dxu05
09-30-2006, 07:53 AM
To the new bill:
The argument could certainly be made that the bill against online poker is going to be a huge detriment to Casino income.
The reason is this: Most casino's fill enough tables to rake around the same amount of money anyways, poker rooms have never brought or lost them incredible amounts of income.
What has brought incredible amounts of income have been the blackjack players who happen to duo as poker players. The wins they make off other players can potentially go directly into the big 0% return deposit structure known as the house. A decline in online poker is a decline in an instrumental marketing tool that can direct a substantial number of poker players to the live casino room.
The interests of Casinos and the tax on the revenues of casinos have been the leading factor in the movement against online gambling; why not convince them it is actually beneficial to keep online poker and perhaps gambling around?
The argument could certainly be made that the bill against online poker is going to be a huge detriment to Casino income.
The reason is this: Most casino's fill enough tables to rake around the same amount of money anyways, poker rooms have never brought or lost them incredible amounts of income.
What has brought incredible amounts of income have been the blackjack players who happen to duo as poker players. The wins they make off other players can potentially go directly into the big 0% return deposit structure known as the house. A decline in online poker is a decline in an instrumental marketing tool that can direct a substantial number of poker players to the live casino room.
The interests of Casinos and the tax on the revenues of casinos have been the leading factor in the movement against online gambling; why not convince them it is actually beneficial to keep online poker and perhaps gambling around?