Wild Wild West

About Wild Wild West

In the late 2000s, we wrote a humor column for the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Titled “Fear and Loafing,” it involved sampling odd jobs around town. One we wanted to try out was working as a personal assistant to a Vegas celebrity.

Every resident headliner up and down the Strip either declined or ignored our request. Most likely, the downside of having a working reporter snoop around their private life outweighed any potential upside.

Carrot Top, uniquely, was game.

About Wild Wild West

Here, advertising for online betting sites is positioned differently. Presented as news, the content talks about the highest odds on the market, features offered by operators, regulatory changes and various cases of bettors, ranging from those who made huge financial gains to those who lost everything. 

It is very common among the different profiles identified to refer to regulatory bodies, such as the National Advertising Self-Regulation Council and SIGAP (Brazil’s betting management system). They also speak of responsible gaming in a generic way. In many cases, this is associated with illegal operators and potentially irregular advertising practices.

In this context, the regulations developed to protect players begin to function as a means of legitimisation, with illegal operators even using the term “authorised” in their communication and the “.bet” extension in their domain, which is intended only for licensed operators.

About Wild Wild West

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.

IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”

This particular lawsuit involving Fox Financial, one of a growing list IPI is battling, centers on an arrangement the company made with a third party, Forson Holdings. That entity had leased property from Fox in 2016, but fell behind. IPI had signed as a guarantor of that lease agreement and, as such, was responsible for covering Forson in the event payments weren’t made. However, it decided it didn’t need to follow the terms of the contract.