Hugo

About Hugo

In an April interview with iGB, Sher reflected on the challenges of regulatory uncertainty in Mexico

“Right now we are working based on a framework of laws which you cannot even call regulation, from 1947,” Sher said. “So it’s very hard to work long-term and to give long-term commitments. While the future is unclear in terms of regulation, we saw what happened in other countries in LatAm when they changed the regulation every other month.

“In Mexico, I think we are stable, we know how to deal with this market. Of course, we will be very happy if in the future, a proper regulatory framework will be introduced and not the way that we are working right now.”  

About Hugo

“Unregulated is not illegal,” he asserted. “We will continue to support those markets that we believe over time will become regulated.

“Our investment is going into regulated markets, and yes over time we will likely consider pulling out of certain markets. I think Playtech has done a very good job, [regulated revenues] are more than 85%.”

Meanwhile its B2C revenue, which took a significant hit last year as it offloaded the majority of its B2C operations, including Snaitech and Happy Bet, declined 22% to €32 million.

About Hugo

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.