Zeus Goes Wild

About Zeus Goes Wild

The share price came under pressure following debt disclosures in Bally’s Q2 10-Q filing, which was submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission on 14 August.

In the filing, Bally’s noted that based on current forecasts, the business “does not project that it would satisfy the liquidity maintenance requirement” or the “consolidated net leverage ratio covenant” in its revolving credit facility over the next year.

The filing added: “As described below, while the company is actively engaged in discussions on several financing alternatives, the conditions and events raise substantial doubt about the company’s ability to continue as a going concern.”

About Zeus Goes Wild

Its findings contained an all-too-familiar combination of ineffective systems, delayed interventions and inadequate source-of-funds controls. One customer placed approximately 4,800 bets in one day and 7,000 the next without being flagged. Another, whose payslips showed monthly earnings of about £2,000, deposited and lost £9,000 in four days.

“What is striking here is the level of activity that apparently failed to trigger effective intervention,” Williams says. “These were obvious indicators requiring further scrutiny, and it is difficult to understand why they did not result in more effective intervention.”

He adds that the recurring weakness is often not an absence of policies but a failure to ensure “technology, algorithms and operational processes actually work in practice”. Some of the QuinnBet issues followed a platform migration, underlining the need to retest controls whenever systems change.

About Zeus Goes Wild

However, before he could even board the first cruise, Grant was told that he would not be able to proceed onboard. Grant had his son and partner along with him. The company only then went to inform Grant that he had been placed on a “no sail” list, effectively a ban, because of “breaking the house rules” in the casino.

Royal Caribbean informed Grant that he had broken various casino rules. While Grant filed a legal action against Royal Caribbean with the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal, he has enjoyed qualified success so far.

Grant is suing the company to reimburse him for the AUD 22,000 he is owed. However, his case was at first shot down. Grant, however, appealed the decision and saw the court agree that it qualified as a consumer-trader dispute.