Sportsbook Review used as a source by the Wall Street Journal

[why]

that will certainly help the cause.

[Mudcat]

What could possibly be going through this guy's mind? This is a classic if it looks too good to be true it probably is. Players you have to be smarter than this. We say guys post up 5 figures here.

I couldn't agree more. I remember when the initial push from Wagerfree was going on and I'd be saying exactly that. Guys were so overcome with their wishful thinking that they made themselves believe that no juice betting for a small monthly "club" charge could actually be legit.

I remember guys who posted up there calling themselves pioneers and they called me a dinosaur.

[SBR_John]

What could possibly be going through this guy's mind? This is a classic if it looks too good to be true it probably is. Players you have to be smarter than this. We say guys post up 5 figures here.

[pags11]

I agree Bill...email me or call me when you have a chance...

[Bill Dozer]

Anytime a big time member of the media like the WSJ points out a stiff operator it will help the cause. I was a little disappointed that the article didn't focus more on the crime and less on the legality of exchange wagering.

I also hope to assist David with other articles including one on the ESB thieves.

[Senator7]

That doesn't surprise me because I'm so glad I discovered this site. There's not a better betting site on the web and that includes Major Wager or The Rx. Congrats guys and keep up the great work!

Senator 7

[jjgold]

SBR has become the biggest site in world for players to go to and look up books and learn about books. They are the hardest working company out there.

[Illusion]

August 19, 2005

E-COMMERCE/MEDIA

Wagering Site Takes a Gamble
On Operating From the U.S.

By DAVID KESMODEL
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE
August 19, 2005

Complaints about WagerFree.com began surfacing on the Internet last
year. SportsbookReview, a Web site that rates Internet sports books and
purports to warn bettors about sites that don’t properly pay winnings,
has collected reports from bettors who say they weren’t paid by the
site.

Ed Hunt, an occasional sports bettor in Texas, said he was drawn to
WagerFree.com because of its pledges of "juice-free" wagering. At a
traditional sports book, a person wanting to bet $100 on the outcome of,
say, a football game would also have to put up juice, also known as
vigorish, of 10%. So, if the bettor lost, he would lose $110. If he won,
he would get back his $110, and win $100.

Mr. Hunt said he is owed $1,000 by WagerFree.com. About $600 is for
winnings on the site, he said, and $400 is from a deposit he made to his
account. Mr. Hunt, who bet on football, baseball and other sports, said
he requested the $1,000 from Mr. Bradford last November. He said he
eventually received a check, in late February or early March of this
year, and it was dated for April. A handwritten note sent with the check
said, "Your checks have been post-dated for April 6. We are under
reorganization. Thanks for your patience." But when he went to a bank to
cash it, he was told WagerFree.com had stopped payment. He has tried to
get Mr. Bradford to send him a new check, but said Mr. Bradford no
longer responds to his calls.

Two other WagerFree.com customers contacted by the Online Journal also
said they were owed money by the site.

In an initial interview about WagerFree.com, Mr. Bradford said all
bettors had been paid the money they were owed. Later, after he was
asked to comment on specific complaints from bettors, he said in an
email that anyone who is owed money "fairly" will "be paid in full or
set up on a payment plan." He didn’t respond to further requests for
comment.