The Rx -What level of accountability does it have with Pan AM

dogball · Jan 29, 2004

( This discussion started in another thread with WIlheim, I think it is worthy of its own thread )

And what can we as players do to demand situations like this NEVER happen again???

My brief opinion is this
The Rx promoted Pan AM in its infancy as the second coming of christ. It is an embarrassment and a HUGE miscalculation on there part.

Was it intentional- ABSOLUTLEY NOT
Did they get paid to offer there opinion, absolutley.

Similarly, Smith Barney could have led me to buy a stock that was a complete failure. The difference is I have the tools to investigate that stock and its owners before I buy it. Offshore, I am compelled to rely on the research of sites like this before I invest my $ with them.
Shrink has handled the crisis part of Pan Am very well. He has been hard on them and asked the right questions in the face of what he knew to be unbeliveable backlash to him for his endorsement. He is doing his best right now and that is all I can ask of him at this point.

How much slack we can cut the sites for there endorsement of Pan AM and other failures is one issue and what we can do as players to make sure it never happens again is the other issue.

Thoughts ??

dimeplayersonly · Jan 29, 2004

SHRINK........owes everyone an apology...

then again its not his fault they are having problems.......

one reason i dont vouch for very many people, is you cant control what they fck up....but everyone will remember you, when you sang thier praises......

Journeyman · Jan 29, 2004

IF there is a 500K bond then there should be some hope to hold out for...IF is the key though and I really do wonder about that...

This is the worst travesty since I have been reading this site...

Like I said a minute ago, without repercussion these books that bail can very easily start back up with player list in hand, something has got to stop this!

I hate to say it but no wonder the govt. wants this ceased...Every couple months this happens....Earth to anyone wanting to start a book, don`t give away the store with obscene bonuses,lies and reduced vig!

HateTheRiverCard · Jan 29, 2004

DB.. My opinion is that the RX went wrong in touting them as the next best thing since sliced bread. In hindsight they probably wish they hadn't. I think that if you are taking on a new book as an advertiser it is best to not only state that but also explain that with any new venture comes risk. Sure nobody holds a gun to a players head and forces him to send money to a new book but people sometimes foolishly trust the words of owners of these forums when they say that a book and its principals are solid. The only person(s) that know are the principals themselves because they know how much they are willing to lay out before packing it in. Pan Am made a mistake trying to grow to big to fast and probably shouldn't have investing as much in forum advertising and promotion as they did, and they admitted to as much tonite when they stated in a chat session at OGD that they would not be renewing advertising with MW or RX. So to sumarize, is the RX or MW to blame? Sure they assume some of it for making them the next coming of Pinnacle but bettors must take some blame for sending hard earned money to a book still wet behind the ears and in the infantile stage of start up.

IMO

HTRC

dogball · Jan 29, 2004

JMAN
I dont believe for one second that a bond exists and even if it did I dont believe players will recover a penny from it if Pan AM does not pay.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> This is the worst travesty since I have been reading this site...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed

I wouldnt be surprised if Ken is working on some type of bailout in case Pan AM does not.

dogball · Jan 29, 2004

repeat

dogball · Jan 29, 2004

HTRC
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> would not be renewing advertising with MW or RX <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL, closed books usually do not advertise
WHat did they say about payment and is it to early for posts like this or are we best served by addressing this situation even if Pan Am pulls through

Java · Jan 29, 2004

I think the RX shouldn't tout any book with a bonus program that is "too good", particularly one so new. That is just asking for trouble.

I would be concerned about Pinnacle, if they didn't have such a long track record and such sharp lines. Any other book that offers overly-competitive bonuses should be suspect.

theswami · Jan 29, 2004

1) Pan Am has not failed yet.

2) The Rx (Shrink and mods) should ensure that there is a disclaimer somewhere stating that the site is funded by its owner and advertisers. Additionally, the disclaimer should also state that recommendations by Rx employees are personal opinions and do not guarantee or ensure the stability of any recommended book.

The information in number two is obvious to most BUT IMHO actually stating it somewhere VISIBLE (either on each page OR in a thread when a book is being touted) releases the RX from any sort of moral responsibility when a book fails.

I do believe that the site (and its representatives) portrays itself as a "watchdog" or "trusted source" and that can be misleading when things like this go down. The disclaimer would relieve them of this baggage and allow them to tout a book as much as they want.

Unfortunately, the posters do not usually hear about how each person should make his own decision and things of that nature until something happens. At that point, its probably a little too late after reading a dozen posts stating that the operators are "stand up guys" and this operation is "going to be around a while" and that the book is the "next industry leader."

dogball · Jan 29, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> 1) Pan Am has not failed yet<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

True swami, noone is writing them off just yet

Interstingly, I think it raises this issue regardless of the outcome bc I think everyone realizes now that this or any situation could go either way.

theswami · Jan 29, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by dogball:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> 1) Pan Am has not failed yet<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

True swami, noone is writing them off just yet

Interstingly, I think it raises this issue regardless of the outcome bc I think everyone realizes now that this or any situation could go either way.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

AGREE!!!!

lander · Jan 29, 2004

Dog,
I think this is an extremely important topic.

I don't have any idea how to stop these situations from happening, but hopefully as a group brainstorming we'll figure something out - or at least give the powers that be some ideas to work with.

wilheim · Jan 29, 2004

Dog - The principal difference between sites like The Rx. and Smith Barney is that SB charges you for the information they supply. This and all other sites like it are free. Log on and use the site for whatever reason you please. Lots of posters and lurkers never even bother with Offshore, they use the various forums to help themselves bet more wisely. Others only come here to read what is going on in this forum. The site and others like MW have a lot of things to offer Gamblers, a good example is one of the posters in the NBA forum posted a nice winning total tonight. I happen to know he has a large following, so it is certain a good number of visitors to that forum are a little richer right now (myself included). To get back to the topic of accountability, I can only offer the opinion that at the time everyone who endorsed BPAM believed they would succeed. Does Shrink owe an apology? I certainly hope so. Is he soley to blame, of course not. This sadly looks like another live and learn lesson for all. I will add that the situation is not completely down the tubes, who really knows, I don't.

wil.

HateTheRiverCard · Jan 29, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by dogball:
HTRC
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> would not be renewing advertising with MW or RX <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL, closed books usually do not advertise
WHat did they say about payment and is it to early for posts like this or are we best served by addressing this situation even if Pan Am pulls through<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

DB.. they are going on the assumption that they will still be in business after the Super Bowl, I didn't hang around for most of the chat but will post the full transcript tomorrow if the mods allow it to stay. Seems like alot was covered by Bill but will wait for the transcript to see what else was said.

Later

HTRC

dogball · Jan 29, 2004

Lander
I agree buddy, I also think the time is now for a call to arms so to speak. We need leaders, are you ready ??

lander · Jan 29, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> LOL, closed books usually do not advertise
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dog,
Please get your facts straight. Homebets advertised for several months here after they ceased to exist

dogball · Jan 29, 2004

Wilheim
The rx is a great source of information for betting opinions, I clearly agree with that and the site has many purposes.
You make a good point about Smith Barney getting paid to supply me info, but indirectly the rx is paid by posters as they generate all there revenue from ad dollars and without poster post up # to advertisers that wont continue. Thats why I think that argument falls short.

BTW, I am not blaming shrink for anything, I think this dialogue will be helpful to understand where both sides are coming from.

Lander-
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Homebets advertised for several months here after they ceased to exist <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
lmfao
That must predate my time

wilheim · Jan 29, 2004

Dog - true posters that sign up with books indirectly support the site. My point however is that NO ONE is obligated to sign up any where, as opposed to the example used Smith Barney, where customers are obligated to pay for service. This is a completely free site if you want it to be.

wil.

marino13 · Jan 29, 2004

I know I posted up soley because of the RX, and I have since learned A $1200 lesson. I will never post up with a book solely because they advertise here ever again. In fact, it kinda raises a red flag with all of the other failures of new books (Wager's Paradise, GA, etc.) I was lucky before to avoid those, but it looks like I'll get burned on this one. Sorry to those with bigger balances.

I know I haven't posted alot here, and as such I may not be a member of your "community". However, it does p**s me off that the RX made money off PanAm and I just through away $$$ based on their recommendation.

I do appreciate this site, and I have learned a lot from it. I just won't be so naive ever again.

vinividivinci · Jan 29, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by dogball:
( This discussion started in another thread with WIlheim, I think it is worthy of its own thread )

And what can we as players do to demand situations like this NEVER happen again???

There is an important difference here that needs to be brought to the forefront.

A firm like Smith Barney (or Merrill Lynch) is required by law (Securities and Exchange Commission) to do "due diligence" prior to touting the stock of any company.

Failure to do so leaves them open to legal action (lawsuits) that would bankrupt them. On the other hand, The RX is free from any regulation. The Rx can accept advertising dollars from a startup company and then promoate them in any fashion desired.

Whereas the brokerage firm would be bankrupt, The RX does not even have to say "I'm sorry. I really fvcked up this time. I took the money and promoated this book and now they are not paying. I hope they will pay soon. Stay tuned as there is another really good new book starting up soon."

VVV

My brief opinion is this
The Rx promoted Pan AM in its infancy as the second coming of christ. It is an embarrassment and a HUGE miscalculation on there part.

Was it intentional- ABSOLUTLEY NOT
Did they get paid to offer there opinion, absolutley.

Similarly, Smith Barney could have led me to buy a stock that was a complete failure. The difference is I have the tools to investigate that stock and its owners before I buy it. Offshore, I am compelled to rely on the research of sites like this before I invest my $ with them.
Shrink has handled the crisis part of Pan Am very well. He has been hard on them and asked the right questions in the face of what he knew to be unbeliveable backlash to him for his endorsement. He is doing his best right now and that is all I can ask of him at this point.

How much slack we can cut the sites for there endorsement of Pan AM and other failures is one issue and what we can do as players to make sure it never happens again is the other issue.

Thoughts ??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>