What Is Going To Happen To High-Stakes Fantasy Football?

mkrucek · Post by **mkrucek** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:14 am

Originally posted by DoubleG:
quote:Originally posted by DoubleG:
if you are paying taxes on the rolled over money, what advantage is there to roll over your money. it sounds like you are simply allowing another party to hold your money, instead of you being able to use it, invest it, save it, etc...

i would venture a guess that over 50% of people rolling over their money don't pay their respective taxes. if they did pay their taxes, the IRS or the state government would wonder why your return doesn't match up with your 1099.

IMO, not issuing 1099's for "rolled over" winnings is a shady business practice at best. Yellow - this is the post alex wanted changed. specifically he wanted me to retract the last sentence.

i made this post on the nffc board (not his). and neither the words "alex' nor the "ffpc" were in my post. [/QUOTE]Looking at your post I would imagine all of the big three should be insulted as you have said all of them are using (have used) shady business practices.

I don't know what your definition of shady is but I don't think anyone would appreciate it. Especially when they have received advice from people far more knowledgeable about the topic than you or me. And it's certainly true that many issues regarding taxes are far from set in stone. Different people can interpret things differently and do all the time in this field. It doesn't make it shady. And the fact that Alex asked you to change only that line seems rather reasonable to me. He didn't ask you to remove the entire post, did he?

Shady is not paying your winners, not letting your customers know what's going on, etc. Neither the NFFC or FFPC have that on their resume. And shady might not be strong enough for those issues.

thegambler · Post by **thegambler** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:07 am

Originally posted by 4D:
Looking at your post I would imagine all of the big three should be insulted as you have said all of them are using (have used) shady business practices.

I don't know what your definition of shady is but I don't think anyone would appreciate it. Especially when they have received advice from people far more knowledgeable about the topic than you or me. And it's certainly true that many issues regarding taxes are far from set in stone. Different people can interpret things differently and do all the time in this field. It doesn't make it shady. And the fact that Alex asked you to change only that line seems rather reasonable to me. He didn't ask you to remove the entire post, did he?

Shady is not paying your winners, not letting your customers know what's going on, etc. Neither the NFFC or FFPC have that on their resume. And shady might not be strong enough for those issues. you don't think it is bad business to go to another board and contact someone and demand they change their post or else? come on man.....you can defend the ffpc all you want but that is uncalled for.

guess he won't be playing for the ffpc this year.

thegambler · Post by **thegambler** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:13 am

the only time i can see you talking to someone....that is just talking not demanding something....is when they are attacking you or your business directly. saying things, about you, that just aren't true.

double g has the right to his opinion and so do you.

now go run and tell alex what i said.....maybe i will be getting a pm today telling me not to bother playing there as well.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 4:24 am

Alex and I had a similar situation happen between us in May. I posted something on the NFFC boards, and received a PM on the FFPC boards soon thereafter. Alex was very cordial, and explained his position to me. No demands were made, but after reading his message and obtaining additional information, I immediately altered my post.

The path chosen by Alex, in Mark's case, was a bit over the line. From talking to Mark, I know that if Alex had approached him differently -- much like Alex did with my own post -- there would have been an entirely different chain of events that followed. I also know that Alex and Mark have a bit of "history" behind them, and perhaps that was why Alex was 'nagging him.

This is a very tense time for the HSFF industry, and I understand that game operators need to protect their interests and defend their product. With that said, I do think that Alex could have acted a bit more diplomatically here -- just as he was with me.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 4:30 am

For what it's worth, Alex and Dave have played in our event (Dave, as Greg pointed out, is our No. 2 all-time leading money winner) and both have posted on our boards. If at any time they feel their event or approach is being unfairly questioned or presented we welcome them to come here and set the record straight. David Dodds recently joined our boards and that invitation is extended to David as well.

The purpose of this thread has never been to bash another event or for us to present ourselves as being superior. It's about a discussion of the future of this part of the fantasy business, which has grown considerably in recent years but now faces a very perilous time as many consumers are contemplating their futures as high-stakes players. We welcome all opinions and want the facts to be presented. As Greg and I have always said, our goal is to grow this space and we believe that can be done without acrimony and animosity between game operators.

mkrucek · Post by **mkrucek** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 5:51 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:
Alex and I had a similar situation happen between us in May. I posted something on the NFFC boards, and received a PM on the FFPC boards soon thereafter. Alex was very cordial, and explained his position to me. No demands were made, but after reading his message and obtaining additional information, I immediately altered my post.

The path chosen by Alex, in Mark's case, was a bit over the line. From talking to Mark, I know that if Alex had approached him differently -- much like Alex did with my own post -- there would have been an entirely different chain of events that followed. I also know that Alex and Mark have a bit of "history" behind them, and perhaps that was why Alex was 'nagging him.

This is a very tense time for the HSFF industry, and I understand that game operators need to protect their interests and defend their product. With that said, I do think that Alex could have acted a bit more diplomatically here -- just as he was with me. Simple, let's have Mark post the series of messages that went between him and Alex, unedited and in their entirety. Then people can judge if Alex was over the line. Mark?

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 5:55 am

I don't believe Mark, or anyone, should be posting private communications without the consent of the other party. If Alex gives his consent, that's fine. But I would respectfully ask Mark to refrain from posting any messages/emails etc. from Alex unless Alex gives his consent.

Cocktails and Dreams · Post by **Cocktails and Dreams** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:29 am

Yeah, not cool to post private exchanges.

Old School · Post by **Old School** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:44 am

the lockout is so annoying I might just go back and read all of SNAKE'S posts over the past years to keep me busy

mkrucek · Post by **mkrucek** » Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:56 am

Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
I don't believe Mark, or anyone, should be posting private communications without the consent of the other party. If Alex gives his consent, that's fine. But I would respectfully ask Mark to refrain from posting any messages/emails etc. from Alex unless Alex gives his consent. So if Alex gives his consent it's ok for Mark to post them? That's fair and I understand completely.