Professor Emails Hijacked By CAP!!!!!

[Enke]

PAW was once named Party Riches?

Yes it was. I founded PartyRiches which was rebranded as PAW. I sold PAW to PokerNews Ltd. Pokernews then sold only the forums to AMI who merged them with PAP.

I no longer have anything to do with either PokerNews Ltd., PAW, PAP, or AMI.

Confusing I know. Bottom line however is that PAW is owned by PokerNews Ltd. and not AMI. Whatever you read is false information. PM me if you need clarification.

[Jinnia]

Yes it was. I founded PartyRiches which was rebranded as PAW. I sold PAW to PokerNews Ltd. Pokernews then sold only the forums to AMI who merged them with PAP.

I no longer have anything to do with either PokerNews Ltd., PAW, PAP, or AMI.

Confusing I know. Bottom line however is that PAW is owned by PokerNews Ltd. and not AMI. Whatever you read is false information. PM me if you need clarification.

I know you launched PartyRiches as a sales page for your ebook, then added
a discussion area, which grew into PAW, and I know (read) Poker News owns
it now (then?), and you just manage it, or did manage it.(?)

[COPCapo]

I read in a German Forum , and its all in german ...yes its very confusing where pokernews has all his fingers

Must say i hear about all that things the first time, lol...never promote card spike ... but need to say also, i get a lot of help in the pap and cap forum...but also need to say this has nothing to do with all the scam they did to the other affiliates.

One thing im missing , why Lou dont past anymore, also, im confused, when im the shareholder of a company, how it can be that someone is kicking out, there must be more as that ... for me its like a deep deep sea, and noone wants to fish in it

[PokerNations]

also, im confused, when im the shareholder of a company, how it can be that someone is kicking out, there must be more as that ... for me its like a deep deep sea, and noone wants to fish in it

Not sure how companies work in Germany, but here in the States, most companies have Articles of Organization (or Articles of Incorporation)

These generally spell out how the company is structured, and the rules that govern it. The Articles will usually include information on how someone can become a partner or shareholder in the company, and also how that person can be removed from the company.

Perhaps you've heard of hostile takeovers? Essentially what is happening is that there are three partners with Affiliate Media. Lou only owns 40% of the rights in the company, which is not a majority ownership.

Because the other two partners control 60% of the company, they have more voting power and influence if they combine their votes against Lou.

Whether 60% is a large enough percentage of votes to oust Lou from the company is unknown, as some companies require a "supermajority" vote (generally 66%) to perform an action like that.

Although Warren and the silent partner could argue that Lou's public actions were detrimental to their business, and they were justified in removing him from the company because of this.

[COPCapo]

The same structure, only that u need only 1% more to make a decision, means, 51% is enough to make decision, mostly this sharing structurre, is then when one guy wants to have the control over all and the other one is more an investor

but okay its all confusing

[universal4]

Although Warren and the silent partner could argue that Lou's public actions were detrimental to their business, and they were justified in removing him from the company because of this.

I wonder then if Lou could argue that Warren forcing the issue to purchase/open the Cake Skin was detrimental. this may be a moot point since the skin was owned by a different entity?

Also, he may be able to argue that he wanted to come clean on the Cardspike issue but the other partners wouldn't allow it?

Or, Warren may be the one that wanted to post and Lou recommended against it?

I guess we may not know for a while?

Rick
Universal4

[PokerNations]

I wonder then if Lou could argue that Warren forcing the issue to purchase/open the Cake Skin was detrimental. this may be a moot point since the skin was owned by a different entity?

Also, he may be able to argue that he wanted to come clean on the Cardspike issue but the other partners wouldn't allow it?

Or, Warren may be the one that wanted to post and Lou recommended against it?

I guess we may not know for a while?

Rick
Universal4

Anythings possible, although if I was a gambling man, I'd wager that all three partners were aware of, and ok with, the whole Cardspike involvement and other practices that Affiliate Media regularly practiced.

They only started to care about it as an issue for the industry, when it became an issue for their wallets and reputation.

If the investigative reports hadn't been conducted, they'd all be happily cashing their checks like nothing was wrong. Hell, if Cardspike had managed to just keep affiliates paid, none of us would probably even know what was going on behind the scenes.

They really shot themselves in the foot (and chest, and face) on this one.

[tryme]

Does anyone else think this is all tiresome speculation mainly stirred up by the protagonists involved. After all, this very thread was started by Lou about his lack of access to email and since then he hasn't posted.

Wake me when it's over. Life's too short for this kind of thing.

[BiggDawgg]

Lie, cheat, and steal .. then come crying to the people who you stole from when it happens to you ... how do you say ... kind of ironic


This whole situation is disgusting and a complete disgrace to the industry.

[thepokerkeep]

Well, we can all thank the guys at CAP for waking up the operators and affiliate programs.

It's obvious that at least two of the three partners were aware of and OK with the Cardspike situation. CAP has certainly shot itself in the foot this time. What was once the "Golden Fleece" for them has become their worse nightmare. Reading between the lines, I imagine that when the CAC meetings are over, CAP will be thrown under the bus, much like the Lou and warren have done to each other. The industry does not need the negative attention these guys are bringing to it. And it appears the operators have had enough.