- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
However, even an unsuccessful prosecution may have dragged on for years, and the company was eager to remove the stigma altogether. So, it effectively paid the U.S. government $105 million for a clean slate — particularly helpful in the event that the UIGEA was overturned and the chance to re-enter the U.S. market presented itself once more (which is looking more and more likely). In that sense, PartyGaming took a calculated risk that will probably pay off for the company when it can once more resume operations in the U.S.
Thats exactly what I figured.
They bribed the doj, that’s all.
I don’t know if I’d call it a bribe, Dom, so much as just a stop-loss measure. They were getting hammered on this bogus charge, losing money, suffering damaged reputation, facing criminal prosection, with an ex-founder who admitted guilt, so they had to find a way to end it. They just happened to choose the way that would help them the most in the long run. I don’t think they would have approached it this way if the U.S. hadn’t gone after them first.
I’d be more willing to accuse the U.S. of extortion than PartyGaming of bribery here, though both labels seem like a bit of a stretch.
