The Structure that should have been Shut Down!

Shadow Network behind Mansion Group.

A diagram once created for internal presentation (now publicly circulated as part of legal proceedings) purported to illustrate Mansion Group’s efforts to separate its operational, ownership and consultancy structures. But far from ensuring regulatory compliance, the structure appears to have allowed the same core network of beneficial owners and consultants to operate across multiple jurisdictions using varied legal entities.

What makes this particularly concerning is that substantial elements of the structure persist today under the brand M88, despite the official wind-down of Mansion Group’s regulated European entities. Evidence presented in the Gibraltar Supreme Court by former CEO Karel Manasco describes how this network facilitated continued business in high-risk and, in some cases, prohibited markets.

A Closer Look at the Structure

The diagram, titled “Structure for Operational & Ownership Separation”, includes entities such as:

• Ventana Holdings Ltd and Mansion Europe Holdings Ltd, linked to B2C operations
• Apollo Online Consultancy Ltd (Gibraltar) and Hermes Online Consulting Ltd (Israel), used for staffing and services
• Violet Star Group Ltd (BVI), acting as a consultant intermediary with links to Mossack Fonseca
• Giljan Holding Ltd, Triton Online Services Ltd (ISR) and Sliema Services Ltd, connected to the B2B vertical
• Midas Entertainment B.V. and CasinoMidas, holding a Curaçao gaming licence and allegedly used for offering services in prohibited markets

Each vertical is represented by a different UBO group, ranging from the Sampoerna family (Michael, Kathleen and Putera Sampoerna), to nominee-controlled consultancies and shell structures linked to secrecy jurisdictions such as the BVI.

Key Individuals and Relationships

According to Manasco’s sworn declaration, several individuals played instrumental roles in creating and maintaining this complex matrix:

• Lawrence Quahe, allegedly a central architect, was connected to Oakleigh Capital and the trust structure via Isolas LLP
• Ping On Mak, a long-standing Sampoerna intermediary, received regular updates from executives and coordinated funding flows
• Roger Chye and Michael Sampoerna were key figures in financial strategy and high-level restructuring decisions
• Guy Gussarsky and Sagi Lahav were removed during earlier attempts to shut down parts of the structure after regulatory risk emerged
• Christian Karl Block, although denying involvement in the original framework, was described by Manasco as being closely familiar with M88 and the closure processes

Also notable is the involvement of Isolas LLP, at times legal advisor, registered agent and landlord. Entities such as Apollo, Hermes and Violet Star were not operated at arm’s length but, according to Manasco, staffed with former Mansion employees reassigned under the guise of third-party service providers.

CasinoMidas and the Legacy of B2B Gaming

The structure culminates in Midas Entertainment B.V., operating CasinoMidas under a Curaçao licence. This part of the group allegedly enabled unlicensed gambling in jurisdictions such as France, Germany and Spain. Manasco testifies that Mansion's own legal counsel referenced CasinoMidas in internal correspondence, directly linking it to the core group despite public denials.

In Exhibit 22 and 23 of his court filing, Manasco presents internal board meeting records describing “Project Next”, a covert initiative to shift operations to unlicensed markets using consultancy fronts. These meetings reportedly involved individuals such as Tengku Reza, Donald Chia, Paul Summers and Andrew Tait. Documents show discussions on circumventing tax obligations, avoiding regulatory entry barriers and maintaining brand separation in name only.

Still Operational?

While Mansion Gibraltar was eventually wound down, the underlying components (including Midas Entertainment, CasinoMidas and the M88 brand) remain live and accessible today.

This raises a broader question: If the legal framework was problematic enough to justify corporate dissolution and executive dismissals, why has its operational legacy continued virtually uninterrupted?

The UK Gambling Commission has acknowledged receiving submissions from Manasco but declined to act after Mansion surrendered its licence. Gibraltar’s authorities, including the Gaming Commissioner, have also refrained from taking public enforcement action, despite being provided with extensive documentation.

The Broader Implications

This case illustrates how a sophisticated group structure can facilitate regulatory evasion while appearing formally compliant. The layering of jurisdictions, the use of nominally independent consultants and the creation of offshore entities with shared personnel all contributed to the functional continuation of business under a different name.

The concern is not that B2B models are inherently illegal. It is that in this case, the B2B facade was allegedly used to simulate separation, while in practice maintaining the same beneficial control, staff and technology stack across all entities.

FAQs

What is the Mansion Group and why is it under scrutiny?
Mansion Group is a former gambling operator now facing legal scrutiny for allegedly using a complex offshore structure to evade regulations.

What does the internal diagram of Mansion Group reveal?
The diagram shows a network of operational, ownership, and consultancy layers designed to create the appearance of separation while allegedly maintaining centralized control.

Who are the key individuals mentioned in the Mansion Group case?
Key figures include Lawrence Quahe, Ping On Mak, Michael Sampoerna, Roger Chye, and Karel Manasco, among others involved in structuring and maintaining the network.

What role did M88 and CasinoMidas play in this structure?
M88 and CasinoMidas were used to continue business operations, including allegedly offering gambling in prohibited markets despite the dissolution of regulated Mansion entities.

What allegations has Karel Manasco made in court?
The former CEO testified that the group used offshore entities and consultants to circumvent licensing laws and tax obligations while retaining effective control.

What is “Project Next” and why is it significant?
“Project Next” was an internal initiative aiming to covertly shift Mansion’s operations to unlicensed markets through consultancy fronts and legal separation tactics.

Why is the involvement of Isolas LLP notable?
Isolas LLP served multiple roles—legal advisor, agent, and landlord—raising concerns over conflicts of interest and lack of independent oversight.

Are the offshore entities still operational today?
Despite Mansion Gibraltar being wound down, associated entities like CasinoMidas, Midas Entertainment, and the M88 brand are still active.

Has any regulatory body taken enforcement action?
No public enforcement action has been taken by the UK Gambling Commission or Gibraltar authorities, despite being presented with substantial evidence.

What are the broader implications of this case?
It highlights how offshore structures and consultant fronts can be misused to appear compliant while retaining effective control and evading regulatory scrutiny.

Legal Notice

All information presented is drawn from sworn legal statements, internal diagrams and court disclosures. The article makes no claim of criminal conduct unless determined by a competent authority. All individuals and companies named are presumed innocent unless proven otherwise. Links to original materials have been made available for transparency and journalistic accuracy.