About this app
How to play 20 Pirate Bombs
“Markets now exhibit far more casino-like behavior than they did when I was young. The casino now resides in many homes and daily tempts the occupants,” Buffett wrote, noting that extreme volatility makes identifying sound, long-term investments vastly more difficult.
“One fact of financial life should never be forgotten. Wall Street–to use the term in its figurative sense–would like its customers to make money, but what truly causes its denizens’ juices to flow is feverish activity. At such times, whatever foolishness can be marketed will be vigorously marketed–not by everyone but always by someone,” Buffett warned.
Buffett was not always entirely anti-gambling. Before commercial sports betting expanded across the United States, he regularly offered $1 million annually to any Berkshire Hathaway employee who submitted a perfect NCAA March Madness men’s basketball bracket.
About 20 Pirate Bombs
I didn’t invent online gambling, but I saw its potential early enough to help shape the industry in ways that allowed it to emerge from the shadows into the mainstream.
For those who came looking for archived CalvinAyre.com gambling articles, they live on [here]. For those looking to learn more about the endless possibilities of BSV – including how it will impact the gambling industry – I encourage you to visit [CoinGeek.com] and join me on my next great adventure.
Who’s up for changing the world?
How to play 20 Pirate Bombs
George Hasselback is done with Imperial Pacific International (IPI). The attorney has been representing the controversial and incompetent casino operator as it defended itself in a lawsuit filed by Fox Financial, as well as others, but has now washed his hands and stepped away. He had filed a request to withdraw from representing the company on February 12, and a judge granted his petition yesterday. Magistrate Judge Heather Kennedy agreed with Hasselback in his assertion that continued representation would put him in an ethical conundrum.
Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”
Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.
