About this app
How to play Wizarding Wins
“We saw that they had entered football and advertising, and they have political and economic weight. Understanding that Congress would not prohibit the activity, we decided to put the brakes on and establish the rules.
“It’s not that I want to collect taxes because I need the money. I want to collect taxes for the sake of fairness: if a company sells cars, it pays taxes; if it sells drinks, it pays taxes. If it’s authorised to operate, it has to pay.”
In the interview, the minister mentioned the tax changes proposed by the Ministry of Finance, and more recently, the ban on beneficiaries of social welfare programmes from gambling.
What is Wizarding Wins?
Many players use a fixed cash-out target, such as 1.5x or 2x, and exit automatically every round. This removes emotion from the decision and keeps losses predictable.
The outcome of each round is determined by a provably fair system, which means every result can be independently verified. This transparency is part of why the format caught on so quickly.
As with any game, the house edge is real and the mathematics always favours the operator over time. Treat crash games as short bursts of entertainment rather than a strategy for steady income.
About Wizarding Wins
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.
