biggest loser...
Harrah's treats it's customers VERY well!
He lost $204 Mil and they're going to imprison him
to get $14 Mil more. I wonder if there's a way they
can take the marrow from his bones? There's probably
some current high roller who would enjoy it on toast.
I can already hear the crys of 'he didn't have to
gamble'. Really? If this guy's not a compulsive
gambler who is? At what point should a casino say
enough?
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "JudyGreg" <Judy@...> wrote:
Harrah's treats it's customers VERY well!
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "irdd3000" <irdd@> wrote:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2eva4vc
>
At what point should a casino say
enough?
Never. When do people start taking responsibility for their actions? Sad state of affairs in the world. Blame others its the right thing to do
By that standard as a bar owner I should serve
an alcoholic till they die on the floor. I suspect
that rational people will disagree.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "radek2166" <radek2166@...> wrote:
At what point should a casino say
> enough?Never. When do people start taking responsibility for their actions? Sad state of affairs in the world. Blame others its the right thing to do
A casino that allows a gambler to gamble is not nearly the same as a
bartender serving drinks to a drunk.
If the gambler (in the story) broke the law (by passing bad checks/markers),
he should pay the consequences for his illegal actions.
···
On 5/24/10, krajewski.sa@pg.com <krajewski.sa@pg.com> wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "radek2166" <radek2166@...> wrote:
> > At what point should a casino say
> > enough?
>
> Never. When do people start taking responsibility for their actions? Sad
state of affairs in the world. Blame others its the right thing to doBy that standard as a bar owner I should serve an alcoholic till they die
on the floor. I suspect that rational people will disagree.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
It's funny how the casinos seem to have no problem whatsoever in telling me (and other good players) that they've had enough of our action, but no one seems to have the authority to tell a drunk and/or a horribly compulsive loser that they can't play any more.
EE
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "radek2166" <radek2166@...> wrote:
At what point should a casino say
> enough?Never.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
...
It's funny how the casinos seem to have no problem whatsoever in telling me (and other good players) that they've had enough of our action, but no one seems to have the authority to tell a drunk and/or a horribly compulsive loser that they can't play any more.
EE
I believe that, in this case, Wynn had bared this individual for compulsive play prior to Harrah's continuing to skin him. In the interest of fairness all casinos shouldn't be tarred with the same brush.
David
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "eecounter" <eecounter@...> wrote:
When i follow this story 2 points come to mind. First i wonder how Harrah's could have not stopped this guy earlier. It was obvious something was wrong for anyone to lose this much this fast. For them to now cry foul is a clear sign of their greed and lack of good business ethics. We should remember this when we gamble in their properties. Secondly all casinos prey on weak players. Easy access ABM's with exorbitant fees, 24 hours with no closing and comp systems create an environment that will eventually destroy anyone who has limited bankroll.
It will be a dark day when this man is jailed. Reminds me of how the taliban used to stone to death a woman who was raped because she had sex outside of her marriage.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, krajewski.sa@... wrote:
He lost $204 Mil and they're going to imprison him
to get $14 Mil more. I wonder if there's a way they
can take the marrow from his bones? There's probably
some current high roller who would enjoy it on toast.I can already hear the crys of 'he didn't have to
gamble'. Really? If this guy's not a compulsive
gambler who is? At what point should a casino say
enough?--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "JudyGreg" <Judy@> wrote:
>
> Harrah's treats it's customers VERY well!
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "irdd3000" <irdd@> wrote:
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/2eva4vc
> >
>
At what point should a casino say
enough?
Putting the (serious) ethical questions aside, it would have been in Harrah's self interest to string the guy along. With both whales and fleas, Harrahs Inc. (especially) goes for the short term (quarterly) gain over the long term payoff and regularly dines on geese that would otherwise continue laying golden eggs.
Don
The poor guy. He is just a victim of big bag corporate America.
This is amazing to me - if he started the banking failures with his inability to control himself would it be easier to jail him? Maybe Bernie Madolf is really the victim, someone who couldn't rein in his horrible habit of stealing from others? I'm sure his prison mates have a lot of sympathy for him.
My Momma taught me that I was responsible for myself, and not to blame others for my many shortcomings.
Get a grip folks......
Jigger
···
--- On Tue, 5/25/10, stormin96 <pcolborne@hotmail.com> wrote:
From: stormin96 <pcolborne@hotmail.com>
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: biggest loser...
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 2010, 1:14 PM
When i follow this story 2 points
come to mind. First i wonder how Harrah's could have not
stopped this guy earlier. It was obvious something was wrong
for anyone to lose this much this fast. For them to now cry
foul is a clear sign of their greed and lack of good
business ethics. We should remember this when we gamble in
their properties. Secondly all casinos prey on weak players.
Easy access ABM's with exorbitant fees, 24 hours with no
closing and comp systems create an environment that will
eventually destroy anyone who has limited bankroll.It will be a dark day when this man is jailed. Reminds me
of how the taliban used to stone to death a woman who was
raped because she had sex outside of her marriage.--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com,
krajewski.sa@... wrote:
>
> He lost $204 Mil and they're going to imprison him
> to get $14 Mil more. I wonder if there's a way
they
> can take the marrow from his bones? There's
probably
> some current high roller who would enjoy it on toast.
>
> I can already hear the crys of 'he didn't have to
> gamble'. Really? If this guy's not a
compulsive
> gambler who is? At what point should a casino
say
> enough?
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com,
"JudyGreg" <Judy@> wrote:
> >
> > Harrah's treats it's customers VERY well!
> >
> > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com,
"irdd3000" <irdd@> wrote:
> > >
> > > http://tinyurl.com/2eva4vc
> > >
> >
>------------------------------------
vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
vpFREE\-fullfeatured@yahoogroups\.com
It's funny to say this isn't the same as a bartender serving someone too much alcohol because Harrah's was allegedly serving him 2 to 3 bottles of vodka a day to keep him gambling, as well as prescription pills. Allegedly, there was video footage of times where Watanabe passes out at the blackjack table in the middle of a hand and the dealer has to wake him up to keep gambling or to sign a marker.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Jigger Woodruff <bayfieldkent@...> wrote:
The poor guy. He is just a victim of big bag corporate America.
This is amazing to me - if he started the banking failures with his inability to control himself would it be easier to jail him? Maybe Bernie Madolf is really the victim, someone who couldn't rein in his horrible habit of stealing from others? I'm sure his prison mates have a lot of sympathy for him.
My Momma taught me that I was responsible for myself, and not to blame others for my many shortcomings.
Get a grip folks......
Jigger
--- On Tue, 5/25/10, stormin96 <pcolborne@...> wrote:
> From: stormin96 <pcolborne@...>
> Subject: [vpFREE] Re: biggest loser...
> To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, May 25, 2010, 1:14 PM
> When i follow this story 2 points
> come to mind. First i wonder how Harrah's could have not
> stopped this guy earlier. It was obvious something was wrong
> for anyone to lose this much this fast. For them to now cry
> foul is a clear sign of their greed and lack of good
> business ethics. We should remember this when we gamble in
> their properties. Secondly all casinos prey on weak players.
> Easy access ABM's with exorbitant fees, 24 hours with no
> closing and comp systems create an environment that will
> eventually destroy anyone who has limited bankroll.
>
> It will be a dark day when this man is jailed. Reminds me
> of how the taliban used to stone to death a woman who was
> raped because she had sex outside of her marriage.
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com,
> krajewski.sa@ wrote:
> >
> > He lost $204 Mil and they're going to imprison him
> > to get $14 Mil more. I wonder if there's a way
> they
> > can take the marrow from his bones? There's
> probably
> > some current high roller who would enjoy it on toast.
> >
> > I can already hear the crys of 'he didn't have to
> > gamble'. Really? If this guy's not a
> compulsive
> > gambler who is? At what point should a casino
> say
> > enough?
> >
> > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com,
> "JudyGreg" <Judy@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Harrah's treats it's customers VERY well!
> > >
> > > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com,
> "irdd3000" <irdd@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/2eva4vc
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> vpFREE-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
All of a sudden the player becomes a gambler because he's addicted.
But a drinker isn't an alcoholic when he's addicted?
The propreitor of a business should not serve either addict.
It's just plain greed just like the investment bankers.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Luke Fuller <kungalooosh@...> wrote:
A casino that allows a gambler to gamble is not nearly the same as a
bartender serving drinks to a drunk.If the gambler (in the story) broke the law (by passing bad checks/markers),
he should pay the consequences for his illegal actions.On 5/24/10, krajewski.sa@... <krajewski.sa@...> wrote:
>
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "radek2166" <radek2166@> wrote:
> > > At what point should a casino say
> > > enough?
> >
> > Never. When do people start taking responsibility for their actions? Sad
> state of affairs in the world. Blame others its the right thing to do
>
>
> By that standard as a bar owner I should serve an alcoholic till they die
> on the floor. I suspect that rational people will disagree.[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
If that is correct, Wynn did the right thing and that will weigh heavily in the lawsuit decision; but this is Nevada
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "David" <d_richheimer@...> wrote:
I believe that, in this case, Wynn had bared this individual for compulsive play prior to Harrah's continuing to skin him. In the interest of fairness all casinos shouldn't be tarred with the same brush.
David
Must have lost a fortune in the market or at the machines/tables
david
All of a sudden the player becomes a gambler because he's addicted.
But a drinker isn't an alcoholic when he's addicted?
The propreitor of a business should not serve either addict.
It's just plain greed just like the investment bankers.
···
From: haaljo@yahoo.com
It completely irrelevent, whether they are an 'addict' or not.
I don't care what their story is. If someone breaks the law
by passing bad checks or markers, they should pay the
consequences for their illegal actions. Period.
···
On 5/27/10, Dave <haaljo@yahoo.com> wrote:
All of a sudden the player becomes a gambler because he's addicted.
But a drinker isn't an alcoholic when he's addicted?
The propreitor of a business should not serve either addict.
It's just plain greed just like the investment bankers.--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Luke Fuller <kungalooosh@...> wrote:
> A casino that allows a gambler to gamble is not nearly the same as a
> bartender serving drinks to a drunk.
>
> If the gambler (in the story) broke the law (by passing bad
checks/markers),
> he should pay the consequences for his illegal actions.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Failing to repay a private debt is not illegal. The casinos have co-opted
the Nevada criminal justice system to be their collection agency by
inventing the fiction that markers are checks. They are not, no matter how
much boilerplate claims they are.
Casinos should have no more power than any other business to collect debts.
Cogno
···
-----Original Message-----
From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpF…@…com] On Behalf
Of Luke Fuller
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 1:50 PM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] biggest loser…It completely irrelevent, whether they are an 'addict' or not.
I don't care what their story is. If someone breaks the law
by passing bad checks or markers, they should pay the
consequences for their illegal actions. Period.On 5/27/10, Dave <haaljo@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> All of a sudden the player becomes a gambler because he's addicted.
> But a drinker isn't an alcoholic when he's addicted?
> The propreitor of a business should not serve either addict.
> It's just plain greed just like the investment bankers.
>
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Luke Fuller <kungalooosh@...> wrote:
> > A casino that allows a gambler to gamble is not nearly the same as
a
> > bartender serving drinks to a drunk.
> >
> > If the gambler (in the story) broke the law (by passing bad
> checks/markers),
> > he should pay the consequences for his illegal actions.[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
Well, maybe all businesses should be able to throw debtors in prison.
To quote Dickens: "Have we no prisons? Have we no poorhouses? Have we no cemeteries?"
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cogno Scienti" <cognoscienti@...> wrote:
Failing to repay a private debt is not illegal. The casinos have co-opted
the Nevada criminal justice system to be their collection agency by
inventing the fiction that markers are checks. They are not, no matter how
much boilerplate claims they are.Casinos should have no more power than any other business to collect debts.
Cogno
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpF…@…com] On Behalf
> Of Luke Fuller
> Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 1:50 PM
> To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [vpFREE] biggest loser…
>
> It completely irrelevent, whether they are an 'addict' or not.
>
> I don't care what their story is. If someone breaks the law
> by passing bad checks or markers, they should pay the
> consequences for their illegal actions. Period.
>
>
> On 5/27/10, Dave <haaljo@…> wrote:
> >
> > All of a sudden the player becomes a gambler because he's addicted.
> > But a drinker isn't an alcoholic when he's addicted?
> > The propreitor of a business should not serve either addict.
> > It's just plain greed just like the investment bankers.
> >
> >
> > — In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Luke Fuller <kungalooosh@> wrote:
> > > A casino that allows a gambler to gamble is not nearly the same as
> a
> > > bartender serving drinks to a drunk.
> > >
> > > If the gambler (in the story) broke the law (by passing bad
> > checks/markers),
> > > he should pay the consequences for his illegal actions.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Highly inaccurate. Highly.
Whether you like it or not, casino markers are treated as checks in
Nevada. Failure to repay a marker or having insufficient funds to cover
the marker is fraud. That's illegal.
This law is not fiction. And, it allows the Clark County district
attorney's office to recover a casino's bad debts.
I agree that casinos *should* not have more power than any other
business to collect debts. But, how I feel about the law is irrelevant.
This buy broke the law and should be held accountable for his actions.
···
On 5/28/10, Cogno Scienti <cognoscienti@gmail.com> wrote:
Failing to repay a private debt is not illegal. The casinos have co-opted
the Nevada criminal justice system to be their collection agency by
inventing the fiction that markers are checks. They are not, no matter
how much boilerplate claims they are.Casinos should have no more power than any other business to collect debts.
Cogno
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpF…@…com] On Behalf
> Of Luke Fuller
> Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 1:50 PM
> To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [vpFREE] biggest loser…
>
> It completely irrelevant, whether they are an 'addict' or not.
>
> I don't care what their story is. If someone breaks the law
> by passing bad checks or markers, they should pay the
> consequences for their illegal actions. Period.
>
>
> On 5/27/10, Dave <haaljo@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > All of a sudden the player becomes a gambler because he's addicted.
> > But a drinker isn't an alcoholic when he's addicted?
> > The propreitor of a business should not serve either addict.
> > It's just plain greed just like the investment bankers.
> >
> >
> > — In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Luke Fuller <kungalooosh@…> wrote:
> > A casino that allows a gambler to gamble is not nearly the same as a
> > bartender serving drinks to a drunk.
> >
> > If the gambler (in the story) broke the law (by passing bad
> > checks/markers),
> > he should pay the consequences for his illegal actions.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
If the law says they are checks then they are checks. It might not be right, but you'll still go to jail if you don't pay. When you sign a marker you are essentially signing a post-dated check. The law does, however, provide some protections like for example if the casino KNOWS you don't have any money in the account and they grant you credit anyway then it becomes their problem. Of course you will have to be able to prove that they didn't know.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cogno Scienti" <cognoscienti@...> wrote:
Failing to repay a private debt is not illegal. The casinos have co-opted
the Nevada criminal justice system to be their collection agency by
inventing the fiction that markers are checks. They are not, no matter how
much boilerplate claims they are.Casinos should have no more power than any other business to collect debts.
Cogno
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpF…@…com] On Behalf
> Of Luke Fuller
> Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 1:50 PM
> To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [vpFREE] biggest loser…
>
> It completely irrelevent, whether they are an 'addict' or not.
>
> I don't care what their story is. If someone breaks the law
> by passing bad checks or markers, they should pay the
> consequences for their illegal actions. Period.
>
>
> On 5/27/10, Dave <haaljo@…> wrote:
> >
> > All of a sudden the player becomes a gambler because he's addicted.
> > But a drinker isn't an alcoholic when he's addicted?
> > The propreitor of a business should not serve either addict.
> > It's just plain greed just like the investment bankers.
> >
> >
> > — In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Luke Fuller <kungalooosh@> wrote:
> > > A casino that allows a gambler to gamble is not nearly the same as
> a
> > > bartender serving drinks to a drunk.
> > >
> > > If the gambler (in the story) broke the law (by passing bad
> > checks/markers),
> > > he should pay the consequences for his illegal actions.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>