industry giants say, "Not so fast"

[greg nice]

saw this link posted in HSNL

http://www.gambling911.com/internet-gambling-bill-093006.html

[kslghost]

Should be very interesting come Monday

[7n7]

[ QUOTE ]
Should be very interesting come Monday

[/ QUOTE ]

It had better be very interesting come Monday...7n7 angry, very, very angry!

[MicroBob]

thanks for that link.

Like they mentioned in the article, I'm looking forward to a VERY interesting Monday.

[JackDragna]

What a time to be a new poster. I'm fairly new to internet poker and it looks like the rug will be taken out from under me. Guess I'll go back to grinding it out at BnM's.

As regars the topic of this thread, I wish the online poker sites and interests in Nevada had done something sooner. My read on this bill is that it's political pork for the right and Frist and co. will fight tooth and nail. Even with appeals to groups like the WTO, there's very little ability (even within the WTO) to force the United States to change its policies. Countries can impose economic sanctions, but the damage it causes won't get enough play in the American media to change any minds.

[LesJ]

[ QUOTE ]
thanks for that link.

Like they mentioned in the article, I'm looking forward to a VERY interesting Monday.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bob,
What are your thoughts on this article? This isn't exactly mainstream press here. Do you believe their sources are solid?

Thanks,
Les

[spatne]

Careful, guys. They may be right in this case, but this is not a reliable source for this type of information. This piece is super sketchy and vague, even for an anonymously sourced article.

Basically, I'm hoping that they know something, but I won't be surprised if there are no meaningful statements issued on Monday. YMMV.

[async]

You'd think if your business made tens (hundreds?) of millions of dollars and legislation was being actively pushed that would cripple it, you'd have some contingency plans.

[Sarge85]

This makes me think that the "giants" have seen this coming for awhile and have a game plan already in place.

I hope its a good one.

Sarge/images/graemlins/diamond.gif

[mpslg]

http://www.cmbdg.com/blog/content/wp-content/i/fingerscrossed.gif

[Wynton]

I'm sorry if I'm making the same point I did in another thread (I can't keep these threads straight anymore). But in case I didn't:

This news should not be surprising. It would have been shocking if the companies were not developing strategies for challenging the law. But just because someone can come up with a creative challenge does NOT necessarily mean that the law will not go into effect during the pendency of the challenge (let alone that it will succeed).

[DONTUSETHIS]

[ QUOTE ]
This news should not be surprising. It would have been shocking if the companies were not developing strategies for challenging the law. But just because someone can come up with a creative challenge does NOT necessarily mean that the law will not go into effect during the pendency of the challenge (let alone that it will succeed

[/ QUOTE ]

It is hard for me to think that an industry as big as this one would just roll over and die. They have noting to lose to try.

[Autocratic]

[ QUOTE ]
Careful, guys. They may be right in this case, but this is not a reliable source for this type of information. This piece is super sketchy and vague, even for an anonymously sourced article.

Basically, I'm hoping that they know something, but I won't be surprised if there are no meaningful statements issued on Monday. YMMV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed on the source, but I don't think we need a major paper to tell us that companies worth billions of dollars aren't going to take this lying down.

[toss]

Does this mean we're going to see a war this coming monday?

[Lawman007]

That's a pretty vague article from an obviously biased internet publication. I'll believe it when I see it.

The time to oppose this bill was before it passed. It is going to be much, much more difficult to do anything about it now that it has passed.

[b33nz]

LET US GOGOGOGOGOG!!!!!!

[jeffman]

The statements are just to help reduce the damage to their stock by a little. I don't see this as a really big deal.

[Hock_]

[ QUOTE ]
The time to oppose this bill was before it passed. It is going to be much, much more difficult to do anything about it now that it has passed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. These guys were clearly asleep at the wheel. Allowing the legislation to pass without a monumental effort to stop it could cost them BILLIONS of dollars. I'm more inclined to believe that they had their heads in the sand all along and just got a major kick in the ass, which means that they're scrambling big time now.

Better late than never, I suppose, but man did they ever f&#% this one up.

[Losing all]

Hard to read with all the flashing on that page. I'm sure EOG, theRX, PSO, and SBR will follow suit with positive articles of their own.

[Miamipuck]

Any thought as to why Harrah's and MGM did absolutley nothing to stop this legislation?

Could they have wanted it, so they can come in and start their own US based sites. Once, they mobilize their huge Lobby's, is it possible they can get Online Poker regulated?

Seriously, Harry Reid could have put a hold on this bill but chose not to. Whose to say that after they initially outlaw online poker, the US based companies fund studies. Those studies say the Gov't could make an assload if it was properly regulated, obviously this would be a given. Then Harrah's, MGM etc. get it regulated. Finally, with their deep pockets they can go ahead an eventually buy up Party or Poker Stars. Then we are basically where we are today, sans prohibition ............. anyway just an out of the box thought.

[badger2006]

[ QUOTE ]
Any thought as to why Harrah's and MGM did absolutley nothing to stop this legislation?

Could they have wanted it, so they can come in and start their own US based sites. Once, they mobilize their huge Lobby's, is it possible they can get Online Poker regulated?

Serioulsy, Harry Reid could have put a hold on this bill but chose not to. Whose to say that after they initially outlaw online poker, the US based companies fund studies. Those studies say the Gov't could make an assload if it was properly regulated, obviously this would be a given. Then Harrah's, MGM etc. get it regulated. Finally, with their deep pockets they can go ahead an eventually buy up Party or Poker Stars. Then we are basically where we are today, sans prohibition ............. anyway just an out of the box thought. [/quote




It is certainly possible. Because of the $$$$ at stake there will be many brilliant business and legal minds trying to navigate this landmine.

[Oranzith]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any thought as to why Harrah's and MGM did absolutley nothing to stop this legislation?

Could they have wanted it, so they can come in and start their own US based sites. Once, they mobilize their huge Lobby's, is it possible they can get Online Poker regulated?

Serioulsy, Harry Reid could have put a hold on this bill but chose not to. Whose to say that after they initially outlaw online poker, the US based companies fund studies. Those studies say the Gov't could make an assload if it was properly regulated, obviously this would be a given. Then Harrah's, MGM etc. get it regulated. Finally, with their deep pockets they can go ahead an eventually buy up Party or Poker Stars. Then we are basically where we are today, sans prohibition ............. anyway just an out of the box thought. [/quote




It is certainly possible. Because of the $$$$ at stake there will be many brilliant business and legal minds trying to navigate this landmine.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Flight_Risk]

This article reeks. I don't see how any of those 'industry giants' can't see how stupid it is to be 'releasing' statements after the bill has already been passed. The time for action was before it went through. I mean, what do these bums really think they are going to accomplish?

[ QUOTE ]
amulet:
i spoke with the general counsel of one of the top sites 3 weeks ago. he reiterated that that they had studied the legislation and that they felt;
1. it was unlikely to pass .
2. it would be declared unconstitutional in time.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Mason Malmuth (09/17/06):
Here's what we plan to do. On Monday, we're going to call our attorney to make an appointment. In addition to some other legal matters, we plan to discuss the legislation , the PPA, and exactly what our role should be.

Just for a little background, our attorney and his firm specialize in intellectual property and Internet Gambling. He also does all the intellectual property work for Steve Wynn and Kirk Kikorian, and has been our attorney since 1987.

In previous conversations, the feeling was that the legislation would not pass and the best role for us was not to do anything , and the opinion on the PPA was consistent with mine. However, now with the possibility of the legislation being attached to another bill, things may have changed. So all of these subjects will be brought up again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems like alot of this type of thinking is going around.

Flight_Risk

[Lawman007]

[ QUOTE ]
This article reeks. I don't see how any of those 'industry giants' can't see how stupid it is to be 'releasing' statements after the bill has already been passed. The time for action was before it went through. I mean, what do these bums really think they are going to accomplish?

[ QUOTE ]
amulet:
i spoke with the general counsel of one of the top sites 3 weeks ago. he reiterated that that they had studied the legislation and that they felt;
1. it was unlikely to pass .
2. it would be declared unconstitutional in time.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Mason Malmuth (09/17/06):
Here's what we plan to do. On Monday, we're going to call our attorney to make an appointment. In addition to some other legal matters, we plan to discuss the legislation , the PPA, and exactly what our role should be.

Just for a little background, our attorney and his firm specialize in intellectual property and Internet Gambling. He also does all the intellectual property work for Steve Wynn and Kirk Kikorian, and has been our attorney since 1987.

In previous conversations, the feeling was that the legislation would not pass and the best role for us was not to do anything , and the opinion on the PPA was consistent with mine. However, now with the possibility of the legislation being attached to another bill, things may have changed. So all of these subjects will be brought up again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems like alot of this type of thinking is going around.

Flight_Risk

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, they must all use the same do-nothing lawyer. LOL

This has to have been the worst read in the history of poker.

[Flight_Risk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This article reeks. I don't see how any of those 'industry giants' can't see how stupid it is to be 'releasing' statements after the bill has already been passed. The time for action was before it went through. I mean, what do these bums really think they are going to accomplish?

[ QUOTE ]
amulet:
i spoke with the general counsel of one of the top sites 3 weeks ago. he reiterated that that they had studied the legislation and that they felt;
1. it was unlikely to pass .
2. it would be declared unconstitutional in time.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Mason Malmuth (09/17/06):
Here's what we plan to do. On Monday, we're going to call our attorney to make an appointment. In addition to some other legal matters, we plan to discuss the legislation , the PPA, and exactly what our role should be.

Just for a little background, our attorney and his firm specialize in intellectual property and Internet Gambling. He also does all the intellectual property work for Steve Wynn and Kirk Kikorian, and has been our attorney since 1987.

In previous conversations, the feeling was that the legislation would not pass and the best role for us was not to do anything , and the opinion on the PPA was consistent with mine. However, now with the possibility of the legislation being attached to another bill, things may have changed. So all of these subjects will be brought up again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems like alot of this type of thinking is going around.

Flight_Risk

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, it seems like they all use the same lawyer. LOL

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
Hello Bobby,

We appreciate and share your concerns about the bill which passed in
the US Congress today regarding the funding of internet gaming, as an
attachment to a Port Security bill.

PokerStars' management and legal team are examining the bill at this
time. Until we understand the potential impact of the bill , we cannot
comment on how it will impact our players or PokerStars. Please note
that the bill includes a 270-day window for enforcement procedures to
be established, so we do not expect to see any immediate changes in
the ability to transfer funds to and from PokerStars.

Also please remember that your money is safe on PokerStars. All
player funds are in a segregated account at the Royal Bank of Scotland.

As always, we thank you for playing on PokerStars.

Regards,

Grant
PokerStars Support Team

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean to tell me you're still examining the bill and don't already know the potential impact by now? Wow.

Flight_Risk

[monkeyman]

[ QUOTE ]
This article reeks. I don't see how any of those 'industry giants' can't see how stupid it is to be 'releasing' statements after the bill has already been passed. The time for action was before it went through. I mean, what do these bums really think they are going to accomplish?



[/ QUOTE ]

this is one of the dumbest things i have read in a while. i am assuming it is a joke?

[Flight_Risk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This article reeks. I don't see how any of those 'industry giants' can't see how stupid it is to be 'releasing' statements after the bill has already been passed. The time for action was before it went through. I mean, what do these bums really think they are going to accomplish?



[/ QUOTE ]

this is one of the dumbest things i have read in a while. i am assuming it is a joke?

[/ QUOTE ]

Find the joke.

Flight_Risk

[sunpar]

To everyone saying why haven't the "giants" done anything until after the bill was passed, I'm guessing they were more or less caught with their pants down on this one.

They were not looking (correct me if I'm wrong) for the legislation to come in the form of an attached ammendment to other legislation.

[Flight_Risk]

[ QUOTE ]
To everyone saying why haven't the "giants" done anything until after the bill was passed, I'm guessing they were more or less caught with their pants down on this one.

They were not looking (correct me if I'm wrong) for the legislation to come in the form of an attached ammendment to other legislation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anytime the cash cow of your business is threatened, you don't sit around and make assumptions that the worse probably won't happen. You assume it can and will happen, then you make every effort to prevent that from happening. The fact that the industry giants or even 2+2 Publishing thought the bill was unlikely to pass or that it wouldn't pass at all led to inaction. Had they been vigorously involved from the outset instead basking in the glory of their coffers overflowing, having this bill be attached as an amendment would've gotten recognized and stuffed out a long time ago. It's no excuse. They all will suffer dearly for such incompetent inaction.

Flight_Risk

[badger2006]

[ QUOTE ]
To everyone saying why haven't the "giants" done anything until after the bill was passed, I'm guessing they were more or less caught with their pants down on this one.

They were not looking (correct me if I'm wrong) for the legislation to come in the form of an attached ammendment to other legislation.

[/ QUOTE ]



Surely you jest? Would you really expect a customer service rep to give the company's official position to a player who contacts them BEFORE they have a press conference to give that same official statement. They have known this law was an imminent possibility for a number of years and I for one would be absolutely in shock if they did not spend a decent amount of their enormous profits on the longterm legality of internet poker in the US of A. Lets just see what happens.

[Little_Luck]

The 1000's of dollars I've made neteller are possibly going to good use.

[Copernicus]

"This article reeks. I don't see how any of those 'industry giants' can't see how stupid it is to be 'releasing' statements after the bill has already been passed. The time for action was before it went through. I mean, what do these bums really think they are going to accomplish? "

It makes perfect sense to address the problem in public AFTER the law passes. IG bills have been voted on for the last 6 or 7 years and failed every time. As late as 24 hours before it passed the consensus was that there wasnt time left on the agenda to pass it.

To raise the profile of the issue with that kind of prognosis for passage could well have been counter-productive.

Given the Antigua precedent I am sure that sites have formulated a strategy to respond. Whether the law was tightly written enough to block any response remains to be seen.

Lets see how thorough the responses and not be so quick to judge execs competent enough to build mutli-billion dollar businesses. There isnt a chance in hell they buried their heads in the sand over this.

And the above contention that the statements are intended to prop up stock values is ludicrous. If there are no teeth in the statement that make sense, the stock is going down.

[jah7_fsu1]

Actually the internet sites did not have enough profits to fight this because of the rake we got back through affiliates. Party and Pokerstars are just barely scraping by.

[Copernicus]

yeah youre right, thats why their stock valuations make them penny stocks. [/sarcasm]

[jah7_fsu1]

Exactly, they have no money...just like the oil companies now that gas went down a bit.

[aramfingal]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v210/ovegto/slot.jpg

i don't like this picture.

[Python49]

First of all a few things don't make sense. I've seen people make reference to online sports betting and other crap like that not getting banned... is this true?
Because if it is whose to say the money im transferring to bodog or a sports book like mansion is going to be bet on a sport instead of poker?
And if all those gamblnig transactions are banned well ok, what about if I want to buy something online using a neteller account or firepay, are these institutions all going completely out of business?

For them to stop people from depositing online they'd have to completely block out any use of these types of internet wallets since they'd have no idea where the money is going. I can't see how banks will like this too much.

Also it doesn't really seem logical to me that a multi billion dollar industry is just going to somehow disappear just like that in the blink of an eye, this industry is bigger than the alcohol one that turned into a black market many years ago. It just does't seem likely to me that it's going to disappear. I think the sites will either find a way around this by maybe offering a new deposit method on their site that is disguised completely and maybe shows up differently each time its dispatched to withdraw from someones bank account.

If not that, theres too much money to be made from this market and I think something will happen in the USA where somebody who wants to get rich is going to take advantage and start some online website and get a law or something passed to make it possible.

Doesn't seem possible to me for the entire industry to disappear in the blink of an eye.

Also another thing about all the fishes not going through the effort to deposit, the thing is.... alot of the "fish" online do not even realize or think they are fish. Theres plenty of fish even right here at 2+2 that would be very willing to go out of their way to deposit and access the online sites. Many regulars i've played with do understand how to play correctly but do not have the discipline. I'd say that very few players are playing online knowingly giving their money away, they are trying to win because they think they can.

When I first got into online poker as a clear fish, neteller did not work in my state (maryland) but this did not stop me from finding SOME way to get money on there. The main problem back then for me was that I was trying to oplay at eurobet for rakeback but they didn't have IGM pay or firepay and I didn't have neteller. So I just had my affiliate transfer me some money in and I paid him on paypal, then when it was time to cash out I used moneybookers. Believe it or not, many fish would be very willing to find a way to deposit if they know one exists.

[coachkf]

"The time to oppose this bill was before it passed. It is going to be much, much more difficult to do anything about it now that it has passed."

What exactly were they supposed to do before the bill was passed? From what I understand, offline companies can't hire lobbying groups or donate to politicians.

That means the only thing they "could" have done was send out mass emails to members (some of them did). I suspect most did not want to scare their membership over something that almost everyone agreed had little or no chance to pass.

Now that an actual law has passed, they have something they can fight. Before, it was just a bill moving through the US congress, and they being companies based in another country had no legitimate way to weigh in, correct?

I'm not an expert on these things by any means, but I'm pretty sure that online poker sites were handicapped by the fact that they're not based in the USA and therefore can't take part in our mucked up lawmaking.

That being said, I'm thoroughly disgusted with poker industry leaders here in the USA like 2p2 who sat on their hands when they could have at least matched what several online poker sites did and email their members that there was a threat.

[DrewOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
There isnt a chance in hell they buried their heads in the sand over this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have yet to see one single bit of action on the part of the online casinos that would make me believe this. I hope that you are right, but am afraid that you are wrong.

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
Any thought as to why Harrah's and MGM did absolutley nothing to stop this legislation?

Could they have wanted it, so they can come in and start their own US based sites. Once, they mobilize their huge Lobby's, is it possible they can get Online Poker regulated?

Seriously, Harry Reid could have put a hold on this bill but chose not to. Whose to say that after they initially outlaw online poker, the US based companies fund studies. Those studies say the Gov't could make an assload if it was properly regulated, obviously this would be a given. Then Harrah's, MGM etc. get it regulated. Finally, with their deep pockets they can go ahead an eventually buy up Party or Poker Stars. Then we are basically where we are today, sans prohibition ............. anyway just an out of the box thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

This wouldn't surprise me in the least. It's the next 3-5 years that will suck though.

[THE HOBO]

Post deleted by Ryan Beal

[ginko]

Lets wait and see what happens on monday, it can only be good news.

[Python49]

why can we play on WSEX but not other sites if the only thing that was banned was the depositing of money into an online gambling site? Playing online isnt illegal nor is withdrawing. Are people still allowed to bet on sports and horse racing online just not poker? I wasn't sure about this part and if its true they will have no way of enforcing this.

[blueodum]

I suspect that the major sites will claim:

1) Because of the carve outs for US-based businesses (for horseracing, fantasy sports leagues), the new law will violate WTO agreements by discriminating against foreign-based businesses. They will claim that the US-based businesses are essentially in the same sector (i.e. internet gaming) and, as such, competitors.

2) Therefore, they are not going to cut off US players until a WTO tribunal rules on the matter.

[daedalus]

[ QUOTE ]
I suspect that the major sites will claim:

1) Because of the carve outs for US-based businesses (for horseracing, fantasy sports leagues), the new law will violate WTO agreements by discriminating against foreign-based businesses. They will claim that the US-based businesses are essentially in the same sector (i.e. internet gaming) and, as such, competitors.

2) Therefore, they are not going to cut off US players until a WTO tribunal rules on the matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice try but companies don't file WTO claims, countries do. This route smells like another Antigua WTO action at best, I don't see Blair filing a UK WTO claim against Georgy Boy. I like where your heart is on this one tho bro.

[dustyn]

One thing to keep in mind is that sites did not just immediately start banning players in Italy when they made online gambling illegal. Now, obviously, the US example is totally different and the issue of arrests may come into play here, but the Italy example is the only one we have to go from. I think it points to the idea that it's less likely the major sites will start not allowing American customers.

[Flight_Risk]

[ QUOTE ]
"The time to oppose this bill was before it passed. It is going to be much, much more difficult to do anything about it now that it has passed."

What exactly were they supposed to do before the bill was passed? From what I understand, offline companies can't hire lobbying groups or donate to politicians.

That means the only thing they "could" have done was send out mass emails to members (some of them did). I suspect most did not want to scare their membership over something that almost everyone agreed had little or no chance to pass.

Now that an actual law has passed, they have something they can fight. Before, it was just a bill moving through the US congress, and they being companies based in another country had no legitimate way to weigh in, correct?

I'm not an expert on these things by any means, but I'm pretty sure that online poker sites were handicapped by the fact that they're not based in the USA and therefore can't take part in our mucked up lawmaking.

That being said, I'm thoroughly disgusted with poker industry leaders here in the USA like 2p2 who sat on their hands when they could have at least matched what several online poker sites did and email their members that there was a threat.

[/ QUOTE ]

If they are gonna use the excuse that they [the online sites] were handicapped by the fact of being located offshore outside of U.S. jurisdiction as a reason they could do nothing or participate in U.S. policymaking, then what is making statements after the bill has passed gonna change? THEY ARE STILL HANDICAPPED!

Flight_Risk

[Gary Stevenson]

[ QUOTE ]
LET US GOGOGOGOGOG!!!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

[MelchyBeau]

[ QUOTE ]

Nice try but companies don't file WTO claims, countries do. This route smells like another Antigua WTO action at best, I don't see Blair filing a UK WTO claim against Georgy Boy. I like where your heart is on this one tho bro.

[/ QUOTE ]

Blair will be leaving office soon. I expect someone much more anti-Bush to be put in power

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Nice try but companies don't file WTO claims, countries do. This route smells like another Antigua WTO action at best, I don't see Blair filing a UK WTO claim against Georgy Boy. I like where your heart is on this one tho bro.

[/ QUOTE ]

Blair will be leaving office soon. I expect someone much more anti-Bush to be put in power

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesnt matter who is in power. Either the tax revenues on profits from US players justifies the effort to keep the US market in the game (and all of the ramifications under the WTO and other trad treaties) or it doesnt.

[JOHNY CA$H]

I guess we can speculate all we want, we'll see on Monday.

[Lawman007]

[ QUOTE ]
Guys I am lawyer. These foriegn companies cant file any thing yet. Just like fruit this caes is not ripe. It is going to take a while for what the government wants to happen to happen. Do you really thinkthe banks are going to go for this so quick. Use some common sense. Congress passed this law. Well who is gonna enforce it? and how . How are the banks gonna stop it? I can use my neteller to bet on horse races but then ibet a little on poker. Bank OF america your going to jail. HOrse racing is legal. Also no matter what we can all play on WSEX. I love JC2006 and he was in jail once but Aruba wont stand for this.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must have skipped over spelling and grammar classes on your way to law school, huh, counselor? LOL

[Lawman007]

[ QUOTE ]
There isnt a chance in hell they buried their heads in the sand over this.

[/ QUOTE ]

There isn't a chance in hell that they didn't.

[Lawman007]

[ QUOTE ]
Lets wait and see what happens on monday, it can only be good news.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I'm sure it will be great news. LOL

Man, the level of denial on here is really astounding.

[DrewOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Lets wait and see what happens on monday, it can only be good news.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I'm sure it will be great news. LOL

Man, the level of denial on here is really astounding.

[/ QUOTE ]

No kidding, and I wish people would just stop it already. The posted picture of Chicken Little in another thread and other such responses border on the asinine.

[DuderinoAB]

Guys lets just stay level headed for another 12 hours ok? I don't think that a large amount of optimism is warranted, but a doomsday approach isn't either. What we need to do right now is find out as many facts as we can and choose the best course of action. Speculating one way or the other is just going to create paranoia or a false sense of hope which will probably be detrimental to the cause. Just relax and let's see what happens tomorrow.

[OHFreak]

Would you advise drinking heavily and waking up at say... 4pm tomorrow?

[DrewOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you advise drinking heavily and waking up at say... 4pm tomorrow?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds good to me. Anyone up for a White Russian?

[jrz1972]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you advise drinking heavily and waking up at say... 4pm tomorrow?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but I would have recommended that regardless.

[DuderinoAB]

I've got some Kalua

[OHFreak]

I've got some grain alcohol.

And now I'm blind.

gg Bill Frist.