A Nevada-based casino table games developer, manufacturer and distributor is wanting to reassure worried shareholders after the company’s California ‘suitability to complete company’ liberties had been revoked by that state’s Gambling Control Commission recently.
Galaxy Gaming CEO Robert Saucier has sent a four-page missive to investors, claiming that all the issues decried by the California regulators within their decisions stemmed from a ‘predecessor entity that ceased business procedure in 2009 and dissolved. The procedures would not involve Galaxy, directly’ Saucier went on, adding that ‘it is business as usual [at Galaxy ] even as we continue to deliver our products and services without the interruption.’
With Galaxy doing plenty of its business in the Golden State particularly with many tribes that are indian have gambling enterprises Saucier wanted to guarantee clients and investors that Galaxy’s ‘gaming permit with California tribes is unchanged and in good standing. Likewise, our status in most other jurisdictions we serve is also unchanged and remains in good standing. In fact, we continue to seek and get licenses that are new approvals in extra jurisdictions,’ the letter went on to state.
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 reality, it is the CEO’s very checkered past involving misstatements, witholding information, and providing misleading information that seems to have gotten him into the pickle by which he now finds himself. So who are shareholders to believe?
According to Administrative Law Judge Catherine Frink, not Saucier. She’s described him as ‘evasive, intentionally dishonest, and misleading in his response to questions.’ She adds that ‘in a highly regulated industry such as video gaming, the failure become forthcoming with relevant information was inexcusable.’
Whatever Saucier is attempting to convince his minions of, it nonetheless seems that Galaxy Gaming LLC will no longer have the ability to run as a vendor that is tribal California following the Gambling Commission decision. In reality, he will not even manage to request a reconsideration unless new evidence crops up.
Details of ‘Can’t Lose’ Promotion Don’t Sit Well with Revel Customers
Enjoy Atlantic City had been designed as a Las Vegas-style resort regarding the city’s famous Boardwalk; however a rocky start caused the casino to file for bankruptcy simply ten months after it opened one of the most disastrous starts for a casino casinopokies777.com in recent memory.
That’s why Revel designed unique summer time promotions, so that you can get players right back through the casino’s doorways. In a ad campaign that admitted things got off to a beginning that is rough Revel invited players right back in July, with the promise of a ‘can’t lose’ promotion on slot machines. Based on the ads, players would receive all of their losses back on slots through to the end of the a deal that many gamblers simply couldn’t pass up month.
Unfortunately, many players didn’t see the fine print. And whenever they found out just what the advertising entailed, some weren’t happy with what they’d to get their refunds.
‘we employ a definition that is different of ‘refund’ compared to the Revel and I also believe a most of others would agree totally that a reimbursement implies that you will receive the full reimbursement of funds,’ customer Ed Conti told The Star-Ledger after visiting Revel. ‘ I don’t feel it is right.’
Read the Fine Printing
The print that is fine the offer from the casino makes the promotion a little less amazing than it may seem initially. A number of the restrictions are rather 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 method by which the ‘refunds’ are fond of players that has Conti and others upset. Players can get their refunds only 5 percent at a right time, with every ‘block’ of 5 percent being available in one associated with the 20 weeks following the promotion ends. If a gambler doesn’t look at the casino in a given week, they won’t have the ability 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 can not be directly cashed down.
Some might say that a 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 surrender most of its winnings to customers, even over a short time frame. However, the fact that the details of the ‘refund’ program are flashed on tv ads for just a 2nd and in very little printing could mean that Revel is skirting laws on clarity in advertising, if not actually breaking them.
Regardless of standing that is legal of ad, the type for the advertising has turned off one or more gambler from visiting Revel again.
‘When I told my mom about it she stated, ‘That’s not exactly what the ad on TV said,” Conti stated. ‘My mother have not attended the Revel and will maybe not go later on.’
Federal Theft Trial Starts for Former Pequot Tribe Chairman
Michael Thomas, a disgraced previous Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation president, is currently facing theft that is federal involving inappropriate utilization of a tribe-issued credit 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 expenses to get his mother to and from her medical appointments, according towards the prosecutor’s opening statements at his trial.
Expensive, Extensive Limo Rides
$80,000? That has to’ve been close to 200 round trips, by our conservative estimation. Thomas’ defense is that he was having monetary hardships as he decided Mom could just begin to see the doc showing up via limo. The charges that are actual destination for two years between 2007 and 2009 just as the tribe began grappling with tighter available funds after being struck by both the recession and much more neighboring states’ land casino competition.
Thomas’ unrelated defense lawyer, Paul Thomas, says it is up to the jury to find out if those expenses were really not allowed.
‘Was it impermissible to charge travel with respect to his sick, 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 has to do with his mother, we’re maybe not completely sure. Regardless, it appears that Michael Thomas never submitted required expense states detailing his unwell mom’s limo service. Also not helping the chairman that is former case ended up being testimony from Barbara Poirier, the tribe’s director of health services, whom noted that the tribe makes transportation services available for members who have to arrive at and from medical appointments.
Dirty Laundry…or underwear
Additionally apparently not for mother there had been some Victoria’s Secret credit charges made towards the tribal account. Probably for a rain dance something or ceremony, 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 relate to his suffering.
Defendant Thomas has pleaded perhaps not accountable to one count of theft from A indian tribal organization, and to two counts of theft concerning an Indian tribal government receiving federal funds. His brother Steven Thomas who is being tried separately was also indicted early this 12 months. 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.
The family that steals together, appeals together? That’s a complete great deal of wampum.
UK Debt Collector Makes casino that is bad Using Collected Funds
A Coventry, UK debt collector decided it was a idea that is good gamble away a £6,000 (over $9,000) contract which he had restored from the debtor on behalf of his employer, to be able to recoup his or her own £30 ($46) petrol bill.
Not Licensed to Steal
Unfortunately for him, it was not a good idea after all. In reality, it had been probably the decision that is stupidest he ever made, as he’s now been sentenced to 12 months in prison, suspended for two years, and will likely be forced to accomplish 80 hours of unpaid work for his company, and pay right back payment towards the sum of £3,600.
Sandeep Chatha pleaded guilty to stealing the cash after their employers noticed the sum that is missing called in police.
Chatha took the chance to take the money in February a year ago, after being instructed to pick up two £6,000 contracts for Face 2 Face, a business that executes warrants and recover debts on behalf of utility companies.
Upon collecting the debts, it was Chatha’s job to deposit the funds into the company’s account within a day. However, seizing the ability to make a small money that is extra the 34-year-old instead deposited one among the contracted quantities, and tottered on over 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 absolutely was all just a simple banking error, and that one £6,000 deposit had been paid over the counter, whilst the other was deposited towards the Face 2 Face account via a automatic deposit machine.
Surveillance Video Tells the Tale
However, when police took to the CCTV footage through the bank branch, they determined that Chatha was in fact creating a false testimony, and eventually monitored him down again in February this season, after he had changed their address, and unveiled their findings, which left him no option but to admit their actions and admit the theft.
‘we needed seriously to purchase petrol while I was working,’ said Chatha, whom chose to represent himself. ‘I was not thinking directly. It absolutely was never ever my intention to simply take it all. We spent some funds to fund my petrol costs, and had been then attempting to get the cash back without anyone knowing, and so I went to a bookmakers and a casino,’ he stated, adding that with the force of trying to win back his losses, ‘We used it all.’
The judge, however, had beenn’t buying it.
‘ I do not believe your account of what happened, but I can’t be certain just what did occur to it,’ reported Judge Richard Griffith-Jones upon sentencing your debt collector. ‘It is important that this would not continue for a period that is long of. It was one impulsive act to take the money, and also you pleaded bad during the first opportunity.’