"If it was a buy-out, what's with the five-time rollover?” asked an RX poster. “What about the people who just want their money? In my opinion, they get screwed not saved."

Now tell me, what business in this world would bail out another business? Then, to build its goodwill, imagine that company just letting the customer walk away with money he will never give back in future business. How ridiculous. A book is a business, not a charity.

Unfortunately they can't just make everyone whole immediately, but think about the math. If you are even a 50/50 bettor, turning over your bankroll five times implies that you will lose less than 50 percent of it if your results go exactly as expected.

I am sure most people that worried about the demise of Gamblers Avenue are relieved they at least now have an account with a sports book that almost everyone would consider solvent.

Sure it would be nice if Gamblers Avenue was able to live up to its end of the bargain of being a normal solvent book. But certainly most would agree it’s much better than the alternative. And for those of us who weren't personally financially involved with Gamblers Avenue, it still is great news.

If another sports book goes completely belly-up, like Aces Gold, it badly affects the industry as a whole more than anyone seems to comprehend. Even one book that goes under without recourse is terrible public relations for the industry.

That’s especially true when getting fresh money from ‘square’ bettors that most definitely won't send their money offshore if the scandal of a bankrupt book is fresh on the wire.



Gamblers Avenue posted they sold the book and if they did not sell it players were going to get paid. So this post makes a point...

Rude
Certifiably Crazy
posted November 05, 2003 03:10 AM
Read Mikes statement about selling Gamblers Avenue.

He says, "There was never a question of if the players were going to get paid or not, they were going to get paid even if we did not sell the company to Royal or any other entity."

So here is what I get out of this.

1.You Sell To Royal Sports - We Get 5x Rollover

2. No-One Buys Gamblers Avenue - WE GET OUR MONEY!!!

What's the problem here guys ???

You guys keep sayng how great it was for Royal To come Buy Gamblers Avenue, but if no one did, we all would have been paid regardless according to Mike Silver.

Does this make any sence to you guys ???

Rude


It's not sour grapes anymore. It is theft.

 

[Rude]

Hey Wild Bill,

I'm looking forward to reading tommorows article that you write based on what's happened these past few hours.

Thanks,

Rude

 

[WildBill]

So you are mad that you got money stolen by someone else and you are going to take it out and call theft on the book that came in and gave you free money? Come on, we all understand that people are upset at the predicament GA got into, but you know if you or anyone else involved didn't like the terms of the Royal deal, I am sure you could tell them not to transfer your account and you can call the principals of GA for about 6 months before realizing you won't recover anything. Yes that was theft, but only by GA. Sour grapes is expecting Royal or any other book to just come in and pay everyone off for the losses incurred by another book. Rollovers aren't exactly bad either, if you are a solid handicapper and have multiple outs then surely adding another out that requires you to give them a shot at the money they essentially are giving you isn't that bad considering the alternative.

 

[JESUS]

IMO Royal doesn't buy GA without the 5x rollover would you? Royal needs the 5x rollover to guarantee themselves some profit. Royal doesn't buy GA then GA should refund all the players money, but probably couldn't cover that so Royal steps in implies a 5x rollover and the players now have to play their money 5x times before making a withdrawal and Royal has the upper hand. Is this fair to the players no, but i rather take a chance on playing my money 5x then not playing at all. Samething with locals you find a good one you stay, but how many have i found that stiff you too many to count. Samething with players you take the good with the bad that's gambling folks.

 

[WINNINGHAND]

good point heysoos. i will take the rollover as opposed to an outright stiff. nets, you are wrong in terms of the fact that too many people want to complain when in fact they are the one's culpable in most situations, and they want to point blame. Wild bill, your articles are usually right on.

 

[Jazz]

Players cannot win, can they? When they accuse books who offer bonuses like this of having problems, they get excoriated on the forums for not having proof a book is in trouble. When some players join up anyway and then problems hit due to the BOOK'S FAULT, then those players are made to feel stupid for having thought the book was not in any kind of trouble in spite of the bonus offers.

In other words, looks to me like the player is NEVER right - how fvcked up is that?