Fengshen

How to play Fengshen

Betting skewed male, with 16% of men gambling on betting compared to 4% of women. Age-wise, overall gambling participation peaked among 45- to 64-year-olds (56%-59%), when excluding lotteries the highest participation was among 35- to 44-year-olds (35%). 

Respondents cited motivations predominantly as seeking large winnings and entertainment, while 42% reported positive feelings about their most recent gambling expenditure. 

Kathryn covers bitesize breaking news with a primary focus on EMEA and US legislation. A proud North Walian, fluent Welsh speaker and lifelong Wrexham FC fan – long before Hollywood came calling.

About Fengshen

The AI-generated image of Davies’ father then urges viewers to visit the same online casino he used. Users who click the ad are redirected to Oxibet, an offshore gambling platform based in Comoros.

The Sun quoted Davies’ agent, who called the advertisement “lies” and confirmed that the soccer star has no ties to any gambling sites.

A fraudulent ad directing consumers to an unlicensed offshore operator highlights the exact issue Alberta sought to address by adopting an Ontario-style regulated iGaming model.

About Fengshen

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.