I've been looking forward to tonight's radio ever since I saw Todd's first tweet about this clown show. As soon as I saw that their twitter acct was protected, I knew this was gonna be fun.
I mean, it's outrageously obvious that this cannot be a legitimate business.
Curtis Woodward (@curtinsea on Twitter) claims to know Gabriela Hill, and said he verified with her that she actually sent those tweets.
I don't know Curtis Woodward, other than interacting with him on Twitter, but I doubt he is making this up.
So weird. I really want to know what Gabriela's true role is here.
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
She may be the only one that has actually seen any money from pokerapproved. Only thing that makes sense. Or she's fucking him.
Ms. Hill sounds alot like Michele Claybourne from FTP: doing her "PR" job defending a ship that is sinking (but she can't tell b/c she is asleep in the luxury suite).
keep going .... dig deeper u guys are so close
Dunno if you know something or not. But if you do, the inference would then be that Gabriela is a part owner of this, whatever it is, since Michelle had some FTP stock. I haven't even started looking into this but hope to do so tomorrow.
keep going .... dig deeper u guys are so close
Hi y'all. I'm the "high-profile poker blogger" that Anna Khait referred to on PokerFraudAlert Radio tonight. (If you don't know me, I've been a poker tournament reporter since 2004, and I've been the lead reporter for the World Poker Tour since 2007.)
I've just sent an email to DanDruff detailing my contact with Poker Approved, which was much less interesting than Anna's involvement. I won't go into details here (it's relatively boring), but DanDruff has all the information I have and can contact me if he has any follow-up questions.
It's Curtis Woodard, one 'W' FYI
I don't know what Gabby's role is with that site, I didn't press her on it and she didn't elaborate. But she did confirm to me that she sent the tweets. She is in media, and her role was probably in that vein. I never saw her promote the site, so I don't think she is party to any scam. She did say in her tweet that she signed a non-disclosure agreement, so I'm not surprised she had little to say other than a party-line comment. I doubt she will comment on it further.
You don't know her role with that site, but you do know her, correct? If so, does she strike you as someone who would do "media" for a scam site? Also, do you think (your opinion only) that the site seems to be a scam?It's Curtis Woodard, one 'W' FYI
I don't know what Gabby's role is with that site, I didn't press her on it and she didn't elaborate. But she did confirm to me that she sent the tweets. She is in media, and her role was probably in that vein. I never saw her promote the site, so I don't think she is party to any scam. She did say in her tweet that she signed a non-disclosure agreement, so I'm not surprised she had little to say other than a party-line comment. I doubt she will comment on it further.
Yes I think it's a scam site. It has all the markings of a con to me. People fall for cons all the time, that makes them dupes, not scammers. And when you have signed a non disclosure agreement, it is in your best interest to just keep quiet and let the chips fall where they may.You don't know her role with that site, but you do know her, correct? If so, does she strike you as someone who would do "media" for a scam site? Also, do you think (your opinion only) that the site seems to be a scam?
No I don't think she would be involved in a scam site, and it looks to me like she has distanced herself from it. It probably looked like an attractive deal at the time. She does care about her reputation very much.
Yes I think it's a scam site. It has all the markings of a con to me. People fall for cons all the time, that makes them dupes, not scammers. And when you have signed a non disclosure agreement, it is in your best interest to just keep quiet and let the chips fall where they may.
No I don't think she would be involved in a scam site, and it looks to me like she has distanced herself from it. It probably looked like an attractive deal at the time. She does care about her reputation very much.
What's the difference between a scam site and a con?
Or dupes and scammers?
You know it's a fraud but you support this girl anyway because you want to bone her.
Thanks Dandruff for digging into this. I was debating posting on 2+2 to warn people about this, but it's impossible to control the message there and stay on topic with the NVGtards. Pretty sure that word of mouth, Twitter and your site/show have guaranteed that these scumbags won't dupe any poker players ever again.
A group of us were having some fun with this on Twitter, because Sergio (on the PokerApproved account) was being sooooo ridiculous. The threats and stalking were way over the line, but my guess is the guy has serious mental problems and doesn't have a firm grasp on reality. He looked me up and found out where I work and threatened to tell them about my slandering him. I welcomed this as my reputation at work is beyond reproach and I happen to work for a company that employs quite a number of libel lawyers. Then he started digging more and found some addresses of people connected to me. Pretty creepy.
BJ Nemeth sent me Sergio's e-mail to him, regarding attempting to hire BJ to report on the Super Millions.
From: "Sergio - (Poker Approved)" <sergio@PokerApproved.com>
Subject: Overview - Super Millions Poker Championship
Date: April 13, 2014 at 12:00:59 AM EDT
To: BJ NEMETH <EMAIL ADDRESS REDACTED>
Hey BJ,
Thank you for elaborating on your schedule and time horizons. The super high roller event that we would need you for, would not overlap any of those mentioned timelines, so that is a good start.
The event that we are producing is a big one. It will be a $50 Million Guarantee with hopes of hitting our magic number of $100 Million Prize Pool. The buy-in is $1.2 Million ....so it caters to a very small but special field of poker players and the rich wealthy business men / clientele.
We plan on televising the tournament and we would be producing the event itself and pay for all productions. (not a small endeavor, let me tell you!)
We plan on bringing the best individuals on-board to create the best Production Team for our SHR - Super Millions Poker Championship event.
The event will be produced in the Caribbean and the event will last approx 6 days, with other fun TV stuff going on and fun challenges for the poker players and billionaires. We plan on making this a very high end poker tournament, but one with a fun filled atmosphere with great stories and entertainment for TV purposes.
So we would need you for a minimum of 6 full Days of event work + at least 2 travel days.
What services do you think you would like to offer in a tournament of this magnitude, and so that I have a better idea of what kind of involvement you would like to have, or offer to us.
Let me know.
Cheers,
Sergio
I was the one who bolded parts of the message. There was nothing bolded in the actual e-mail.
BJ said he negotiated a fairly generous rate for his services, to which Sergio agreed. However, it never got past that stage, as BJ pulled out when all of the weird stuff with Anna went down.
Interesting that the Super Millions was actually planned to be a $50 Million Guarantee. What a joke.
Curtis,Yes I think it's a scam site. It has all the markings of a con to me. People fall for cons all the time, that makes them dupes, not scammers. And when you have signed a non disclosure agreement, it is in your best interest to just keep quiet and let the chips fall where they may.
No I don't think she would be involved in a scam site, and it looks to me like she has distanced herself from it. It probably looked like an attractive deal at the time. She does care about her reputation very much.
Sorry for misspelling your name earlier.
Anyway, I appreciate you approaching Gabriela about this. I don't know how close you are to her, but if you two really are friends, I would try to have a serious talk with her and let her know that she is likely being duped.
BTW, are you 100% sure you were really talking with Gabriela? How did you contact her? (I'm just making sure you didn't e-mail her, and get a response from the same person who compromised her Twitter.)
While I always hate when people hide behind NDAs to wash their hands of involvement in scams, I can also understand where someone can be uncomfortable violating one.
However, this still doesn't explain why Gabriela lashed out at me with the lawsuit threats. If she were to have said, "I'm sorry, I am bound by an NDA not to discuss PokerApproved", that would have been understandable. However, she tweeted legal threats at me and chided me for making "false claims" about PokerApproved. She was acting as if she were personally affected by my recent accusations against the company.
Furthermore, her initial response to me was also very peculiar. I asked her what she knew about PokerApproved, and she came back with a formal answer regarding the supposed ownership structure. I never asked about the ownership structure -- just who was behind the operation. Again, if she was only afraid of an NDA, she would have said, "I'm sorry, I am unable to discuss PokerApproved". The answer of, "The company is privately held and owned by a private equity firm and including shareholders" is an unlikely answer to come from someone no longer working there. The answer also paints PokerApproved in a positive light -- stating that they have shareholders and are owned by an equity firm (rather than just some chump in Canada). This would also be an unlikely response from her if she had parted ways from PokerApproved.
Think about it this way, Curtis.
Let's say you went to work for a small business down the road, but left after you had suspicion that they were engaging in illegal/scammy behavior. Let's say that you signed an NDA regarding your time there.
If someone asked you about the company publicly, would you respond peddling the company-line bullshit and threaten people with lawsuits for questioning the company's integrity?
Or would you simply say something like, "Sorry, my NDA prevents me from discussing this business."
You have to admit that Gabriela's behavior is very peculiar here. I'm wondering what you make of it, and if you can get some clarification why she is acting this way.
By the way, I am officially inviting Sergio (or Gilles) Guimond to come on PFA and defend himself against these allegations/assumptions.
He is also welcome to come on the next PFA Radio show.
I would love to hear from him, and get to the bottom of this.
No worries. But middle aged? That hurtCurtis,
Sorry for misspelling your name earlier.
I'm 100% sure I was talking to herAnyway, I appreciate you approaching Gabriela about this. I don't know how close you are to her, but if you two really are friends, I would try to have a serious talk with her and let her know that she is likely being duped.
BTW, are you 100% sure you were really talking with Gabriela? How did you contact her? (I'm just making sure you didn't e-mail her, and get a response from the same person who compromised her Twitter.)
I see how you took her tweets, but I really don't think they are as strong and threatening as you make them seem. They were pretty much 'party line' statements, likely she was told that was all she could say on the subject. If it were me, and I'd signed something, I wouldn't be going and giving out info on twitter and getting myself in trouble for no reason. I would have gave the party line and then never responded to you again. I really don't find it suspicious. She has nothing to gain by giving any info publicly, and probably plenty to lose.While I always hate when people hide behind NDAs to wash their hands of involvement in scams, I can also understand where someone can be uncomfortable violating one.
However, this still doesn't explain why Gabriela lashed out at me with the lawsuit threats. If she were to have said, "I'm sorry, I am bound by an NDA not to discuss PokerApproved", that would have been understandable. However, she tweeted legal threats at me and chided me for making "false claims" about PokerApproved. She was acting as if she were personally affected by my recent accusations against the company.
Furthermore, her initial response to me was also very peculiar. I asked her what she knew about PokerApproved, and she came back with a formal answer regarding the supposed ownership structure. I never asked about the ownership structure -- just who was behind the operation. Again, if she was only afraid of an NDA, she would have said, "I'm sorry, I am unable to discuss PokerApproved". The answer of, "The company is privately held and owned by a private equity firm and including shareholders" is an unlikely answer to come from someone no longer working there. The answer also paints PokerApproved in a positive light -- stating that they have shareholders and are owned by an equity firm (rather than just some chump in Canada). This would also be an unlikely response from her if she had parted ways from PokerApproved.
Put the tweets in the context and it's not so strange . . .
Think about it this way, Curtis.
Let's say you went to work for a small business down the road, but left after you had suspicion that they were engaging in illegal/scammy behavior. Let's say that you signed an NDA regarding your time there.
If someone asked you about the company publicly, would you respond peddling the company-line bullshit and threaten people with lawsuits for questioning the company's integrity?
Or would you simply say something like, "Sorry, my NDA prevents me from discussing this business."
You have to admit that Gabriela's behavior is very peculiar here. I'm wondering what you make of it, and if you can get some clarification why she is acting this way.
Todd: You worked for PokerApproved. Can you please tell us who is behind that operation?
Gabriela:Hi Todd, The company is privately held and owned by a private equity firm and including shareholders.
Todd: Hi, thx for responding. Do you have any proof of this? There is some suspicion now that it's a scam:
Gabriela: All employees of the company are bound by Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreements
Todd: That's a lot of legal nonsense. If you suspect it is a scam, it is your duty to report it to the authorities and come forward.
Gabriela: Poker Approved will defend itself vigorously against any false claims that you are making and will be held accountable
Gabriela: for business and revenue losses of the company, for your actions.
Her tweets were replies to yours, I'm sure she is just covering her ass.
I don't speak for her. And if she can't or won't speak to the issue publicly, that is her choice. Personally, I don't see any plus side to her saying any more on the subject. I haven't seen anything anywhere that has her trying to get people to sign up and/or send money to this site, so I see nothing that implicates her in the scam
I don't believe I implied there was a difference
Victims and participantsOr dupes and scammers?
What are you, twelve?
You know it's a fraud but you support this girl anyway because you want to bone her.
Tough news for everyone. I took a visit to http://pokerapproved.com to see if I could invest a couple million of the dollars I harvested from my money tree and discovered... alas, they are currently fully-funded.
They must've hit the bank with all your publicity!
Currently Fully-Funded for Sponsorships
Individual / Private Clients: Institutional / Corporate Clients:
Minimum Sponsorship Investment: $10,000 Minimum Sponsorship Investment: $100,000
Maximum Sponsorship Investment: $2,000,000 Maximum Sponsorship Investment: $15,000,000
-----
Our Poker Equity Partners program does not require any long term commitments by investors. Investors may redeem their capital and any profits from their Poker Equity Partners sponsorship account any time.
INVESTOR REPORTS: Individual reports are supplied to each investor, for verification purposes of poker bankroll administration and equity participation records. Such reports will show how the investors sponsorship funds were invested and will show the returns of each sponsored bankroll played by the staked poker player, with the investors sponsorship funds.
---
I have to admit part of me would like to see someone who was scammed surface and show one of these personal "investor reports". I suspect any personal investors would be seeing the effects of negative short term variance.
Curtis, you don't have to talk to Gabriela further about this if you don't want. I don't know how close you are with her. If it's just a "friendly acquaintance", I don't blame you for not wanting to get involved.
However, if she really is a friend, I think you really should make sure she understands what she's gotten herself into.
I do agree with one of your points -- that she was likely quoting the "party line" for the company when responding to me. But that means she's probably still heavily involved, and that couldn't be good for her.
It is true that she is no longer promoting PokerApproved publicly, but obviously she still has some interest in seeing it succeed if she is writing such inflammatory messages on Twitter to me, so either way, this couldn't be a good thing for her.
I have received numerous e-mails from respected individuals within poker regarding this matter, and their stories all have one thing in common:
"Sergio" seems to be taking his plans very seriously, and seems to be putting a LOT of time and effort into actually lining things up.
Does that mean I've changed my mind and believe that PokerApproved is legit? Not at all.
It means that I am becoming further convinced that my original assumption is true. I believe that Sergio really wants to put on these events and make PokerApproved a reality, but is lying/misleading people in order to get people on board for his plans.
Let me put it in a non-poker context so it's more clear what I mean:
Say that I have (what I believe to be) a great idea for a movie, and I want Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Cruise, and George Clooney to star in it.
If I were to call up Tom Cruise's agent and say, "Hey, I am going to make a really great movie, and I want Tom to be one of the stars!", he would ask me various questions:
"What studio is funding this?"
"What other stars have agreed to be in this film?"
"Who is going to direct?"
"Where is it going to be filmed?"
If I told Cruise's agent the truth -- basically that I had nothing in place and that this was all in concept, he would laugh at me and hang up.
Similarly, if I called a studio and tried to get them to back the movie, again they would likely laugh me off the phone. And if I called a respected director and asked him to sign on, it would be the same result -- failure.
But what if I were to be able to mislead all of these entities to believe that the project was already well underway? What if I could lie to Cruise's agent and convince him that a major studio was involved, and that I had already hired a highly respected director? What if, at the same time, I could convince a director that I had Tom Cruise, George Clooney, and Leo DiCaprio all highly interested in my project? What if I could convince a studio that I had these A-list actors interested in starring and a top director all ready to direct it, and simply needed their backing?
Well, if I could con all of them well enough, in theory I could pull this off before anyone realized that they were all jumping aboard without anything really having been in place. Each of these entities -- the stars, the studio, the director, would all be convinced that the others were already established prior to them signing on, when in reality none of them were.
There was a Steve Martin/Eddie Murphy movie about this in the '90s called "Bowfinger", and it had a similar plot. Basically, Martin's character was a broke, ne'er do well wannabe producer, who put together a group of people to fool a huge star named Kit Ramsey (Murphy) that he was really acting in a large picture. However, their budget was so low that they actually had to put Ramsey in real life situations and tell him that he was acting. In the clip below, they convince Ramsey's double (also played by Murphy) to cross a real-life busy freeway, telling him that the drivers are all stuntmen and won't actually hit him.
From my preliminary investigations into PokerApproved, I believe something similar is happening here.
Sergio/Gilles seems to believe, "If I convince everyone else that it's already built, they will come."
From what I have observed, as well as things I've been told behind the scenes, Sergio does seem to actually be trying to put the pieces together to make these events reality.
He contacts venues, such as Revel and Mirage.
He contacts bloggers/reporters, such as BJ Nemeth.
He contacts media to write articles, promote, and televise these events.
He contacts pretty girls in poker like Anna to be the "face" of these events.
He contacts players such as Jeff Madsen and tries to get them on board to play in the events (albeit with ridiculous pre-pay requirements in order to get "staked" the rest of the way.)
This doesn't look like a "take the money and run" sort of scam, but rather a scam where everyone is being misled into believing they are being invited to join something big, when in reality nothing is actually in place.
Sergio/Gilles likely sees himself as the puppetmaster, pulling the strings on the money-hungry poker community and putting enough pieces together based upon empty promises to where he will eventually have enough names to drop to make his tournaments and company look legit.
Why do I think this?
I have received numerous reports of people being offered jobs at SuperMillions, as well as reports of SuperMillions attempting to secure partnerships with existing poker media companies. These reports also indicate that Sergio/Gilles was very aggressive and pushy in negotiating these jobs/partnerships. Basically, he put a lot of time and effort into each one. If the object is simply to take everyone's buyins and run, this doesn't make a lot of sense. I like BJ Nemeth, but you really don't need to "hire" him to report on the event behind the scenes if your only goal is to steal everyone's money. It's unlikely that any pro will see BJ Nemeth's presence as the difference of whether or not they plunk down $1.2 Million to play the SuperMillions.
But if it's not an outright "steal the buyins" scam, why that weird story where they offered Jeff Madsen a stake into SuperMillions, provided he sent them $400,000 first?
That's actually pretty easy to explain. They need seed money. Sergio needs actual money to pay the people he hires, and to cover their expenses (flight, hotel, etc). If he gets people like Madsen to front $400,000, he can then use that money to actually prepay the people he's hiring, and thus give the event an appearance of legitimacy. Then he would have better luck securing a venue for his precious SuperMillions tournament, and in turn would get enough publicity to perhaps actually attract real $1.2 million buyins! And just like that, the SuperMillions exists!
Of course, this isn't a victimless situation. If Madsen gives his $400,000 and then SuperMillions doesn't happen (despite the money being used to promote it and hire people), Madsen is out his money, and is highly unlikely to recover it.
So, simply put, I think Sergio/Gilles is the "Bowfinger" of poker. He is trying to make everyone think that he has a large established operation, so they sign on and voila, suddenly he really DOES have a large operation! And if it doesn't go according to plan? Sure, people will end up losing out on money, time, and perhaps will have given up other opportunities in order to participate in this. But who cares? That's not Sergio's problem!
Sergio, I am sure you are reading this. If you want the poker community to take you seriously, you have to do the following:
- Be honest about who you are. Give your real name and verifiable identity, both when dealing with people and on your site's webpage. Stop hiding in the shadows.
- Be honest about the size of PokerApproved. Don't lie about the number of employees you have, the number of people you're staking, or the amount of funding behind your project. Be open about all of this, and be ready to provide people proof of what you say.
- Be honest about the venues of your events. Just because you hope to have an event at the Mirage doesn't mean you're actually having it there. Don't promise people like Anna that you'll be hiring them for a tournament that doesn't yet exist. If the tournament is still in the conceptual/planning states, YOU NEED TO DISCLOSE THIS.
- Be honest about the number of people seriously interested and committed to playing in your events. Do not lie or exaggerate these numbers just to drum up interest.
- Do not charge people to be interviewed by your company for staking. If you are serious about staking and have millions of dollars of funding (LOL), you don't need their measly $1,000 to be "evaluated". That's not how staking works, and that's never how any kind of job interview has worked.
It also seems that Sergio is the ONLY person anyone has ever spoken to regarding these jobs/tournaments/projects. Even Gabriela, who clearly has some involvement, does not seem to be actively contacting anyone -- or at least not anymore. They all report dealing with Sergio personally. This completely contradicts PokerApproved's grandiose "jobs listing", which laughably portrays a big organization ready to hire people for as much as $500,000 per year.
I believe PokerApproved to simply be the brainchild of one selfish Canadian dreamer, who believes himself to be smarter than everyone else in poker.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
