12 Facts & BJ's Analysis of Clonie's Full Tilt Lawsuit

[BJ Nemeth]

Even though nobody asked, I thought I'd provide my thoughts on Clonie Gowen's lawsuit against Full Tilt Poker. I apologize in advance for the length, but I wanted to clearly label the facts before offering my analysis. My goal was to make the issues as clear as possible without oversimplifying.

For the record, I don't know Clonie personally. That's irrelevant, of course, but I thought I'd mention it since I am friendly with some of the other pro players (including a few members of Team Full Tilt).

Also, I am a poker journalist, and not a lawyer.


I. CLONIE GOWEN AS A MEMBER OF TEAM FULL TILT

Fact #1. Clonie was a member of Team Full Tilt from the spring of 2004 until November 11, 2008. There have only been 14 members of Team Full Tilt, and it represents a much higher level of endorsement (in both directions) than 'Full Tilt Pro.'

Fact #2. Clonie has represented Full Tilt Poker thoroughly and exclusively during that four-year period. There is overwhelming evidence of this, including photos of her wearing Full Tilt logos and jerseys while playing in major tournaments (many taken by me), video evidence of her representing Full Tilt on TV ("Poker After Dark," the Full Tilt specials, and Full Tilt's own TV commercials), the July 2006 issue of Maxim Magazine, and plenty of Full Tilt ads in magazines like Card Player and Bluff.

Fact #3. According to the lawsuit, "On November 11, 2008, Defendants informed [Clonie] that they would be releasing a press statement informing the public that [Clonie] was no longer a 'Team Full Tilt' member."

BJ's Thoughts: I don't think anyone, including Full Tilt, can deny that Clonie Gowen was a fully participating member of Team Full Tilt. In all my time covering tournaments, I've never seen Clonie say anything negative about the company or behave in a way that would put Full Tilt in a bad light. (At least no different from the other members of Team Full Tilt.)

It's also obvious that every member of that Team had to have a contract (either oral or written). It's completely illogical to suggest that there was no contract of any kind between the Team members and Full Tilt. It was a business relationship, and business relationships require contracts, whether written, oral, or implied.

For the record, being a member of Team Full Tilt does not automatically imply ownership of the company. That would depend on the contracts.

So what was in Clonie's contract?


II. CLONIE'S CONTRACT

Fact #4. According to the lawsuit, "In April 2004, [Ray] Bitar offered [Clonie Gowen] a 1% ownership interest in FTP and Tiltware in exchange for [Clonie] to become a celebrity representative for FTP." A later part of the lawsuit claims that the offer was made when Bitar contacted Clonie "at her home in Texas," which implies it was a telephone call. During that conversation, Clonie "asked Bitar to prepare a contract," but he never did.

Fact #5. In the lawsuit, Clonie "alleges that none of 'Team Full Tilt's' members, all who have ownership interests in the Companies, have written contracts with the Companies."

Fact #6. According to the lawsuit, "In May 2004, [Clonie] attended a meeting in Las Vegas, Nevada at the Golden Nugget Hotel and Casino in Ivey's suite. The majority of 'Team Full Tilt' members were in attendance. Lederer conducted the meeting. Lederer informed the group that their ownership interests were not only in FTP, but were also in Tiltware."

Fact #7. As far as I can tell, nobody at Full Tilt has ever publicly disclosed (or even hinted at) the terms of their deal with Clonie.

BJ's Thoughts: It's clear that there had to be an oral contract of some kind between Full Tilt and Clonie, but so far, we only have Clonie's opinion on what that contract included. Full Tilt apparently cancelled the contract on November 11th, but didn't claim breach of contract, at least publicly. In the lawsuit, Clonie claims they never gave her a reason.

Before I go any further, let's give Full Tilt a chance to give their side of the story.


III. FULL TILT'S STATEMENT

Fact #8. Full Tilt's statement to PokerNews.com: "Tiltware, LLC, has been made aware of the recent filing of a meritless lawsuit by a former Full Tilt Poker endorser -- Ms. Cycalona Gowen. All claims have no merit and there are many inaccuracies improperly and unlawfully asserted by Ms. Gowen within her frivolous complaint. Tiltware LLC expects that this lawsuit will be dealt with accordingly by a competent court in due course."

BJ's Thoughts: It's everything you'd expect from a statement about a pending lawsuit. It's vague, and gives us no information other than Full Tilt plans to fight the lawsuit. It also doesn't give any reason why Clonie is no longer a member of Team Full Tilt.

While the statement mentions handling this in court, I expect this to ultimately be settled out of court. Full Tilt probably doesn't want their internal operations and finances to be described in public court records. Online poker in the United States is still questionable in the eyes of the law.

Also, while Clonie is suing Full Tilt in the state of Nevada (where many of Full Tilt's shareholders live), the jurisdiction over an online poker site operating out of California, Ireland, and Aruba is hardly clear. I'm not sure how that will affect the lawsuit, but it might become an issue at some point.

Until this lawsuit is settled (either in court or out), I don't expect anyone at Full Tilt to discuss any details. That's standard for any company facing litigation, and it doesn't imply any guilt or misconduct.


IV. FULL TILT'S DEBT TO CLONIE GOWEN

Fact #9. According to the lawsuit, Clonie "has not been paid any winnings at all but one FTP sponsored poker events [sic]." Presumably, the event she's referring to is Full Tilt's June 2006 televised event at Red Rock Casino, where she earned $120,000 for finishing 3rd.

Fact #10. According to the lawsuit, Clonie "has not been paid a fee to compete in any of the poker events she participated in on behalf of FTP." The lawsuit doesn't mention anything about tournament buy ins.

Fact #11. According to the lawsuit, the other members of Team Full Tilt began receiving regular distribution checks in May 2007. Clonie began complaining internally at that time, but received nothing.

Fact #12. On November 6, 2007, Howard Lederer offered Clonie "approximately $250,000 for her 'past performance' on behalf of the company." Clonie refused the payment, claiming it was only a fraction of what she was owed.

BJ's Thoughts: As a four-year member of Team Full Tilt, Clonie deserves to be compensated for her endorsement. Full Tilt has presumably been paying Clonie's tournament entry fees during this four-year period; regardless, it's clear that both sides agree that she is still owed something. But how much?

Clonie claims she is a 1% shareholder of the company. The lawsuit estimates the value of Full Tilt at $4 billion, so Clonie's share would be $40 million.

Full Tilt's position (or at least that of Howard Lederer, one of the majority shareholders) appears to be that Clonie deserved a cashout of approximately $250,000 (approximately $60,000/year).

My opinion? Without a written contract, it'll be difficult for her to get her hands on $40 million. But I think she clearly deserves much more than $250,000. Hell, I was making $60,000 a year at an unnamed major poker magazine -- the one that isn't Bluff.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

V. KEEP THE DISCUSSION CLEAN

I hope that clears up some facts about the lawsuit and dispels some of the rumors floating around. Keep in mind that to this point, we've only heard details from one side of the dispute. If this is settled out of court, we may never hear anything official from Full Tilt at all.

One more thing. While we're discussing this issue here at Poker Road, let's avoid unnecessarily talking about two things that have dominated all the other forums on this topic:

1. Clonie Gowen's appearance.

2. Clonie Gowen's skill as a poker player or her tournament results.

Neither of these things is relevant in this debate, unless and until Full Tilt claims one or both was a part of her contract.

Oh, and if you quote me in your post, please quote only the relevant sentences, and not this entire post. Everyone who reads this thread will appreciate not having to see my post over and over and over again.

[jlzinck]

Great post!

[FirstDonk]

Leave it to BJ to break it down properly.

I think the fact you raised, that once answered, will impact this case the most profoundly is if all the people who were given part ownership have written contracts or not. If none of them do then her argument has much more validity in the courts and they cannot all go on record stating she should 100% know she is not a part owner.

To quote Chuck Todd, this may be the "canary in the coal mine".

[essay]

How can Clonie's performance as a player not be a topic of discussion? She wore all the gear, certainly, but so could an empty seat. The initial selling point of FTP was that you could "learn, chat, and play with the pros." Without a contract that says she owns 1% her contribution to the growth of the business from her signing on to her being axed should be relevent and that has something to do with her abilities. It also has to do with the fact that she hooha instead of a what-what, if you know what im saying.

[Lon VanPatten]

Let's try this: If Jennifer Harman wasn't away from poker in 2004 getting a kidney transplant, would she have been Full Tilt Poker's first female pro instead of Clonie? I think so. Clonie rose to fame by winning the first WPT Ladies' Night back in Sept. 2003. The rest of the lineup for Ladies Night I was:

Evelyn Ng
Maureen Feduniak
Annie Duke
Kathy Liebert
Jennifer Harman

Of those 6, Maureen and Kathy are throwaways for any sort of endorsement deal back then (unfortunate but true). Annie already was involved with UB, so that leaves you with Clonie, Jennifer and Evelyn. Evelyn finishes 2nd, and she gets a deal with PokerStars, Clonie wins and is eventually snapped up by FTP. Jennifer's illness means she doesn't get signed by FTP until she returns to poker. If you watch the telecast, Annie after being eliminated makes a comment to the other 3 eliminated women that the producers, TV people, etc got what they wanted with Clonie v Evelyn headsup. So her good looks helped her become a part of Team FTP.

[Andrew Feldman]

BJ- Great analysis, but why would she do this? I have off the record information about this case and with that in mind, I can't imagine she'll get a penny out of this lawsuit.

I also don't understand what took her so long. If everyone was getting checks back in 2007, except for Clonie, that should've been a major wake up call at that time. Not a year later. I know that if everyone at my job got their paycheck today and I didn't get one, I'm sure I would have an answer of "why not" ASAP.

On another note, you said, "2. Clonie Gowen's skill as a poker player or her tournament results. "

There is a lot more involving that information than you think.

[99 Problems]

Originally Posted by Andrew Feldman

BJ- Great analysis, but why would she do this? I have off the record information about this case and with that in mind, I can't imagine she'll get a penny out of this lawsuit.

Win the lawsuit? No, not given the cloak and dagger way the company SEEMS to be ran (out of necessity given the laws in the US)

IF IF what she is saying is true, that she was not paid a fee (like BJ mentioned she undoubtedly was bought into the tournaments) this is simply being used as a "negotiating tool" to get more then the alleged $250k offered. I however, much like Andrew, think it's very very strange that she found out the others were being paid and has taken a year and a half to get to this point?? I understand at first you want to do it behind the scenes, not wanting to create waves or be ousted, but 17 months later?? This makes it feel like she was "ok" with her compensation until now.

Just because everyone else with your job title is given X in compensation, doesn't mean you deserve X also......they just negotiated a better deal or bring more to the table (be it in poker skill, notoriety, marketability, business savy, software development skills, etc.)

[jujuizraw]

bg along with with barry get down to the nitty gritty with indef poker news, im liking it

[BJ Nemeth]

Originally Posted by essay

How can Clonie's performance as a player not be a topic of discussion? She wore all the gear, certainly, but so could an empty seat. ...

Her performance as a player could certainly be the reason she was dropped from Team Full Tilt, but unless it was part of her original contract (such as, "You get 1% of Full Tilt, provided you make at least three televised final tables per year."), it's irrelevant to the lawsuit itself. She clearly represented the site often in a variety of media, and they used her image in most of their marketing materials.

Originally Posted by Lon VanPatten

If you watch the telecast, Annie after being eliminated makes a comment to the other 3 eliminated women that the producers, TV people, etc got what they wanted with Clonie v Evelyn headsup. So her good looks helped her become a part of Team FTP.

While Clonie's appearance was clearly a major factor in her becoming a Team member in the first place, there's no evidence that it was a clause in her contract. (Such as, "You get 1% of Full Tilt, unless 30% or more of random internet posters claim you're not that hot.")

Again, the issue is whether or not Clonie's appearance affects whatever contract was in place. I haven't seen or heard any evidence that this was the case.

Originally Posted by 99 Problems

I understand at first you want to do it behind the scenes, not wanting to create waves or be ousted, but 17 months later?? This makes it feel like she was "ok" with her compensation until now.

Just because everyone else with your job title is given X in compensation, doesn't mean you deserve X also......they just negotiated a better deal ...

In the lawsuit, Clonie claims she hasn't received any compensation. (Though we all presume she had her tournament entry fees paid by Full Tilt.) Of course her compensation depends on her specific deal (another term for an oral contract), which is the primary issue in this case. Clonie claims the deal was for 1% ownership.

I'm sure some of the players on Team Full Tilt have different contracts than the others. But a court, an arbiter, or negotiating lawyers need to come to an agreement on the details of her contract for this to be settled.

[99 Problems]

Originally Posted by BJ Nemeth

In the lawsuit, Clonie claims she hasn't received any compensation. (Though we all presume she had her tournament entry fees paid by Full Tilt.)

If she is truly claiming this in writing ( I have no reason to not believe you) I think she is WAY to naive to let things go this long with no compensation OR she's lying.... to not be compensated AT ALL for this long, come on....it just makes it sound even more like a play to get Howards' alleged 250k offer bumped much higher.

Originally Posted by BJ Nemeth

Of course her compensation depends on her specific deal (another term for an oral contract), which is the primary issue in this case. Clonie claims the deal was for 1% ownership.

I'm sure some of the players on Team Full Tilt have different contracts than the others. But a court, an arbiter, or negotiating lawyers need to come to an agreement on the details of her contract for this to be settled.

My point was it is foolish for people to think that she would receive this big of a chunk (yes 1% is big for a representative) just because she was a member of Team Full Tilt.

........oh what I would pay to hear what Mike Matusow receives as I would think their deals are most similar as far as compensation (not to say the same but it would give us a good idea of the ballpark her oral/written/wink wink deal was)