One of the reasons Freedom said the bonus might have been there is because of many books pulling out of the US market recently and Beted trying to snag some new customers. Kinda makes sense. Only problem is the "fact" that they didn't except e-check (which goes through the DOJ processors) and only accepted moneygram and western union (and credit card?). That is the sketch part. This is where some players would contend that they got "stiffed" and their money stolen. I'm guessing most players would take this as an assumption that Beted knew their funds may be or are confiscated and setup a bonus that was "cash only" to get money delivered directly to them. What adds to the "sketchiness" is the fact that there was no communication to the players, which makes it easy for players to blame them as figures that took their money, ran away, and then denied ownership of the company.
Great info Paddy as this really puts this situation into a whole new perspective. One thing I noticed is you said they will negotiate a plea deal within the next few days. Does this mean we can expect to see some real development or play-out of this story in the coming week (because literally nothing new has happened so far regarding the DOJ since this all started)?
0
One of the reasons Freedom said the bonus might have been there is because of many books pulling out of the US market recently and Beted trying to snag some new customers. Kinda makes sense. Only problem is the "fact" that they didn't except e-check (which goes through the DOJ processors) and only accepted moneygram and western union (and credit card?). That is the sketch part. This is where some players would contend that they got "stiffed" and their money stolen. I'm guessing most players would take this as an assumption that Beted knew their funds may be or are confiscated and setup a bonus that was "cash only" to get money delivered directly to them. What adds to the "sketchiness" is the fact that there was no communication to the players, which makes it easy for players to blame them as figures that took their money, ran away, and then denied ownership of the company.
Great info Paddy as this really puts this situation into a whole new perspective. One thing I noticed is you said they will negotiate a plea deal within the next few days. Does this mean we can expect to see some real development or play-out of this story in the coming week (because literally nothing new has happened so far regarding the DOJ since this all started)?
One of the reasons Freedom said the bonus might have been there is because of many books pulling out of the US market recently and Beted trying to snag some new customers. Kinda makes sense. Only problem is the "fact" that they didn't except e-check (which goes through the DOJ processors) and only accepted moneygram and western union (and credit card?). That is the sketch part. This is where some players would contend that they got "stiffed" and their money stolen. I'm guessing most players would take this as an assumption that Beted knew their funds may be or are confiscated and setup a bonus that was "cash only" to get money delivered directly to them. What adds to the "sketchiness" is the fact that there was no communication to the players, which makes it easy for players to blame them as figures that took their money, ran away, and then denied ownership of the company.
Great info Paddy as this really puts this situation into a whole new perspective. One thing I noticed is you said they will negotiate a plea deal within the next few days. Does this mean we can expect to see some real development or play-out of this story in the coming week (because literally nothing new has happened so far regarding the DOJ since this all started)?
jdamon...thats the main resaon im so pissed. If i was someone who played at beted for years and lost my balance there when they closed, id still be upset but nowhere near as pissed. The ONLY reason i deposited there is becuase of the scam email they sent me with the ridiculous bonus offer in order to flat out steal my money. After seeing that covers had them as the #1 rated book, i figured they werent that bad and it was worth a shot. Guess i was wrong.
0
Quote Originally Posted by jdamon26:
One of the reasons Freedom said the bonus might have been there is because of many books pulling out of the US market recently and Beted trying to snag some new customers. Kinda makes sense. Only problem is the "fact" that they didn't except e-check (which goes through the DOJ processors) and only accepted moneygram and western union (and credit card?). That is the sketch part. This is where some players would contend that they got "stiffed" and their money stolen. I'm guessing most players would take this as an assumption that Beted knew their funds may be or are confiscated and setup a bonus that was "cash only" to get money delivered directly to them. What adds to the "sketchiness" is the fact that there was no communication to the players, which makes it easy for players to blame them as figures that took their money, ran away, and then denied ownership of the company.
Great info Paddy as this really puts this situation into a whole new perspective. One thing I noticed is you said they will negotiate a plea deal within the next few days. Does this mean we can expect to see some real development or play-out of this story in the coming week (because literally nothing new has happened so far regarding the DOJ since this all started)?
jdamon...thats the main resaon im so pissed. If i was someone who played at beted for years and lost my balance there when they closed, id still be upset but nowhere near as pissed. The ONLY reason i deposited there is becuase of the scam email they sent me with the ridiculous bonus offer in order to flat out steal my money. After seeing that covers had them as the #1 rated book, i figured they werent that bad and it was worth a shot. Guess i was wrong.
One of the reasons Freedom said the bonus might have been there is because of many books pulling out of the US market recently and Beted trying to snag some new customers. Kinda makes sense. Only problem is the "fact" that they didn't except e-check (which goes through the DOJ processors) and only accepted moneygram and western union (and credit card?). That is the sketch part. This is where some players would contend that they got "stiffed" and their money stolen. I'm guessing most players would take this as an assumption that Beted knew their funds may be or are confiscated and setup a bonus that was "cash only" to get money delivered directly to them. What adds to the "sketchiness" is the fact that there was no communication to the players, which makes it easy for players to blame them as figures that took their money, ran away, and then denied ownership of the company.
Great info Paddy as this really puts this situation into a whole new perspective. One thing I noticed is you said they will negotiate a plea deal within the next few days. Does this mean we can expect to see some real development or play-out of this story in the coming week (because literally nothing new has happened so far regarding the DOJ since this all started)?
You are very right that that is the sketchy part. However, I don't know how BetEd would know trouble was coming until it was absolutely too late. I doubt there would be any ESP involved. It is possible though that a few days early, the pipeline stopped, i.e. the US controlled pipeline stopped sending funds on to the Panama bank. That may have aroused suspicion, and triggered the switch of deposit methods.
As to the upcoming processes, you can take it from the fact that Parchomchuk and Wright voluntarily flew to Baltimore that they are going there to talk. It is much more likely, if there really are these phantom owners, that the phantom is Calvin Ayre himself, rather than anyone at Covers. That would certainly be the Calvin Ayre I know. He would think himself extremely clever to have his two mutts name the Covers lads, and at the same time get his revenge for them cutting his nuts off here.
There is nobody in online gaming from BC that I know of that isn't swinging from Calvin Ayre's willnots.
0
Quote Originally Posted by jdamon26:
One of the reasons Freedom said the bonus might have been there is because of many books pulling out of the US market recently and Beted trying to snag some new customers. Kinda makes sense. Only problem is the "fact" that they didn't except e-check (which goes through the DOJ processors) and only accepted moneygram and western union (and credit card?). That is the sketch part. This is where some players would contend that they got "stiffed" and their money stolen. I'm guessing most players would take this as an assumption that Beted knew their funds may be or are confiscated and setup a bonus that was "cash only" to get money delivered directly to them. What adds to the "sketchiness" is the fact that there was no communication to the players, which makes it easy for players to blame them as figures that took their money, ran away, and then denied ownership of the company.
Great info Paddy as this really puts this situation into a whole new perspective. One thing I noticed is you said they will negotiate a plea deal within the next few days. Does this mean we can expect to see some real development or play-out of this story in the coming week (because literally nothing new has happened so far regarding the DOJ since this all started)?
You are very right that that is the sketchy part. However, I don't know how BetEd would know trouble was coming until it was absolutely too late. I doubt there would be any ESP involved. It is possible though that a few days early, the pipeline stopped, i.e. the US controlled pipeline stopped sending funds on to the Panama bank. That may have aroused suspicion, and triggered the switch of deposit methods.
As to the upcoming processes, you can take it from the fact that Parchomchuk and Wright voluntarily flew to Baltimore that they are going there to talk. It is much more likely, if there really are these phantom owners, that the phantom is Calvin Ayre himself, rather than anyone at Covers. That would certainly be the Calvin Ayre I know. He would think himself extremely clever to have his two mutts name the Covers lads, and at the same time get his revenge for them cutting his nuts off here.
There is nobody in online gaming from BC that I know of that isn't swinging from Calvin Ayre's willnots.
You are very right that that is the sketchy part. However, I don't know how BetEd would know trouble was coming until it was absolutely too late. I doubt there would be any ESP involved. It is possible though that a few days early, the pipeline stopped, i.e. the US controlled pipeline stopped sending funds on to the Panama bank. That may have aroused suspicion, and triggered the switch of deposit methods.
As to the upcoming processes, you can take it from the fact that Parchomchuk and Wright voluntarily flew to Baltimore that they are going there to talk. It is much more likely, if there really are these phantom owners, that the phantom is Calvin Ayre himself, rather than anyone at Covers. That would certainly be the Calvin Ayre I know. He would think himself extremely clever to have his two mutts name the Covers lads, and at the same time get his revenge for them cutting his nuts off here.
There is nobody in online gaming from BC that I know of that isn't swinging from Calvin Ayre's willnots.
Calvin that prick, the man at beted,do tell PADDYMAC
What a swing,WOW
0
Quote Originally Posted by PaddyMacR:
You are very right that that is the sketchy part. However, I don't know how BetEd would know trouble was coming until it was absolutely too late. I doubt there would be any ESP involved. It is possible though that a few days early, the pipeline stopped, i.e. the US controlled pipeline stopped sending funds on to the Panama bank. That may have aroused suspicion, and triggered the switch of deposit methods.
As to the upcoming processes, you can take it from the fact that Parchomchuk and Wright voluntarily flew to Baltimore that they are going there to talk. It is much more likely, if there really are these phantom owners, that the phantom is Calvin Ayre himself, rather than anyone at Covers. That would certainly be the Calvin Ayre I know. He would think himself extremely clever to have his two mutts name the Covers lads, and at the same time get his revenge for them cutting his nuts off here.
There is nobody in online gaming from BC that I know of that isn't swinging from Calvin Ayre's willnots.
Calvin that prick, the man at beted,do tell PADDYMAC
LOL that would be a real twist if Calvin was actually the Beted owner
behind the scenes. It would be more-so if he was the one that ended up
getting ratted out.
Kind of off topic, but when this whole thing started, I was under the
assumption that Freedom and Lou had a very good relationship with Beted
that including them flying down to Costa Rica and visiting the place
many times. I'm not saying in a "they owned Beted sense", but more in a
respectful advertiser-advertisee relationship where they were impressed
enough to rate them number 1. So I'm guessing they know who the real
owners are and if it was Calvin (or they thought it could have been
linked to him), then I'm guessing they would've cut off ties with the
book. Assuming te Covers owners are truly innocent in this, I would
hope our justice system is smart enough to mold the situation properly
and sort it out so the actually guilty people (whoever they are) end up
behind bars.
0
LOL that would be a real twist if Calvin was actually the Beted owner
behind the scenes. It would be more-so if he was the one that ended up
getting ratted out.
Kind of off topic, but when this whole thing started, I was under the
assumption that Freedom and Lou had a very good relationship with Beted
that including them flying down to Costa Rica and visiting the place
many times. I'm not saying in a "they owned Beted sense", but more in a
respectful advertiser-advertisee relationship where they were impressed
enough to rate them number 1. So I'm guessing they know who the real
owners are and if it was Calvin (or they thought it could have been
linked to him), then I'm guessing they would've cut off ties with the
book. Assuming te Covers owners are truly innocent in this, I would
hope our justice system is smart enough to mold the situation properly
and sort it out so the actually guilty people (whoever they are) end up
behind bars.
That being said, what me and my fellow Beted players really want is our money
back. We are just a bit confused as to which possible scenario would
lead us to that final conclusion.
If no one is found guilty?...I'm
assuming the government won't give back
any funds seeing as they supposedly already spent some of it. Would
this get the monkey off the back of whoever is the owner and get a
bailout done anonymously?
If these two guys or someone else is found guilty?...how
would this help us players if a bailout doesn't get done before this?
This would end with the government with our money, and the person with
out account info that can be used for a bailout behind bars. Double
whammy.
If the government decides to give it back because of the small public
discontent and/or the actions of Freedom?...like this would ever
happen.
Are we supposed to count on these non-communicative owners of Beted to
work out a bail-out for us at some point? Freedom said a bailout
would
make them look worse in court. If they are denying ownership, can't
they make a deal "anonymously" with another book and get this bailout
done, especially since the offer still (supposedly) stands? This seems
feasible, as evidenced because they had a meeting with their former
disgruntled (rightfully) employees this week about their missed payments
and this happened through a lawyer or some kind of middle man. Why
can't this same kind of meeting take place between the owners and a
sportsbook about a bailout? In a basic sense, it's not like the
negotiations would be that hard (probably a payment up front, and an
exchange of the account information).
Are we supposed to hope Covers feels bad enough for their users trust in
their rankings such that they actually repay our balances?...even if
they did feel like being charitable (and they aren't targeted by the DOJ
because of it), how would they be able to get info on how much we are
owed anyway seeing as to how they can't seem to get any actual
communication with the owners?
At this point, we know we likely won't see our money anytime soon (if ever) and this is more a discussion of what has the greatest odds of success. I'm not sure which route to put our hopes in. All of these seem like
bad outcomes. The bail-out is the one thing that seems possible because
of the ability to work "anonymously." However, let's face it, even if
these owners didn't do anything wrong and didn't steal our money, they
obviously don't care enough about their players to get this done (as
seen by lack of communication and also not accepting the bailout offer
when they could've and then deciding a week or so later that they no
longer even want to explore that option anymore).
0
That being said, what me and my fellow Beted players really want is our money
back. We are just a bit confused as to which possible scenario would
lead us to that final conclusion.
If no one is found guilty?...I'm
assuming the government won't give back
any funds seeing as they supposedly already spent some of it. Would
this get the monkey off the back of whoever is the owner and get a
bailout done anonymously?
If these two guys or someone else is found guilty?...how
would this help us players if a bailout doesn't get done before this?
This would end with the government with our money, and the person with
out account info that can be used for a bailout behind bars. Double
whammy.
If the government decides to give it back because of the small public
discontent and/or the actions of Freedom?...like this would ever
happen.
Are we supposed to count on these non-communicative owners of Beted to
work out a bail-out for us at some point? Freedom said a bailout
would
make them look worse in court. If they are denying ownership, can't
they make a deal "anonymously" with another book and get this bailout
done, especially since the offer still (supposedly) stands? This seems
feasible, as evidenced because they had a meeting with their former
disgruntled (rightfully) employees this week about their missed payments
and this happened through a lawyer or some kind of middle man. Why
can't this same kind of meeting take place between the owners and a
sportsbook about a bailout? In a basic sense, it's not like the
negotiations would be that hard (probably a payment up front, and an
exchange of the account information).
Are we supposed to hope Covers feels bad enough for their users trust in
their rankings such that they actually repay our balances?...even if
they did feel like being charitable (and they aren't targeted by the DOJ
because of it), how would they be able to get info on how much we are
owed anyway seeing as to how they can't seem to get any actual
communication with the owners?
At this point, we know we likely won't see our money anytime soon (if ever) and this is more a discussion of what has the greatest odds of success. I'm not sure which route to put our hopes in. All of these seem like
bad outcomes. The bail-out is the one thing that seems possible because
of the ability to work "anonymously." However, let's face it, even if
these owners didn't do anything wrong and didn't steal our money, they
obviously don't care enough about their players to get this done (as
seen by lack of communication and also not accepting the bailout offer
when they could've and then deciding a week or so later that they no
longer even want to explore that option anymore).
LOL that would be a real twist if Calvin was actually the Beted owner
behind the scenes. It would be more-so if he was the one that ended up
getting ratted out.
Kind of off topic, but when this whole thing started, I was under the
assumption that Freedom and Lou had a very good relationship with Beted
that including them flying down to Costa Rica and visiting the place
many times. I'm not saying in a "they owned Beted sense", but more in a
respectful advertiser-advertisee relationship where they were impressed
enough to rate them number 1. So I'm guessing they know who the real
owners are and if it was Calvin (or they thought it could have been
linked to him), then I'm guessing they would've cut off ties with the
book. Assuming te Covers owners are truly innocent in this, I would
hope our justice system is smart enough to mold the situation properly
and sort it out so the actually guilty people (whoever they are) end up
behind bars.
Personally, I don't believe that anyone should go to jail for running a legitimate online gaming site. I do not believe that offering gaming is a crime.
You have a good point about the Covers people not knowing that Calvin was the owner. And I'm not saying he was, only that it is much more likely that he was than the Covers people. On the other hand, these two fall guys might have had strict instructions to say they were the owners in every case and to behave as if they actually were. The DOJ believed they were the owners, after all. Still do. And maybe they are.
There is without doubt a reason that Calvin is trying to set up the Covers guys. Revenge will be part of it, or all of it. If it's part of it, it may be that he really is the owner.
0
Quote Originally Posted by jdamon26:
LOL that would be a real twist if Calvin was actually the Beted owner
behind the scenes. It would be more-so if he was the one that ended up
getting ratted out.
Kind of off topic, but when this whole thing started, I was under the
assumption that Freedom and Lou had a very good relationship with Beted
that including them flying down to Costa Rica and visiting the place
many times. I'm not saying in a "they owned Beted sense", but more in a
respectful advertiser-advertisee relationship where they were impressed
enough to rate them number 1. So I'm guessing they know who the real
owners are and if it was Calvin (or they thought it could have been
linked to him), then I'm guessing they would've cut off ties with the
book. Assuming te Covers owners are truly innocent in this, I would
hope our justice system is smart enough to mold the situation properly
and sort it out so the actually guilty people (whoever they are) end up
behind bars.
Personally, I don't believe that anyone should go to jail for running a legitimate online gaming site. I do not believe that offering gaming is a crime.
You have a good point about the Covers people not knowing that Calvin was the owner. And I'm not saying he was, only that it is much more likely that he was than the Covers people. On the other hand, these two fall guys might have had strict instructions to say they were the owners in every case and to behave as if they actually were. The DOJ believed they were the owners, after all. Still do. And maybe they are.
There is without doubt a reason that Calvin is trying to set up the Covers guys. Revenge will be part of it, or all of it. If it's part of it, it may be that he really is the owner.
That being said, what me and my fellow Beted players really want is our money
back. We are just a bit confused as to which possible scenario would
lead us to that final conclusion.
If no one is found guilty?...I'm
assuming the government won't give back
any funds seeing as they supposedly already spent some of it. Would
this get the monkey off the back of whoever is the owner and get a
bailout done anonymously?
If these two guys or someone else is found guilty?...how
would this help us players if a bailout doesn't get done before this?
This would end with the government with our money, and the person with
out account info that can be used for a bailout behind bars. Double
whammy.
If the government decides to give it back because of the small public
discontent and/or the actions of Freedom?...like this would ever
happen.
Are we supposed to count on these non-communicative owners of Beted to
work out a bail-out for us at some point? Freedom said a bailout
would
make them look worse in court. If they are denying ownership, can't
they make a deal "anonymously" with another book and get this bailout
done, especially since the offer still (supposedly) stands? This seems
feasible, as evidenced because they had a meeting with their former
disgruntled (rightfully) employees this week about their missed payments
and this happened through a lawyer or some kind of middle man. Why
can't this same kind of meeting take place between the owners and a
sportsbook about a bailout? In a basic sense, it's not like the
negotiations would be that hard (probably a payment up front, and an
exchange of the account information).
Are we supposed to hope Covers feels bad enough for their users trust in
their rankings such that they actually repay our balances?...even if
they did feel like being charitable (and they aren't targeted by the DOJ
because of it), how would they be able to get info on how much we are
owed anyway seeing as to how they can't seem to get any actual
communication with the owners?
At this point, we know we likely won't see our money anytime soon (if ever) and this is more a discussion of what has the greatest odds of success. I'm not sure which route to put our hopes in. All of these seem like
bad outcomes. The bail-out is the one thing that seems possible because
of the ability to work "anonymously." However, let's face it, even if
these owners didn't do anything wrong and didn't steal our money, they
obviously don't care enough about their players to get this done (as
seen by lack of communication and also not accepting the bailout offer
when they could've and then deciding a week or so later that they no
longer even want to explore that option anymore).
I don't know if you are asking me that, but it really isn't my specialty. My specialty is the real Calvin Ayre and looking at his ramblings and schemes and figuring out what is really going on. Which usually isn't difficult.
As to your questions, I do not think anyone is going to ever see their money, unfortunately. Given that placing bets is not illegal, and the government position seems to be that holding legitimate deposits or withdrawals will teach people not to gamble, there might be a class action suit to get deposits and balances at least back.
I see that as being difficult as pretty well everybody but myself is anonymous and angry and likely difficult to organize. However, the DOJ actually does know who money came from and where it was going to. So the money coming and going from their own account might be recoverable in court, but the money in the Panama account, no.
0
Quote Originally Posted by jdamon26:
That being said, what me and my fellow Beted players really want is our money
back. We are just a bit confused as to which possible scenario would
lead us to that final conclusion.
If no one is found guilty?...I'm
assuming the government won't give back
any funds seeing as they supposedly already spent some of it. Would
this get the monkey off the back of whoever is the owner and get a
bailout done anonymously?
If these two guys or someone else is found guilty?...how
would this help us players if a bailout doesn't get done before this?
This would end with the government with our money, and the person with
out account info that can be used for a bailout behind bars. Double
whammy.
If the government decides to give it back because of the small public
discontent and/or the actions of Freedom?...like this would ever
happen.
Are we supposed to count on these non-communicative owners of Beted to
work out a bail-out for us at some point? Freedom said a bailout
would
make them look worse in court. If they are denying ownership, can't
they make a deal "anonymously" with another book and get this bailout
done, especially since the offer still (supposedly) stands? This seems
feasible, as evidenced because they had a meeting with their former
disgruntled (rightfully) employees this week about their missed payments
and this happened through a lawyer or some kind of middle man. Why
can't this same kind of meeting take place between the owners and a
sportsbook about a bailout? In a basic sense, it's not like the
negotiations would be that hard (probably a payment up front, and an
exchange of the account information).
Are we supposed to hope Covers feels bad enough for their users trust in
their rankings such that they actually repay our balances?...even if
they did feel like being charitable (and they aren't targeted by the DOJ
because of it), how would they be able to get info on how much we are
owed anyway seeing as to how they can't seem to get any actual
communication with the owners?
At this point, we know we likely won't see our money anytime soon (if ever) and this is more a discussion of what has the greatest odds of success. I'm not sure which route to put our hopes in. All of these seem like
bad outcomes. The bail-out is the one thing that seems possible because
of the ability to work "anonymously." However, let's face it, even if
these owners didn't do anything wrong and didn't steal our money, they
obviously don't care enough about their players to get this done (as
seen by lack of communication and also not accepting the bailout offer
when they could've and then deciding a week or so later that they no
longer even want to explore that option anymore).
I don't know if you are asking me that, but it really isn't my specialty. My specialty is the real Calvin Ayre and looking at his ramblings and schemes and figuring out what is really going on. Which usually isn't difficult.
As to your questions, I do not think anyone is going to ever see their money, unfortunately. Given that placing bets is not illegal, and the government position seems to be that holding legitimate deposits or withdrawals will teach people not to gamble, there might be a class action suit to get deposits and balances at least back.
I see that as being difficult as pretty well everybody but myself is anonymous and angry and likely difficult to organize. However, the DOJ actually does know who money came from and where it was going to. So the money coming and going from their own account might be recoverable in court, but the money in the Panama account, no.
Good points. Also, let me rephrase my "behind bars" statement. What I meant to say was I hope the justice system doesn't put anyone behind bars from Covers (or anywhere) if they are innocent just because of the weight of any false accusations. I hope they get it right. An analogy would be an innocent guy going to jail because a drug dealer testifies that the innocent guy is the actual drug dealer, not him. I also agree that running an online gambling site is a stupid crime that needs to be re-looked at.
0
Good points. Also, let me rephrase my "behind bars" statement. What I meant to say was I hope the justice system doesn't put anyone behind bars from Covers (or anywhere) if they are innocent just because of the weight of any false accusations. I hope they get it right. An analogy would be an innocent guy going to jail because a drug dealer testifies that the innocent guy is the actual drug dealer, not him. I also agree that running an online gambling site is a stupid crime that needs to be re-looked at.
...and I wasn't necessarily asking those questions to you or anyone. I was just kind of listing our possibilities and showing how hopeless each one really seems.
0
...and I wasn't necessarily asking those questions to you or anyone. I was just kind of listing our possibilities and showing how hopeless each one really seems.
PaddyMacR, something you said earlier, caught my attention, did you mention Mr Boddogs, sexuality, do you have any information, or rumors about his preferred taste or is a 50-50 just wondering.
0
PaddyMacR, something you said earlier, caught my attention, did you mention Mr Boddogs, sexuality, do you have any information, or rumors about his preferred taste or is a 50-50 just wondering.
PaddyMacR, something you said earlier, caught my attention, did you mention Mr Boddogs, sexuality, do you have any information, or rumors about his preferred taste or is a 50-50 just wondering.
Hey bud lets not go down this route... As much as it thrills me to see him get roasted, I still dont think we need to go down that route and talk about sexual orientation in this thread.. We dont need to stupe to his level..
.... Im out fellas...you guys take it easy...
0
Quote Originally Posted by LVTruck:
PaddyMacR, something you said earlier, caught my attention, did you mention Mr Boddogs, sexuality, do you have any information, or rumors about his preferred taste or is a 50-50 just wondering.
Hey bud lets not go down this route... As much as it thrills me to see him get roasted, I still dont think we need to go down that route and talk about sexual orientation in this thread.. We dont need to stupe to his level..
He has had sex with some women. I do know that. But he has never had a long term relationship with any woman except his sister. It is now widely accepted that he is gay, but I think the truth is more that he is kind of a tortured bisexual, who is in very strong denial about the gay part and who goes to extraordinary extremes to try and have people focus on his heterosexual claims through thousands of pictures posing with person, He is very effeminate in his speech and manners and dress and very vindictive in a female way.
I thought he might be gay when I knew him, but for a short while he had a beautiful Chinese girlfriend, and I know at least one girl in Colombia that said she had sex with him. However, almost every person that was in school with him in Salmon Arm said it was common knowledge he was gay. He also makes a great point of showing the thumb ring on the right hand, kind of a gay guys equivalent of the Mason's sign, from what I read.
He's a very very fucked up guy sexually, no doubt about that. But I'm sure he'd be a lying sociopath even if he was straight.
0
He has had sex with some women. I do know that. But he has never had a long term relationship with any woman except his sister. It is now widely accepted that he is gay, but I think the truth is more that he is kind of a tortured bisexual, who is in very strong denial about the gay part and who goes to extraordinary extremes to try and have people focus on his heterosexual claims through thousands of pictures posing with person, He is very effeminate in his speech and manners and dress and very vindictive in a female way.
I thought he might be gay when I knew him, but for a short while he had a beautiful Chinese girlfriend, and I know at least one girl in Colombia that said she had sex with him. However, almost every person that was in school with him in Salmon Arm said it was common knowledge he was gay. He also makes a great point of showing the thumb ring on the right hand, kind of a gay guys equivalent of the Mason's sign, from what I read.
He's a very very fucked up guy sexually, no doubt about that. But I'm sure he'd be a lying sociopath even if he was straight.
jdamon...thats the main resaon im so pissed. If i was someone who played at beted for years and lost my balance there when they closed, id still be upset but nowhere near as pissed. The ONLY reason i deposited there is becuase of the scam email they sent me with the ridiculous bonus offer in order to flat out steal my money. After seeing that covers had them as the #1 rated book, i figured they werent that bad and it was worth a shot. Guess i was wrong.
What date was that email, Rich or what date did you deposit and how?
0
Quote Originally Posted by richsox24:
jdamon...thats the main resaon im so pissed. If i was someone who played at beted for years and lost my balance there when they closed, id still be upset but nowhere near as pissed. The ONLY reason i deposited there is becuase of the scam email they sent me with the ridiculous bonus offer in order to flat out steal my money. After seeing that covers had them as the #1 rated book, i figured they werent that bad and it was worth a shot. Guess i was wrong.
What date was that email, Rich or what date did you deposit and how?
Hey bud lets not go down this route... As much as it thrills me to see him get roasted, I still dont think we need to go down that route and talk about sexual orientation in this thread.. We dont need to stupe to his level..
.... Im out fellas...you guys take it easy...
Sorry Beets, I didn't see your post before I wrote mine.
I agree should go there, but in a way it does explain his extraordinarily dishonest nature through all his business dealings in that the first and most important lie he has to live every day is the one about him being a man's man. Which ironically he is, I suppose.
0
Quote Originally Posted by superbeets:
Hey bud lets not go down this route... As much as it thrills me to see him get roasted, I still dont think we need to go down that route and talk about sexual orientation in this thread.. We dont need to stupe to his level..
.... Im out fellas...you guys take it easy...
Sorry Beets, I didn't see your post before I wrote mine.
I agree should go there, but in a way it does explain his extraordinarily dishonest nature through all his business dealings in that the first and most important lie he has to live every day is the one about him being a man's man. Which ironically he is, I suppose.
What date was that email, Rich or what date did you deposit and how?
Got the email on Fri May 20. Still have it. Went back and forth on whether i should make a deposit into what i thought was a very shady book. On Sunday morning May 22nd, I decided to take the plunge. Sent $250 via w-u cash transfer. Still have the receipt.
Turned the $500 (250+250) into $1530 by days end. I had (and currently have) money at both 5dimes and heritage but because of the rollover associated with the bonus, I only wagered at beted that day. Had i not been scammed by beted, I would have had a very nice Sunday with 5dimes and Heritage.
0
Quote Originally Posted by PaddyMacR:
What date was that email, Rich or what date did you deposit and how?
Got the email on Fri May 20. Still have it. Went back and forth on whether i should make a deposit into what i thought was a very shady book. On Sunday morning May 22nd, I decided to take the plunge. Sent $250 via w-u cash transfer. Still have the receipt.
Turned the $500 (250+250) into $1530 by days end. I had (and currently have) money at both 5dimes and heritage but because of the rollover associated with the bonus, I only wagered at beted that day. Had i not been scammed by beted, I would have had a very nice Sunday with 5dimes and Heritage.
Got the email on Fri May 20. Still have it. Went back and forth on whether i should make a deposit into what i thought was a very shady book. On Sunday morning May 22nd, I decided to take the plunge. Sent $250 via w-u cash transfer. Still have the receipt.
Turned the $500 (250+250) into $1530 by days end. I had (and currently have) money at both 5dimes and heritage but because of the rollover associated with the bonus, I only wagered at beted that day. Had i not been scammed by beted, I would have had a very nice Sunday with 5dimes and Heritage.
Ok, so this happened to you the day before the accounts were seized. The offer came out three days before the accounts were seized. Is that the common experience, everybody got the offer three days before the accounts were seized?
At that point, BetEd for some reason has stopped its usual deposit method through the fed operated sting. I have to say that is suspicious.
What kind of process did you go through when you were depositing through the fed sting? Did the money go straight down the pipe, make your deposit, money is instantly available for betting or casino or poker? Or was there a delay?
How did you deposit to the sting?
0
Quote Originally Posted by richsox24:
Got the email on Fri May 20. Still have it. Went back and forth on whether i should make a deposit into what i thought was a very shady book. On Sunday morning May 22nd, I decided to take the plunge. Sent $250 via w-u cash transfer. Still have the receipt.
Turned the $500 (250+250) into $1530 by days end. I had (and currently have) money at both 5dimes and heritage but because of the rollover associated with the bonus, I only wagered at beted that day. Had i not been scammed by beted, I would have had a very nice Sunday with 5dimes and Heritage.
Ok, so this happened to you the day before the accounts were seized. The offer came out three days before the accounts were seized. Is that the common experience, everybody got the offer three days before the accounts were seized?
At that point, BetEd for some reason has stopped its usual deposit method through the fed operated sting. I have to say that is suspicious.
What kind of process did you go through when you were depositing through the fed sting? Did the money go straight down the pipe, make your deposit, money is instantly available for betting or casino or poker? Or was there a delay?
Ok, so this happened to you the day before the accounts were seized. The offer came out three days before the accounts were seized. Is that the common experience, everybody got the offer three days before the accounts were seized?
At that point, BetEd for some reason has stopped its usual deposit method through the fed operated sting. I have to say that is suspicious.
What kind of process did you go through when you were depositing through the fed sting? Did the money go straight down the pipe, make your deposit, money is instantly available for betting or casino or poker? Or was there a delay?
How did you deposit to the sting?
I sent the money the same as anyone would. I called beted, got a name/country to send the money to, sent it, called them with the control number, and about 30 minutes later the money was in my beted acct.
Bookmaker, betmaker and the other sites knew something was going down because just days ealier, they purchased new domains and were well prepared for this. What did beted do?? Did they prepare and purchase new domains? Nope, instead, they instantly found a way to scam and con as many last minute cash deposits as possible. And like a gullible moron, i bent over.
0
Quote Originally Posted by PaddyMacR:
Ok, so this happened to you the day before the accounts were seized. The offer came out three days before the accounts were seized. Is that the common experience, everybody got the offer three days before the accounts were seized?
At that point, BetEd for some reason has stopped its usual deposit method through the fed operated sting. I have to say that is suspicious.
What kind of process did you go through when you were depositing through the fed sting? Did the money go straight down the pipe, make your deposit, money is instantly available for betting or casino or poker? Or was there a delay?
How did you deposit to the sting?
I sent the money the same as anyone would. I called beted, got a name/country to send the money to, sent it, called them with the control number, and about 30 minutes later the money was in my beted acct.
Bookmaker, betmaker and the other sites knew something was going down because just days ealier, they purchased new domains and were well prepared for this. What did beted do?? Did they prepare and purchase new domains? Nope, instead, they instantly found a way to scam and con as many last minute cash deposits as possible. And like a gullible moron, i bent over.
I sent the money the same as anyone would. I called beted, got a name/country to send the money to, sent it, called them with the control number, and about 30 minutes later the money was in my beted acct.
Bookmaker, betmaker and the other sites knew something was going down because just days ealier, they purchased new domains and were well prepared for this. What did beted do?? Did they prepare and purchase new domains? Nope, instead, they instantly found a way to scam and con as many last minute cash deposits as possible. And like a gullible moron, i bent over.
Was the country Panama?
0
Quote Originally Posted by richsox24:
I sent the money the same as anyone would. I called beted, got a name/country to send the money to, sent it, called them with the control number, and about 30 minutes later the money was in my beted acct.
Bookmaker, betmaker and the other sites knew something was going down because just days ealier, they purchased new domains and were well prepared for this. What did beted do?? Did they prepare and purchase new domains? Nope, instead, they instantly found a way to scam and con as many last minute cash deposits as possible. And like a gullible moron, i bent over.
Here's a story from David Baines, Pink Ass's nemesis, a brilliant columnist at the Vancouver Sun who despises Calvin over the Bicer Medical stock fraud.
So Bet Ed seems to have bank accounts in Guam. And, get this, everyone knew about the indictments on May 20, not 23rd. For some reason the DOJ unsealed them early. So there you have your explanation of why all the operators knew what was coming and got prepared to carry on. All except BetEd. And it was on May 20th that the emails went out.
The hand of Calvin Ayre is all over this. He is the only owner that wouldn't carry on. Why? He'd already been burned in Maryland by the same prosecutor. He'd fallen for it twice. He'd already had a domain name seized and he knew the cost and drop in traffic that caused and BetEd simply wasn't that big a thing to go to all that hassle. So it was fill your boots time and the big come on email goes out. Classic Calvin Ayre. The Bicer Medical boy never changes.
His boys go on the run. It gives him time to put the crowning touch on. He writes out a story and hands it to his halfwitted hack writer to put on the website. The story now is that our wee Calvin is a self righteous huffer and puffer against evil BetEd, and the real owners, not him, but the two guys from Covers. In fact, he writes two stories, one a greater rat out than the other. It's two for one with that tactic. He puts the heat off himself, and creates a ready made basis for what Wright and Parchomchuk can say in their plea deal.
And he gets revenge. He's all about revenge. Unfortunately for him, that's a two way street.
It just didn't seem right, even for him, one major gaming site owner suddenly becoming the DOJ's best friend through some water assed tactic as using a website to rat people out, rather than the traditional dime in the payphone.
0
Whoa, now. Back up.
Here's a story from David Baines, Pink Ass's nemesis, a brilliant columnist at the Vancouver Sun who despises Calvin over the Bicer Medical stock fraud.
So Bet Ed seems to have bank accounts in Guam. And, get this, everyone knew about the indictments on May 20, not 23rd. For some reason the DOJ unsealed them early. So there you have your explanation of why all the operators knew what was coming and got prepared to carry on. All except BetEd. And it was on May 20th that the emails went out.
The hand of Calvin Ayre is all over this. He is the only owner that wouldn't carry on. Why? He'd already been burned in Maryland by the same prosecutor. He'd fallen for it twice. He'd already had a domain name seized and he knew the cost and drop in traffic that caused and BetEd simply wasn't that big a thing to go to all that hassle. So it was fill your boots time and the big come on email goes out. Classic Calvin Ayre. The Bicer Medical boy never changes.
His boys go on the run. It gives him time to put the crowning touch on. He writes out a story and hands it to his halfwitted hack writer to put on the website. The story now is that our wee Calvin is a self righteous huffer and puffer against evil BetEd, and the real owners, not him, but the two guys from Covers. In fact, he writes two stories, one a greater rat out than the other. It's two for one with that tactic. He puts the heat off himself, and creates a ready made basis for what Wright and Parchomchuk can say in their plea deal.
And he gets revenge. He's all about revenge. Unfortunately for him, that's a two way street.
It just didn't seem right, even for him, one major gaming site owner suddenly becoming the DOJ's best friend through some water assed tactic as using a website to rat people out, rather than the traditional dime in the payphone.
I got the same email on May 20 as well. It was at 9:13 PM Eastern Time to be exact. If what you said about all these places knowing what would happen earlier that day is true, then the time of the email makes sense because it would of given them time to assess the situation, then decide on that plan of action.
Two days prior I had gotten an email from them about a 15% deposit/refill bonus in an attempt for me and others to put more money in for the NBA Finals. These kind of bonuses were offered almost weekly so nothing special there. I looked into my history and saw that in each of the 10 last emails I got dating back to March 30 (show's how often they offered these 15-20% bonuses, poker bonuses, friend referral bonuses, etc.) that all of the emails were sent out between 2:45 and 6:30 PM. Never later than that. Not sure what that implies but just saying.
Now this situation is turning back into what it started as. Beted knowingly screwed its players, new and old. Covers promoted a sketch book (though there may not have been signs of this coming) at number 1 that most other sites had rated lower than this. I'm in a different boat that Richsox in that I didn't take that offer as I already had a balance on the site. Like Rich said, that's why people like him that got suckered by the bonus are furious and people like me are maybe more civil, but still passionate to get the money back. For me, especially, because I had won a 5 game parlay (which I rarely try to do, and when I do it never wins) the day before the book went under. Also, I am making these claims/statements with a sane, cool head to keep with the thread's title, and for now nobody can prove anything about Calvin's involvement one way of the other so it is all speculation.
At least now, what Freedom previously called speculation (and rightfully so) of Beted screwing us can maybe turned into fact, if the following line from the article is true: "The motion to unseal the indictment was filed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Kay on May 20." It just fits perfectly. Shows that the bonus, which was cash only (no e-check, which is normally available and widely used) was a complete scam.
0
I got the same email on May 20 as well. It was at 9:13 PM Eastern Time to be exact. If what you said about all these places knowing what would happen earlier that day is true, then the time of the email makes sense because it would of given them time to assess the situation, then decide on that plan of action.
Two days prior I had gotten an email from them about a 15% deposit/refill bonus in an attempt for me and others to put more money in for the NBA Finals. These kind of bonuses were offered almost weekly so nothing special there. I looked into my history and saw that in each of the 10 last emails I got dating back to March 30 (show's how often they offered these 15-20% bonuses, poker bonuses, friend referral bonuses, etc.) that all of the emails were sent out between 2:45 and 6:30 PM. Never later than that. Not sure what that implies but just saying.
Now this situation is turning back into what it started as. Beted knowingly screwed its players, new and old. Covers promoted a sketch book (though there may not have been signs of this coming) at number 1 that most other sites had rated lower than this. I'm in a different boat that Richsox in that I didn't take that offer as I already had a balance on the site. Like Rich said, that's why people like him that got suckered by the bonus are furious and people like me are maybe more civil, but still passionate to get the money back. For me, especially, because I had won a 5 game parlay (which I rarely try to do, and when I do it never wins) the day before the book went under. Also, I am making these claims/statements with a sane, cool head to keep with the thread's title, and for now nobody can prove anything about Calvin's involvement one way of the other so it is all speculation.
At least now, what Freedom previously called speculation (and rightfully so) of Beted screwing us can maybe turned into fact, if the following line from the article is true: "The motion to unseal the indictment was filed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Kay on May 20." It just fits perfectly. Shows that the bonus, which was cash only (no e-check, which is normally available and widely used) was a complete scam.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
.... Im out fellas...you guys take it easy...
Hot Forum Topics
