Trouble at Dynastiy Gaming?

The Chinese facing Mahjong specialist firm Dynasty Gaming.com was at the centre of growing speculation on several online gambling websites as the week ended, with rumours swirling of problems within the company. One thing was certain - the share price has declined significantly - from a high of Cdn $ 1.10 to 19 Cdn cents, suggesting investor concerns.

In a recent development, investors seemed to hold conflicting views on the reasons for the departure of board member Robert Nihon. On the one hand Dynasty CEO Albert Barbusci attributed Nihon's departure to the recent death of his father, necessitating his attention to the family business, whilst on the other there were claims that the CEO's management style and a lack of strategic direction were the reasons. Nihon himself was apparently not saying.

Dynasty appeared to be riding high this year, with a series of press releases reporting what seemed to be impressive partnerships aimed at facilitating its penetration into the difficult Chinese market.

These deals included one with the company Sohu which has more than 100 million registered users, and an agreement with Sino Strategic International which operates 500 retail outlets in Shanghai. Then there were the collaborations with poker and casino game developer Las Vegas From Home, MahjongClub.com, Evolution Gaming Ltd and Shanda Interactive Entertainment.

Investors exchanging views online commented that the Dynasty Mahjong product was in a favourable market position through the teamwork with 95 Joy and Sohu. Initiatives had included setting up a major Mahjong tournament (see previous InfoPowa reports)

"Then Dynasty decided it did not want to be a software company," the poster claimed. "Which led to the resignation of its CIO. Dynasty did nothing with its licence to market in China and the tournament was cancelled. Today we have no software, no revenue, possibly no licence in China, and following the departure of the CFO, little gaming experience within management."

Other complaints have been that Dynasty has been remiss in not giving investors sufficient information on important management decisions. Another was that questions regarding the performance of the company and its stock, and management departures were not satisfactorily answered.