Neteller statement

[whangarei]

http://content.neteller.com/content/en/member_businessupdate.htm

cliff notes: business as usual until regulations have been written.

[00Snitch]

im from australia and havnt really followed this all that closely, dont really know how your (US) law making process works, etc.

i figure, the only way this is going to affect me (apart from the fish drying up), being that neither neteller or any of the sites are actually american, is if neteller stop accepting transfers from poker sites.

being that they arnt a US company, i would have thought this unlikly.

do you think this is an acurate summary for non-US players.?

[DMoogle]

WOOHOO finally SOMETHING. Even though it isn't saying much, this statement is still a relief. The silence from everybody has been quite unnerving, so a simple statement such as this one makes me feel a bit better.

[ QUOTE ]
im from australia and havnt really followed this all that closely, dont really know how your (US) law making process works, etc.

i figure, the only way this is going to affect me (apart from the fish drying up), being that neither neteller or any of the sites are actually american, is if neteller stop accepting transfers from poker sites.

being that they arnt a US company, i would have thought this unlikly.

do you think this is an acurate summary for non-US players.?

[/ QUOTE ]Yes

[jrz1972]

I mentioned this in another thread, but I honestly don't think this bill is going to affect Neteller, unless the regulators disregard the statutory language and declare them in "the business of betting or wagering." Or maybe Neteller will decide to behave like a US bank and follow the regulations that apply to them, but I don't see why Neteller would do anything differently than, say, the Bank of Montreal.

The main threat right now, as I see it, is that poker sites will do like Pacific and Party and cut off American players.

[Richas]

Well I'm glad to see Neteller is under FSA regulation and my cash is in a trust account. My Stars cash is too, Ladbrokes is non US but what about Party & others? Which are heavily US facing and not in trust accounts?

[jrz1972]

None of the major rooms are going to run off with your money. Definitely not Party. This is not a serious concern and it would be better if people not talk about it as if it were.

[invisibleleadsoup]

[ QUOTE ]

The main threat right now, as I see it, is that poker sites will do like Pacific and Party and cut off American players.

[/ QUOTE ]

when did party cut off american players?

[OHFreak]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The main threat right now, as I see it, is that poker sites will do like Pacific and Party and cut off American players.

[/ QUOTE ]

when did party cut off american players?

[/ QUOTE ]

They haven't. The London Times article mentioned "industry sources" which expected them to do so.

[DrewOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The main threat right now, as I see it, is that poker sites will do like Pacific and Party and cut off American players.

[/ QUOTE ]

when did party cut off american players?

[/ QUOTE ]

They haven't. The London Times article mentioned "industry sources" which expected them to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Though it is not a good sign, it is still speculation. I expect a major development to be formally announced here shortly, but remember that "industry sources" also predicted that the IG legislation would never pass.

The world of poker is about to change for the worse, but to what degree remains to be seen. Most of the poker community rested on its laurels while the threat was imminent. Now that the threat has overtaken us, everyone is panicking. The simple truth is that no one can say with 100% certainty exactly how all of this is going to pan out.

[ACPlayer]

The Times (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13129-2384407,00.html)

[jrz1972]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
when did party cut off american players?

[/ QUOTE ]

They haven't. The London Times article mentioned "industry sources" which expected them to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just speculation, but here's my reading-between-the-lines guess. What this means is that Party is going to wait until the bill is actually signed and goes into effect. THEN it's going to cut off the US.

I know this is reading the Times like it was Pravda, but I would guess that's the most likely turn of events here.