Sting got exposed, now suing Clevfan?

[STINGCC]

For the record, I have no intention of personally suing anybody. If anybody gets served with papers next week I can assure you it won’t be by ME.

Furthermore, Sports911.com will take whatever actions are necessary to ensure the integrity of this website and its members and is already in the process of doing so this morning. (11.07.03 3:18 pm EST)

Truthteller, this message has absolutely nothing to do with me suing a poster or anybody else for that matter. My concern above reflects an opinion that I cannot take on advertisers that stiff or are perceived as stiffing people and just walk away from the whole ordeal. I will do everything in my power to ensure this matter is resolved in a way that players do not have to rollover their money 5x. It would be a lot easier to just sit back and let this thing die as it’s been done here and elsewhere with other failed books time and time again. We ALL had Gamblers Avenue as an advertiser and as website owners we are ALL responsible for getting this matter resolved to the benefit of the players. The fact that I know Mike well outside of this industry is beneficial to the players in getting this matter resolved and quickly.

Buzzsaw, I don’t agree with you on this one about the rollover. If you are concerned about what eliminating the rollover requirement will do to Royal then I’m sure you would agree Royal does not belong in this business. Roberto has already emailed me saying he could lower the rollover to 1x without it doing any damage and the only sticking point is an issue that Mike is willing to waive to get the rollover down if that’s all it takes. Mike is communicating with Royal on this front today.

 

[RoyalSports+]

Chris et al,

We have recently opened a direct communication channel which I trust will remain as such. However I am somewhat disappointed of your latest opinions. The Royal Sports Group has never stiffed anyone, and this you have recently convened. Even the Autiger saga has been cleared. We have made an offer to the guy through a third party and he has declined it. He has informed us he is taking us to Court and has retained a local attorney to represent him. The same attorney that IB has just retained as he ( IB ) seems to have a problem to comply with the order of The Court of First Instance . A mere coincidence I suppose.

Back to Gamblers Avenue we both, you and I, know the truth . As we both, you and I, know that Grande was never in the loop.

The Royal Sports Group has all intention to have Gamblers Avenue grow, and we will dedicate all necessary efforts and convey all needed resources to make this happen. Yet I find quite unusual, to say the least, that we have to publicly discuss this issue . A bailout agreement has been convened to, you have had all the insurance you need, or you have been seeking for, to make sure that Gamblers Avenue's customer balances would be SAFE, typed as you recently did.

As a reminder to all I will copypaste CIGA's latest statement about the Royal Sports Group :

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Whilst CIGA does not audit any company's books, I can confirm that in my best judgement and belief, having seen various evidence, Royal Sports has sufficient cash reserves and access to capital to continue to trade profitably, as it has done successfully for many years. Based on the confidential data I have seen, I can further comment that Royal is in far better shape today than at any time in the last 3 years.
Alistair Assheton
Chairman, CIGA
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I shall honestly admit that I have appreciated your continuous effort in challenging the Royal Sports Group as I feel that, also thanks to your contribution, we are the Offshore Company that has been disclosing all about itself , its past problems, its current safety, its future plans of expansion.

Yet you have to undertand, and seriously hope you will appreciate, that we have endured our efforts primarily through the firm execution of a business plan that has never been subject to or has never been remoduled in view of external pressures.

We will proceed with the Gamblers Avenue as per agreed terms with its former owners. These terms do contained the rollover. Discussed and agreed by both parties.

Sincerely,

Roberto Castiglioni
The Royal Sports Group
1-800-818-1000

[This message was edited by Royal Sports on November 08, 2003 at 01:30 PM.]

 

[truthteller]

Sting, thanks for coming and clearing up that you are not suing Clevfan. I was basing this on what Johnny Detroit said over at the MW thread rather than this statement"

"Furthermore, Sports911.com will take whatever actions are necessary to ensure the integrity of this website and its members and is already in the process of doing so this morning. (11.07.03 3:18 pm EST)"

Anyway, glad you are not suing her but if Surfrat/Mike Silver wants to do it, let him bring it on. I have already several posters willing to post up in the Clevfan defence fund.

 

[clevfan]

Sting, nice try to wriggle out of this, but you aren't going to get out of this one. Just so everyone knows, I recieved a threatening phone call which was left on my answering machine on Friday morning, and Sting, tell your buddy Mike Silver that I saved the message.

 

[truthteller]

Sting, can you confirm or deny the rumours that you were part owner of GA?

 

[TheGeneral+]

Very relative thread to what we do here.

 

[clevfan]

don't understand your reply General, but would like to say before I get my papers tomorrow telling me to shut up that Sting could very possibly be a co-owner of the old Gambler's Avenue, and I am sure that he has alot to hide that will be dug out.

 

[truthteller]

Sting, I guess not responding to my question means you owned some part in GA.

I have info coming in from all angles that you were part of this scam outfit. Were you?

 

[Acidkid]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck Sims:
You can't sue someone for telling the truth! Clevfan warns posters about GA being in trouble so STING files a lawsuit against her? And this is a guy who is running a watchdog site? What a joke this sewer scum is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not that it matters, but actually you can sue someone for telling the truth - only if it can be proved that you disclosed or made public the information with the sole intent to do harm.

 

[Jazz]

Acidkid: certainly you can sue people for telling the truth, for instance if someone posted enough information about you to allow people to commit financial fraud against you (social security #, address, phone, birthdate, credit card numbers with expiry dates and that 3 digit code, etc).

Not speaking about this case in particular, though

 

[IntuitionBET]

TTinCO wrote: "I HIGHLY doubt that you'll be hearing a peep out of IB regarding Royal. He got slapped with a big enough bill this week for slander."

TTinCo you act like a little kid bully with FALSE info roberto fed you.

I wasn't the one that LIED that royal was not for sale that was roberto. I was not the one that LIED royal was having cash problems that was roberto. I was the one that roberto called a liar for passing on the truth about the items above, and I only did this along with PEEP and others in an effort to alert the players and that is what this forum is for.
roberto eventually told the truth and admited them after everyone that was royal left...should I give you a link to these threads? Or are you going to LIE and say all the above is not true?

Grow-up and stop your false propaganda. it doesn't hold water.