BetKing.io is a blatant scam operated by Dean Nolan

[JollyGood]

So basically now you can see why investors are so upset that invested in a scheme that guaranteed Dean Nolan would receive millions of US$ in crypto via the ICO but the investors would be left with virtually useless and worthless Betking tokens.

There has no way for investors to cross reference, verify or ascertain how the funds were spent, who the funds went to and if they were spent in accordance with the ICO whitepaper.

I think investors should consider getting together and asking for their funds back and contemplate legal action agaist Betking and Dean Nolan if they are refused.

His 10% buy-back token scheme is pathetic because it forces investors to keep 90% against their wishes at all times! If an investor has 1000 Betking BKB tokens and wants to sell them all in the buy-back then the investor can only sell 10% per quarter:

Q1: Balance 1000 BKB - 10% = 100   tokens buy-back. Balance   900 BKB
Q2: Balance   900 BKB - 10% =  90   tokens buy-back. Balance    810 BKB
Q3: Balance   810 BKB - 10% =  81   tokens buy-back. Balance    729 BKB
Q4: Balance   729 BKB - 10% =  72.9 tokens buy-back. Balance 656.1 BKB

After 4 quarters which is 12 calendar months or 1 year of trying to sell of a relatively small number of 1000 BKB at the allowed 10% buy-back balance you are still left with over half of your unwanted Betking tokens. That is another reason why investors are calling Betking a scam.

[1715377712]

1715377712

[1715377712]

1715377712

[1715377712]

1715377712

[1715377712]

1715377712

[1715377712]

1715377712

[BetKing.io]

It's obvious game-prtotect and jolly good are the same person.

12 messages in a row of just them two posting within a few minutes of each other with no one else discussing. Especially lacking any actual token holders in this thread.

If you look at their post history too they both said positive or neutral things about BetKing until I said game-protect could not be an affiliate of BetKing.

It would be hard for two people to post the same nonsense over and over again and both are incapable of doing very basic research and lack total common sense, never mind business sense.

I've asked mods and theymos to ban this guy and encouraged other sites that he tries to blackmail or extort to do the same. There's tonnes of threads of real players complaining about this guy spamming the forums.

I would encourage everyone to not fall for any scams or extortion attempts made by game-protect like he has tried with other users on the forum (see their trust ratings and the dodgy legal service he claims to provide).

[JollyGood]

I am not game-protect. I just unignored him today and started replying to him.

So instead of behaving like Inspector Clueless Clouseau and getting your facts wrong why do you refuse to answer the questions about exactly how that user called jonte is supposed to be happy his 1.5 BTC investment in the ICO is worth 53% now? That is what you claim, your ICO investors are happy right?

Instead of answering him you wanted him to send you a PM? Explain here openly so we can all read your reason for expecting Betking ICO investors to be happy at making a loss:
A user called jonte posted this yesterday but you refused to answer him:

I personally put 1.5 BTC into the Betking ICO and got a bonus for being an early investor too. I'm disappointed when I see the BKB buyout price you're giving us for 10% of our tokens. For me it's 0.08110188 BTC. So you're saying that my total BKB investment is only worth 0.8110188 BTC? That's almost HALF of what I invested in the ICO yet you claim your investors are "happy with the roi so far" when in reality that couldn't be further from the truth. Please explain yourself. If the business is going well then why is the investment only valued at 54% of the initial investment? It would be slightly understandable if you actually converted the Bitcoin investments from the ICO into fiat right away, but you didn't. I'm interested in hearing what on earth is going on.

[JollyGood]

Making false promises to attract investments is called investment fraud!

His promises during the ICO are obviously and clearly totally contrary to what he finally did!

For months only Dice was offered. Half year later unsuccessful poker was added. Then later sportsbook was added. Almost one year later black jack is still not available for an online casino!

If you have $10 millions on hand, then usually withn 3 months everything should be offered.

From what I have seen and how the casino is managed, it does not need more than around $1 million to run it. Means $5,5 million collected are not used to run the casino.

If BetKing uses only a small fraction of the collected investments to run the casino, why does he still take "investments"?

This does not make any sense and confirms the investment fraud scheme!

This loser cant make up his damn mind  LOL

1st, you were spamming advertisements for betking and trying to affiliate.
And then now you are calling it a fraud scheme.

So which one is it, you stupid spamming nitwit?

I could not work him out myself. First I used the IGNORE button on him and then decided to reply. He seems to have understood that Betking token system is complete nonense so he cannot be that bad

[JollyGood]

Dean's only real reply to this whole situation has been that the ICO was priced in USD all along and that he was transparent in that. In USD, the price has gone up 7%. Fine, let's say that's fair.

Here's where I and others have an issue: The Bitcoin raised has quite obviously barely been put back into the site. So, essentially with the old investment model, users 1) kept their original bitcoin and 2) received money from their investment. What this ICO did was Dean basically said: Give me your Bitcoin, I'll spend it to make this site the #1 crypto casino by adding lots of games (slots/sportsbetting/poker/roulette/blackjack/dice/etc.), marketing it heavily, expanding staff, allowing other sites to white label us, and lots of other promises. 18 months later, what do we have? Basically a re-skinned site, a poker game that never took off and likely took a big loss, roulette, and sportsbetting. And, judging from the token price only going up 7%, the sportsbook and roulette receive essentially no action or have so far broken even. We've also got Dean supposedly building an exchange, because, why not? Guess Betking isn't his number 1 priority. Typically when you take ~$10 million from a group of people and promise them something you would expect some dedication and to see some progress - at the very least, 1 employee helping out. What do we see? Nada. The dice game is basically dead, and has been since relaunch (only 2029 Bitcoin wagered since relaunch - for comparison, Bustadice had over 5k wagered just this past week alone)

Does Dean care about screwing over the investors? Obviously not. He made out like a bandit. Hide behind your "investment is up 7% in USD, you should be happy!" argument all you want, but the gripe isn't even the investment returns... it's the fact you essentially took your investors money and kept it instead of putting it into the site. If the ICO was just about paying you, you should've made that clear. If you hadn't put the money in your pocket and wiped your hands clean of the site, the returns would likely have been exponentially higher than they are now.

Of course, it was obvious you were done giving a shit when you tried to sell the site twice with no takers BEFORE the ICO. You found your way to cash out and you've found a narrative that helps you sleep well at night. Hope you're happy.

These are serious allegations. I have no doubt what you say is true. Dean Nolan never made it clear who the "developers" of the site were so your allegations that he pocked the money and had the ICO because he tried and failed to sell the website twice. Also not bemissed is the fact that he paid for promotional material to be released on various information websites before and during the ICO but not after the ICO ended.

When there is no accountability on part of Dean Nolan to show where the ICO funds went that means the allegations of him pocketing the ICO funds will always be there.

The case he makes about investors being happy and you mentioned Dean Nolan saying the 7% increase in US$ as an argument to justify his actions do not add up.

[JollyGood]

Dean Nolan just sent me this PM:

Keep bumping the threads and giving me free publicity idiot  

Seems he cannot answer investor concerns about them losing their investment but is more concerned about trying to hide where the ICO funds went. This has scam written all over it.

I feel so sorry for the ICO investors and now the new bunch of people he is trying to get on to his failed Betking website by offering them new "chances" to win Bitcoin, Ethereum and Litecoin. All this happened as soon as my thread opened in response to him locking his Betking thread. Dean Nolan thinks he can offer give aways of up to $2000 for advertising Betking and some cheap games in the hope investors will forgive him.

Shame on Dean Nolan for being the only one who ended up rich as a result of the ICO when all the ICO investors that made him rich ended up with a huge loss themselves.

This link proves that an ICO was not needed, the funds it seems may have been raised for a specific purpose to benefit Dean Nolan and not much else:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1974926.msg20020183#msg20020183

[Wendigo]

It's obvious game-prtotect and jolly good are the same person.

12 messages in a row of just them two posting within a few minutes of each other with no one else discussing. Especially lacking any actual token holders in this thread.

If you look at their post history too they both said positive or neutral things about BetKing until I said game-protect could not be an affiliate of BetKing.

It would be hard for two people to post the same nonsense over and over again and both are incapable of doing very basic research and lack total common sense, never mind business sense.

I've asked mods and theymos to ban this guy and encouraged other sites that he tries to blackmail or extort to do the same. There's tonnes of threads of real players complaining about this guy spamming the forums.

I would encourage everyone to not fall for any scams or extortion attempts made by game-protect like he has tried with other users on the forum (see their trust ratings and the dodgy legal service he claims to provide).

I think game protect and jolly good are not the same person. Game protect strikes me as a non-native English speaker while jolly good's command of the English language is miles better, at a native level I would say. If you take a closer look at game protect's antics you will realize that he tends to seek out players with issues at certain sportsbooks and then invades their threads and starts posting on their behalf with the only goal of extorting the gambling sites. I am a frequent reader of the Gambling section and know how he operates so I think this is what's going on here. Game protect is a real pest.
Regards.

[game-protect]

Distribution

- 100,000,000 BetKing Bankroll Tokens will be created as Ethereum ERC23 tokens and issued after the crowdsale ends.
    
- 70 million will be available for sale to crowdsale participants.

- 30 million will be retained by BetKing for ICO bounties, testing bounties, advisors, hiring, future marketing and development.
    
- BetKing Bankroll Tokens can be purchased with Bitcoin, Ethereum and Litecoin. All funds will be held in cold storage.

The value of the 100,000,000 BetKing Bankroll Tokens was $ 6,5 million and BetKing announced that 30% = $ 1,95 million will be used for ICO bounties, testing bounties, advisors, hiring, future marketing and development.

I do not know how much BetKing has spent so far for the above mentioned things, but I am 100% sure it is nowhere near the announced $ 1,95 million!

My personal impression is that he has spent maybe around $100,000 or $200,000.

He did not use the collected investments properly as announced and the criminal offenses of fraud by false representaion and willful deception are committed.

However, the solution is simple: All investors have the right to step back from the investment agreement and demand the sent crypto currencies back.

Profit Distribution

Quote: "A percentage of the profit made from bankrolled games will be used to buy back BetKing Bankroll tokens from holders.All profit made on bankrolled games will be audited and made available to token holders as was done in the past with the crowdfunded bankroll profits."

Whaaat?

Does this mean if the casino does not have profits it will not buy back any BetKing Bankroll tokens?

Why does the casino need winnings to be able to buy back BetKing Bankroll tokens while all the invested crypto currencies are not only available in cold storages, but its value additionally increased further?

Token Price

Quote: "So for example if the price of the token at the end of the crowdsale was $0.014 and the bankroll profit was $1,000,000 then the buy back price would be $0.024 (1,000,000/100,000,000 + 0.014)."

Token Price says that the bankroll profit will fully increase the value of the BKB token and Profit Distribution says that a percentage of the bankroll profit will be used to buy back BKB tokens.

But if you use a part of the bankroll profit to buy back BKB tokens, then this part logically can not be added to the value of the BKB token, because it was used for buy back and simply does not exist anymore!

[JollyGood]

I think game protect and jolly good are not the same person. Game protect strikes me as a non-native English speaker while jolly good's command of the English language is miles better, at a native level I would say. If you take a closer look at game protect's antics you will realize that he tends to seek out players with issues at certain sportsbooks and then invades their threads and starts posting on their behalf with the only goal of extorting the gambling sites. I am a frequent reader of the Gambling section and know how he operates so I think this is what's going on here. Game protect is a real pest.
Regards.

Spot on, I have no multi-logins in this forum. About game-protect I do not follow him on other channels or in other threads but I can vouch for him being a pest in the now locked Betking thread because he was pestering me with pro-Betking propoganda as if he was a paid advocate so I used the IGNORE button on him. I decided to unIGNORE him just yesterday.

Look, only concerns I have related to Betking are that the terms of the ICO never favoured and never will favour the investors. Also the fact that Dean Nolan has never accounted in any way about how many Betking tokens he holds and how many are his vis-a-vis how many are for the promotion and development etc. How much of ICO funds that were supposed to be used for the development of the site actually went to non-affiliated third party coders because to me and to many others it seems Dean Nolan already had a fully working site which did not need much or any work on it so did he pocket that large chunk of the ICO funds for his own pocket?

If Dean Nolan has decency he will sympathise with the concerns of the investors that lost almost everything while their investment directly went to making Dean Nolan a millionaire. He should at least work out a fair way to try to give something back to these investors and make some amends for his ways. Even if it was slow process but investors got their investment back then sure I will jump to the defence of Dean Nolan and ask investors to back off and allow him time to refund the investors but Dean Nolan has to take a step in the right direction.

[BetKing.io]

Look, only concerns I have related to Betking are that the terms of the ICO never favoured and never will favour the investors. Also the fact that Dean Nolan has never accounted in any way about how many Betking tokens he holds and how many are his vis-a-vis how many are for the promotion and development etc. How much of ICO funds that were supposed to be used for the development of the site actually went to non-affiliated third party coders because to me and to many others it seems Dean Nolan already had a fully working site which did not need much or any work on it so did he pocket that large chunk of the ICO funds for his own pocket?

If Dean Nolan has decency he will sympathise with the concerns of the investors that lost almost everything while their investment directly went to making Dean Nolan a millionaire. He should at least work out a fair way to try to give something back to these investors and make some amends for his ways. Even if it wa s slow process but investors got their investment back then sure I will jump to the defence of Dean Nolan and ask investors to back off and allow him time to refund the investors but Dean Nolan has to take a step in the right direction.

I'll say this one last time. The biggest investors are all in our private token holder telegram group or have me on direct contact on telegram, skype or email.

None of them have the concerns you have been posting non stop for a week because they all read the terms of the ico before they bought tokens and have had constant updates from me.

The only things you, game-protect, chazley and a few others are posting here is speculation about things you don't know about (you are not a token holder), exaggerations, false information or outright lies (chazley being the worse there).

If you were an actual token holder and you were in the correct channels you would know everything that has went on with the site, costs, plans, how many tokens I've bought back, where funds have been spent on etc.
I've bought back enough where I now own over 70% of tokens. I'm not sure who you think has been done over.

Again, all major investors knew exactly the terms and what they were getting in to, like they did with countless other ICO's they bought in to, which have actually performed far worse than BetKing.

Are there a few people unhappy? Yes. But they are mostly people who didn't do due diligence and read the details of the ico before they bought tokens, like people do with a lot of other ico's. Most of these people have sold all their tokens back to me anyway.

So feel free to continue the spam attack and spreading false information but until you have a real token holder (easy to prove, it's crypto remember) then there is nothing for me to answer in this thread.



 

[Donald Trump Jr.]

It's obvious game-prtotect and jolly good are the same person.

12 messages in a row of just them two posting within a few minutes of each other with no one else discussing. Especially lacking any actual token holders in this thread.

If you look at their post history too they both said positive or neutral things about BetKing until I said game-protect could not be an affiliate of BetKing.

It would be hard for two people to post the same nonsense over and over again and both are incapable of doing very basic research and lack total common sense, never mind business sense.

I've asked mods and theymos to ban this guy and encouraged other sites that he tries to blackmail or extort to do the same. There's tonnes of threads of real players complaining about this guy spamming the forums.

I would encourage everyone to not fall for any scams or extortion attempts made by game-protect like he has tried with other users on the forum (see their trust ratings and the dodgy legal service he claims to provide).

I think game protect and jolly good are not the same person. Game protect strikes me as a non-native English speaker while jolly good's command of the English language is miles better, at a native level I would say. If you take a closer look at game protect's antics you will realize that he tends to seek out players with issues at certain sportsbooks and then invades their threads and starts posting on their behalf with the only goal of extorting the gambling sites. I am a frequent reader of the Gambling section and know how he operates so I think this is what's going on here. Game protect is a real pest.
Regards.

there is no way that they are the same person.
one speaks good english and GP doesnt

also, such a weak attempt by dean nolan with the attempt to divert the attention away from the fact that hes in some hot water.
all of these alelgations add up and dean nolan looks like a crook -

[JollyGood]

I'll say this one last time. The biggest investors are all in our private token holder telegram group or have me on direct contact on telegram, skype or email.

None of them have the concerns you have been posting non stop for a week because they all read the terms of the ico before they bought tokens and have had constant updates from me.

The only things you, game-protect, chazley and a few others are posting here is speculation about things you don't know about (you are not a token holder), exaggerations, false information or outright lies (chazley being the worse there).

If you were an actual token holder and you were in the correct channels you would know everything that has went on with the site, costs, plans, how many tokens I've bought back, where funds have been spent on etc.
I've bought back enough where I now own over 70% of tokens. I'm not sure who you think has been done over.

Again, all major investors knew exactly the terms and what they were getting in to, like they did with countless other ICO's they bought in to, which have actually performed far worse than BetKing.

Are there a few people unhappy? Yes. But they are mostly people who didn't do due diligence and read the details of the ico before they bought tokens, like people do with a lot of other ico's. Most of these people have sold all their tokens back to me anyway.

So feel free to continue the spam attack and spreading false information but until you have a real token holder (easy to prove, it's crypto remember) then there is nothing for me to answer in this thread.

Thank you for the information you provided in the message. I will get back to you in a day or two after trying to verify that information. I suppose I appreciate you mentioning some of the things you did mention because maybe you did not have to but if that information is readily available to ICO investors and there is some sort of way to cross-reference the information then I will try to get hold of the very last or most recent sheet you made available, after that I will get back to you.

Yes in ICOs not all investors will ever be happy and many will make a profit and many a loss. Personally I feel the lack of (as you refer to it) people who didn't do due diligence and read the details of the ico before they bought tokens does not make it plain and simple the fault of the investors. In fairness to them the bounty participants were trying to shut down, shout down and silence any voice that asked questions about the way the token system was valued. And yes you made everything clear (except some people thought they were buying a portion of the casino and some thought they were buying a portion of profits) and you also made it clear that you would no longer answer any questions because they doubted your motives.

I raised many concerns with you at the time about why a millionaire would shut down and re-open a betting website. I raised many concerns and questions and was not really happy with the response or the eagerness of the bounty participants to drown out my voice along with others that questioned the process but we tried to get clarity.

If what you say is true about owning 70% of the tokens out there then to be fair to investors you should not be claiming your 'profits' on those tokens. The profits should be distributed between the ICO investors and most definitely not on the 30 million tokens that were not released to the ICO investors and not on any that you personally held or any that Betking purchased in the buy back. My personal belief is you did not spend all of the 30 million retained tokens on marketing and development and you are still claiming 'profits' on those when the 'profits' should be going to the ICO and other token investors. If you say the investors have clarity on exactly what the state of play was and is regarding the tokens you held then, hold now and also sold then that is great news. I will try to get hold of that information, check it and get back to you.

Having said all that I thank you again for making a bold statement about you owning 70% of the Betking tokens. I just hope that you stop selling tokens now because the formula is flawed and helps only you while ensuring the investor loses out. If you must continue to sell the tokens then please consider raising the 10% buy-back to at least 25% and please consider defining another formula to sell future tokens so that investors can at least be in a position to make something more in 'profit' and ROI wise.

About the signature, as a gesture of goodwill I will be removing the comments about you and Betking. Thank you.

[game-protect]

It's obvious game-prtotect and jolly good are the same person.

12 messages in a row of just them two posting within a few minutes of each other with no one else discussing. Especially lacking any actual token holders in this thread.

If you look at their post history too they both said positive or neutral things about BetKing until I said game-protect could not be an affiliate of BetKing.

You said weeks ago that Game Protect can not participate in your new affiliate system. And even though you scammed all your affiliates with deleting the statistic of all lifetime referred players I did not say anything against you or opened a scam accusation, because I do not care about your incompetent run casino.

However, opposed to the affiliate issue, your investment scam draw my attention after Jolly Good has started to post about it.

Therefore, your assumption that your investment scam draw my attention because I could not be an affiliate is all but accurate!

It would be hard for two people to post the same nonsense over and over again and both are incapable of doing very basic research and lack total common sense, never mind business sense.

To research your investment fraud scheme is a breeze for me as a private investigator.

If someone wants to read nonsense, simply go to https://betking.io/ico

I quote the statements from your website and if you claim it is nonsense, then you confirm that the ICO content on your website is nonsense!

I've asked mods and theymos to ban this guy and encouraged other sites that he tries to blackmail or extort to do the same.

I have no idea where you learned this or how you came to this thought, but scammers Game Protect is going after can not get away with requesting to ban the truth!

Please show proof where Game Protect tried to blackmail or extort other sites?

Why did no one file a criminal complaint against Game Protect?

There's tonnes of threads of real players complaining about this guy spamming the forums.

How do you know who is behind those anonymous bitcointalk accounts?

The criminal casinos and their paid influencers complain about online gaming consumer protection, not the real players! The real players do not have any disadvantage caused by the existence of Game Protect. The opposite is the case! Hundreds of real player victims submitted their scam to us and asked for help.

I would encourage everyone to not fall for any scams or extortion attempts made by game-protect like he has tried with other users on the forum (see their trust ratings and the dodgy legal service he claims to provide).

Did you open scam accusations like it is very common here on bitcointalk? If not, why not? (Until today not one of those anonymous accounts complaining about Game Protect answered these questions!)

You scammed all your affiliates with deleting the statistic of all lifetime referred players! As it meanwhile turned out, not the first time you breached your promises!

You scammed all your investors with not fulfilling the investment contract! You announced to spend 30% of the tokens = $ 1,95 million for ICO bounties, testing bounties, advisors, hiring, future marketing and development, while in reality you did not even spend a fraction of it to marketing and develop the casino!

Despite your contradictional and misleading statements making the investment offer anyway invalid! These are facts opposed to your false and misleading allegations!

[game-protect]

Is this another promise not fulfilled?

I see on reddit that all donations aren't made yet.
No offense but is that correct?

Are you still looking for suggestions?

If yes, do suggestions need to be USA based? Or can it be worldwide?

Is it a requirement for them to have a bitcoin address on their website?
Or can I talk to them and ask if they know how to accept bitcoin. If they do, I could add them to my list if that's okay for you.
If it's required for them to have it on their website I could try to convince them

Thanks

[Samarkand]

...
I'll say this one last time. The biggest investors are all in our private token holder telegram group or have me on direct contact on telegram, skype or email.
...
If you were an actual token holder and you were in the correct channels you would know everything that has went on with the site, costs, plans, how many tokens I've bought back, where funds have been spent on etc.
I've bought back enough where I now own over 70% of tokens. I'm not sure who you think has been done over.
...

Disclaimer: I´m not invested in the BetKing ICO, but I have occasionally played at the site
even back in the day when it was still called PocketRocketsCasino.

I can understand why you got frustrated with some posts in the BetKing thread and therefore
decided to lock it. However, the current situation is bad for the players as well as for the existing
investors. It is great that you are keeping the investors updated on Telegram. But a public thread
in the highly-frequented gambling forum on Bitcointalk has a much higher advertising value and brings
in random players from time to time. Right now the only BetKing topic on page 1 of the gambling
forum is this thread, which might not be the kind of endorsement that you would like
to see as a site owner, as an investor or as an aspiring player.

I´m just saying that by taking all the communication to rather private channels like Telegram you
are not acquiring any new players. This is obviously diametrically opposed to the interests of the investors
as well.

Why don´t you open a self-moderated thread where you keep us updated about new developments,
promotions and so on? By doing that you could delete certain posts while still maintaining a
thread at Bitcointalk. I concede that a self-moderated thread will obviously attract some criticism as well,
because of censorship, but I still think that the advertising value outweighs this problem, which
is again aligned with the interests of your investors.

To sum up, you will attract more players by continuing to use Bitcointalk instead of taking all
the communication to private channels.

Regarding the ICO I was contemplating to invest back in the day, but I didn´t like the terms
and I was deterred by a quote from this thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1043483.0

Why Sell?
I have worked full time on PRC for 2.5 years and I have some other projects I would like to pursue.
The right buyer would be able to improve PRC for existing users and grow much larger than I can do alone.

Of course it is possible that you still put all your heart into BetKing after the ICO, but I can
certainly understand the frustration of some of the posters in this thread as well.
I know that you have delivered on most promises, but many players certainly
would have expected more than a Cubeia poker software and a mediocre sportsbook
(I was actually looking to place a bet today, but the vig on your site was ~7.67 % for the
bet that I intended to make, which is worse than at all fiat bookmakers that are
displayed at oddsportal.com for my country).

I understand that you can´t run a sportsbook with an extremely attractive margin, because BetKing
doesn´t see much betting volume and you likely have to pay a ton in fees for the sportsbook/odds provider,
but if the odds are worse than at the worst fiat bookmaker I´m obviously not going to jump
at the opportunity to take some of my betting action to BetKing either.

[BetKing.io]

Right now the only BetKing topic on page 1 of the gambling
forum is this thread

That's not true, our own one was on the front page when you posted.

Regarding the ICO I was contemplating to invest back in the day, but I didn´t like the terms
and I was deterred by a quote from this thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1043483.0

Why Sell?
I have worked full time on PRC for 2.5 years and I have some other projects I would like to pursue.
The right buyer would be able to improve PRC for existing users and grow much larger than I can do alone.

Of course it is possible that you still put all your heart into BetKing after the ICO, but I can
certainly understand the frustration of some of the posters in this thread as well.

That post has nothing to do with the current ICO which was launched in July 2017. THe thread you linked to is from 2015.

(I was actually looking to place a bet today, but the vig on your site was ~7.67 % for the
bet that I intended to make, which is worse than at all fiat bookmakers that are
displayed at oddsportal.com for my country).

if the odds are worse than at the worst fiat bookmaker I´m obviously not going to jump
at the opportunity to take some of my betting action to BetKing either.

You should get in touch with me and complain I have made it clear that I will improve the odds to match competitors. We had the best odds on the world cup of any other site. If there's other markets that are worse than other sites then we will get that changed. But it's faster to notice this if people let us know.

[Samarkand]

...
That's not true, our own one was on the front page when you posted.
...

I apologize, I just noticed this as well. I´m also glad that you actually decided
to unlock the original BetKing thread.

...
That post has nothing to do with the current ICO which was launched in July 2017. THe thread you linked to is from 2015.
...

I strongly disagree with this statement. If you were looking to sell the site
in 2015 while mentioning a shift of interest towards other projects as the reason
for selling, this information is obviously highly relevant when you raise millions for the same
project (even though it was rebranded) 2 years later. It is a bit of a stretch to claim
that this post has nothing to do with the ICO in 2017 when it is basically
the same project and the same owner.

If I contemplate to back a project with an investment, I obviously expect that the
owner is fully committed to the success of the project as well. You have to admit
that a post like this from 2015 may have created some scepticism with regards
to your future commitment to the project.

[BetKing.io]

...
That post has nothing to do with the current ICO which was launched in July 2017. THe thread you linked to is from 2015.
...

I strongly disagree with this statement. If you were looking to sell the site
in 2015 while mentioning a shift of interest towards other projects as the reason
for selling, this information is obviously highly relevant when you raise millions for the same
project (even though it was rebranded) 2 years later. It is a bit of a stretch to claim
that this post has nothing to do with the ICO in 2017 when it is basically
the same project and the same owner.

If I contemplate to back a project with an investment, I obviously expect that the
owner is fully committed to the success of the project as well. You have to admit
that a post like this from 2015 may have created some scepticism with regards
to your future commitment to the project.

And I disagree again
That post was in 2015, over two years before I announced the ICO. You can also see the site profit then was around 2900 BTC.
By Dec 2016 we had made 7400 or so. I was still working pretty much alone then.

Now I am not, which was one of the main points of the ICO.

Anyway, it doesn't matter, you chose not to buy in then and that's fine.

If you have anything else for me post it in the main thread. I won't be posting again in here.

[chazley]

Dean if you're going to say I tell "outright lies" go ahead and give me a few. I'll wait. Pretty sure only person who's lied to anyone is you to your investors.

By the way, token investors are way less likely to direct criticism to you. For one, you've got them all in a telegram channel where you may or may not be feeding them bullshit. "X is coming in Y months, and then Z will happen" for example. Easy to fend off criticism when you control the narrative. Second, investors want to protect their investment. People with money invested are way more likely to not see the ship sinking and/or ignore it with the hope it will turn around, especially if the person in charge keeps giving them hope. For example, look up the thousands of ponzi schemes that have happened - on the outside, everyone thinks the investors are idiots but those financially involved ignore warning signs and continue to pour more money in and/or hold their positions in the hope things turn around.

That being said, I could be completely wrong. I'm not infallible. I also don't run from problems or ignore questions I don't like. If you ask me 10 questions, I won't cherry pick one like you do and try to change the subject by insulting someone. I've got integrity and have nothing to hide. For those that can't answer the hard questions, they turn to censorship and insults.

[JollyGood]

...
That's not true, our own one was on the front page when you posted.
...

I apologize, I just noticed this as well. I´m also glad that you actually decided
to unlock the original BetKing thread.

...
That post has nothing to do with the current ICO which was launched in July 2017. THe thread you linked to is from 2015.
...

I strongly disagree with this statement. If you were looking to sell the site
in 2015 while mentioning a shift of interest towards other projects as the reason
for selling, this information is obviously highly relevant when you raise millions for the same
project (even though it was rebranded) 2 years later. It is a bit of a stretch to claim
that this post has nothing to do with the ICO in 2017 when it is basically
the same project and the same owner.

If I contemplate to back a project with an investment, I obviously expect that the
owner is fully committed to the success of the project as well. You have to admit
that a post like this from 2015 may have created some scepticism with regards
to your future commitment to the project.

You are correct when you disagree with what Dean Nolan has stated. There are many of us who share the same view.

The fact he tried and failed to sell the site twice (as has been mentioned before by other users here) strengthens my opinion that this "project" and ICO has all the hallmarks of an investment campaign that was created with the sole purpose of making Dean Nolan wealthy.

He shutdown a moderately successful Betking website returning investors money and then re-launched the same website and same platform using an ICO with terms that basically guaranteed he will become a millionaire overnight and at the same time the structure ensured investors will get back next to nothing in profit and will lose large portions of their original investment.

What is more, the recent increase in activities by Dean Nolan by launching a couple of games and sponorships of various threads in this forum to try to improve the damaged image of both Betking and of himself looks extremely desperate. His activities are coinciding with the increase in people questioning Dean Nolan asking for proof that investors that lost money are happy.