What about this stuff concerning SBG Global?
BetRoyal confiscates what is estimated to be just over six figures in winnings from 18 players that were also subscribers to the same sports handicapping service. The book paid a tout to refer these players to BetRoyal. The players, which were clearly sourced from the pick service, made money playing the pay-for picks at BetRoyal. BetRoyal was later purchased by SBG Global in June. SBG was asked if they wanted to continue doing business with these winning customers by both the pick service and the players' account manager. SBG management was able to review the account activity and reaffirm that they wanted to book action from these players. The house continued to lose on these plays until management froze the accounts for an "investigation." SBG is known for freezing accounts prior to confiscating funds. This tactic is used to guage backlash from users and the negative effect on current marketing investments; legitimze the claim that there may have been fraud and something to actually investigate, and to simply stall from having to deal with victims when they are most upset.
Anyone else read this?
BetRoyal confiscates what is estimated to be just over six figures in winnings from 18 players that were also subscribers to the same sports handicapping service. The book paid a tout to refer these players to BetRoyal. The players, which were clearly sourced from the pick service, made money playing the pay-for picks at BetRoyal. BetRoyal was later purchased by SBG Global in June. SBG was asked if they wanted to continue doing business with these winning customers by both the pick service and the players' account manager. SBG management was able to review the account activity and reaffirm that they wanted to book action from these players. The house continued to lose on these plays until management froze the accounts for an "investigation." SBG is known for freezing accounts prior to confiscating funds. This tactic is used to guage backlash from users and the negative effect on current marketing investments; legitimze the claim that there may have been fraud and something to actually investigate, and to simply stall from having to deal with victims when they are most upset.
Anyone else read this?