well everyone.....do you think this bill will be effective? [Archive]

HSB

10-13-2006, 10:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
we've been over this 87,000 times already...its not like we know something new now that the bill has been signed.

[/ QUOTE ]

We know that the biggest payment processor and second biggest site are sticking around. We didn't know that a week ago.

I conclude that the impact on online poker will be tiny.

I actually think it will have a larger impact on live poker than online poker.

Vern

10-13-2006, 10:26 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
we've been over this 87,000 times already...its not like we know something new now that the bill has been signed.

[/ QUOTE ]

We know that the biggest payment processor and the new biggest site are sticking around. We didn't know that a week ago.

I conclude that the impact on online poker will be tiny.

I actually think it will have a larger impact on live poker than online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP

NickyD

10-13-2006, 10:26 AM

Effective. Online poker may continue,but will more difficult. Less advertising,tougher restrictions will destroy the current craze that makes poker flourish.

cowboy.up

10-13-2006, 10:26 AM

[ QUOTE ]
well everyone the internet gaming bill is signed into law.so do you think it will be effective or ineffective?
what are your thoughts on this?

[/ QUOTE ]

it's going to be very effective. so much so that my computer blew up before the ink on the bill even dried (evidentally the government put explosive cookies on my system to track my every move) - and my entire bank account was dropped to zero since 90% of the funds originated from poker.

sarcasm aside - i'm an optimist and feel that most fish will migrate from party to stars/ftp and the games will still be profitable. but as like all things, only time will tell (give it 6-12 months and you'll have your answer).

primetime32

10-13-2006, 10:29 AM

it will be mildly effective at best. It already has been somewhat effective before being signed. But down the road i see the effect fading and all of us going about our usual business.

Mr.K

10-13-2006, 10:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
it will be mildly effective at best. It already has been somewhat effective before being signed. But down the road i see the effect fading and all of us going about our usual business.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're nuts.

Robby Box

10-13-2006, 10:35 AM

(We'll be singing, when we're winning, we'll be singing)

I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down

primetime32

10-13-2006, 10:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it will be mildly effective at best. It already has been somewhat effective before being signed. But down the road i see the effect fading and all of us going about our usual business.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, and what's your point?

Fhil Ivey

10-13-2006, 10:42 AM

you guys are too optimistic. How many people on this forum predicted it will take years for a bill to get passed and we shouldn't be worried? Stop being delusional. Marijuana and cocaine were legal at a time too.

skegvegaspoker

10-13-2006, 10:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
(We'll be singing, when we're winning, we'll be singing)

I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down

[/ QUOTE ]

Bizarre use of the comma.

ChexNFX

10-13-2006, 10:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
you guys are too optimistic. How many people on this forum predicted it will take years for a bill to get passed and we shouldn't be worried? Stop being delusional. Marijuana and cocaine were legal at a time too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't be a donk. The bill can be picked apart like string cheese. It's a joke. All we need to be watching is the regulations coming out, and the effect.

HSB

10-13-2006, 10:56 AM

[ QUOTE ]
you guys are too optimistic. How many people on this forum predicted it will take years for a bill to get passed and we shouldn't be worried? Stop being delusional. Marijuana and cocaine were legal at a time too.

[/ QUOTE ]

And they're both readily available now.

I am optimistic because some big sites have made it clear they are willing to take the risk.

That means that the only way the casual gambler is going to be troubled by this is if they find it difficult to fund their account. I find it very difficult to believe that the regulators will be able to make it difficult to fund accounts. Even if they do, the regulations are months away and the deadline for banks to implement the technical changes required to enforce those regulations is months after that.

The regulator process bears watching, of course, but if those regulations don't cover Neteller then the net effect of all this legislation is that the casual gambler has to find another site to play at.

Now, what's your logic for taking a pessimistic view?

mikeh1975

10-13-2006, 10:57 AM

i think i might download that song brings back memories of a kinder time.ooops i might better go out and just buy the cd,lol.....

metsandfinsfan

10-13-2006, 10:57 AM

JuntMonkey

10-13-2006, 11:07 AM

Let's assume that Neteller and/or paper checks and e-checks will still be allowed. There are still some big problems.

One is advertising. It has been discussed here that television stations were simply asked by the government to stop accepting gambling ".com" ads and they stopped without a fight. The new worry is that ".net" will soon follow. Somebody who seemed to be in-the-know in one of the threads here said that nothing should change with ".net" as far as the government is concerned. We will see how the networks themselves react.

Another big problem is satellites. I don't think it's officially confirmed, but it seems likely that Harrah's is not going to accept third party registrations for the WSOP anymore. Even if this isn't the case, major sites such as Full Tilt have announced that they will not be offering these satellites anymore.

Will the sites figure out a way to satellite people in anyway? Hopefully. Because this could be the biggest problem. We need massive WSOP and WPT events to keep the dream alive for the average viewer flipping through the channels - not to mention the EV loss for those of us who play in the events.

At least we've made it through phase 1 alive. Games might be slightly less profitable for the short-mid term, but most of us should still be able to make money. We'll see what the future holds.

primetime32

10-13-2006, 11:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Stop being delusional. Marijuana and cocaine were legal at a time too.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, and now its like totally impossible to find pot.

I crown you Donkus Aurelius

ChexNFX

10-13-2006, 11:12 AM

[ QUOTE ]

One is advertising. It has been discussed here that television stations were simply asked by the government to stop accepting gambling ".com" ads and they stopped without a fight. The new worry is that ".net" will soon follow. Somebody who seemed to be in-the-know in one of the threads here said that nothing should change with ".net" as far as the government is concerned. We will see how the networks themselves react.

[/ QUOTE ]
The boom has happened, I didn't foresee much growth in the future anyhow. Everyone knows the game exists, and its huge. If they made it this far without depositing money online, I highly doubt many of them would if they see a stupid Party commercial.

mikeh1975

10-13-2006, 11:15 AM

you know what i think.i think we are going to bounce back from this bump in the road and once the dust settles everything will eventually get back to normal.it won't be quite the same but it won't be bad either.....

ChexNFX

10-13-2006, 11:17 AM

NapoleonDolemite

10-13-2006, 11:45 AM

No.

JPFisher55

10-13-2006, 11:49 AM

I agree. This law will either be struck down by court litigation, reversed due to WTO litigation or the regs governing banking will not hinder ACH's so Neteller et. al. are not affected.

dtan05

10-13-2006, 11:50 AM

well let's not give it a CHANCE to eh?

DuderinoAB

10-13-2006, 11:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
you know what i think.i think we are going to bounce back from this bump in the road and once the dust settles everything will eventually get back to normal.it won't be quite the same but it won't be bad either.....

[/ QUOTE ]

you know what i think.i think speculation is dumb.i don't think any of us have a [censored] clue and we aren't accomplishing anything but we still do this for some unknown reason.just continue playing and roll with the punches as they come.if its the end of the online world then we try to do everything we can to not see that happen.if there is nothing we can do then we can't control it so we shouldn't be worried about it.

Texibus

10-13-2006, 11:58 AM

[ QUOTE ]
you guys are too optimistic. How many people on this forum predicted it will take years for a bill to get passed and we shouldn't be worried? Stop being delusional. Marijuana and cocaine were legal at a time too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I seem to remeber a time when alcohol was illegal as well?

I don't think this legislation will be effective myself, for one reason. You don't dump a market of 30 billion dollars without a fight, and no one seemingly put up a fuss about this, something larger is going on. Also, We have alot of people in the house on their way out the door so that's also hopeful, democrats like tax rev. haha.

Kieran

10-13-2006, 12:12 PM

I can't see this bill being effective... but it's certainly going to shake up the industry, and I'd be surprised if we don't see a few companies going titsup.com

I for one, as a UK player, am boycotting sites that don't accept US players[1]. I imagine others will do the same, some deliberately and others just looking for the sites with the most players.

[1] Except of course to clear down any really sweet bonus deals they might be offering /images/graemlins/wink.gif

DavidNB

10-13-2006, 12:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
we've been over this 87,000 times already...its not like we know something new now that the bill has been signed.

[/ QUOTE ]

We know that the biggest payment processor and biggest site are both sticking around. We didn't know that a week ago.

I conclude that the impact on online poker will be tiny.

I actually think it will have a larger impact on live poker than online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Guthrie

10-13-2006, 12:25 PM

It has already been effective and will continue to be. How effective, and more importantly, how much it affects most of us, remains to be seen.

signal

10-13-2006, 12:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
well everyone the internet gaming bill is signed into law.so do you think it will be effective or ineffective?
what are your thoughts on this?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think at the very least it will be ineffective tonight, right about the time I get home from the lab and fire up some internet poker.

I wouldn't characterize this act as a version of "noble" civil disobedience like the kind that went on during the civil rights era, but it should be our mission to continue to play online (if we can circumvent the impediments) as a matter of principle.

Remember, like liquids, satiated Americans always conform to the boundaries of its container. It's our duty to destroy this container.

Reminds me of a Bob Marley tune: "Time alone - oh, time will tell: Ya think you're in heaven, but ya living in hell."

Albert Moulton

10-13-2006, 12:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
well everyone the internet gaming bill is signed into law.so do you think it will be effective or ineffective?
what are your thoughts on this?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it will largely depend on the administration's actions over the next year. I would not be surprised if they start prosecuting high-profile players. If that happens to even one well-known poker pro, I think US players will pretty much stop playing in large numbers. Right now, I think most 2+2ers just don't believe they will ever be prosecuted for anything, so why not keep playing. As soon as you see somebody going to jail, if you see it, then that's all she wrote for US online poker until the laws change.

Albert Moulton

10-13-2006, 12:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well everyone the internet gaming bill is signed into law.so do you think it will be effective or ineffective?
what are your thoughts on this?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it will largely depend on the administration's actions over the next year. I would not be surprised if they start prosecuting high-profile players. If that happens to even one well-known poker pro, I think US players will pretty much stop playing in large numbers. Right now, I think most 2+2ers just don't believe they will ever be prosecuted for anything, so why not keep playing. As soon as you see somebody going to jail, if you see it, then that's all she wrote for US online poker until the laws change.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, and despite the specific language of the bill, it has always been the governments position, as I understand it, that playing poker for money on line is illegal, but that they weren't prosecuting players for some reason. This law reinforces that position by making the $ transfers illegal too. Once again, it's imact will depend on how/whether it gets tested in court with a successful high-profile prosecution of a player.

JuntMonkey

10-13-2006, 12:40 PM

PA32R

10-13-2006, 01:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(We'll be singing, when we're winning, we'll be singing)

I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down
I get knocked, down but I get up again
You're never gonna keep me down

[/ QUOTE ]

Bizarre use of the comma.

[/ QUOTE ]

Word.

Zetack

10-13-2006, 01:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I seem to remeber a time when alcohol was illegal as well?

[/ QUOTE ]

Man you're old.

My grandparents remember that time, or they would if three of them hadn't passed on and the other didn't have severe alzheimers.

--Zetack

PA32R

10-13-2006, 01:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you know what i think.i think we are going to bounce back from this bump in the road and once the dust settles everything will eventually get back to normal.it won't be quite the same but it won't be bad either.....

[/ QUOTE ]

you know what i think.i think speculation is dumb.i don't think any of us have a [censored] clue and we aren't accomplishing anything but we still do this for some unknown reason.just continue playing and roll with the punches as they come.if its the end of the online world then we try to do everything we can to not see that happen.if there is nothing we can do then we can't control it so we shouldn't be worried about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you sure? (sw)

Lawman007

10-13-2006, 01:57 PM

If the banks stop transferring money to Neteller, the law will be devastatingly effective. Fish aren't going to go to too much trouble to fund an online poker account. If that becomes difficult to do, then the fish will just stop playing.

mikeh1975

10-13-2006, 03:03 PM

i can't seem them going after players.even the high profile ones.....

PA32R

10-13-2006, 03:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i can't seem them going after players.even the high profile ones.....

[/ QUOTE ]

As best I understand it, they couldn't anyway. I think it would have to be a state that went after an individual poker player. I don't think the Feds could do it, it is arguably not a violation of federal law to play poker online.

tehDiceman

10-13-2006, 05:06 PM

I doubt this law will be real effective, even if they go after players. Music and Movie piracy is against the law, there are federal consquences. Piracy is more popular than Microsoft. ;-) I highly doubt some writing on paper is going to stop players from playing, if Neteller drops, perhaps.

As a side note, I refuse to go to brick n morter casinos. That just helps the government think they won. It is all about tax money.

The regime change coming in the near future will also play a big part, especially if the Dems get there hands on the key positions.

mikeh1975

10-13-2006, 07:27 PM

there are going to be a lot of loopholes to exploit in this and thats a good thing.....

Dire

10-13-2006, 07:36 PM

Let's see. As a result of this bill, I'm forced to only choose between 3 huge sites or a spattering of smaller sites. I have no trouble getting at my money and there are still tens of thousands of fish. And there seems nothing happening to change this in the foreseeable future.

No. This bill will most definitely not be 'effective'.

Azizal

10-13-2006, 07:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Let's assume that Neteller and/or paper checks and e-checks will still be allowed. There are still some big problems.

One is advertising. It has been discussed here that television stations were simply asked by the government to stop accepting gambling ".com" ads and they stopped without a fight. The new worry is that ".net" will soon follow. Somebody who seemed to be in-the-know in one of the threads here said that nothing should change with ".net" as far as the government is concerned. We will see how the networks themselves react.

[/ QUOTE ]

NBC's new poker show is an indication that there will still be lots of poker exposure on TV. I think the shows attract more people than the commercials, though that is pure guesswork.

JdT

10-13-2006, 08:55 PM

In the past prohibition has always created an allure. So on the super optomistic side... business could be better than ever.

Fish... I figure a guy that CC's J3s is considerably more likely to take chances to get their money to a site than a guy that folds AJo UTG. Fish will find a way.

OasisG

10-13-2006, 09:21 PM

um... can we poll this?

candyman718

10-13-2006, 09:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
In the past prohibition has always created an allure.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no statistics to back this up, but I believe that sentiment is untrue. While alcohol prohibition was an utter failure, I would be willing to bet alcohol consumption dropped during prohibition. Granted if it only dropped 10 or 30 or 50 percent that is still a significant number of people willing to break the law. But, I think you underestimate the number of people that will obey the law because it is the law. They probably significantly outnumber the amount of people who get a thrill out of doing something just because it is illegal.

However, I do like your profile of this individual. Much more likely to call with any 2 suited or Ace- rag. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

mikeh1975

10-13-2006, 09:38 PM

i'll do a poll.hopefully it won't get locked.....

pacecar86

10-13-2006, 09:55 PM

I don't think so because the Feds are too busy with bigger fish to fry, like drusg, terrorism, and major tax evasion. My guess is that they will track to the point of determining if any US citizens are involved in gambling sites, and/or, if any US based gambling sites are in operation.

However, if US banks decide that they now have sizeable legal exposure unless they block all transfers to offshore service providers like NetTeller, that could shut the whole thing down.

Fed tracking of money transfers of any amount from US financial institutions to NetTeller would be easy enough. Patriot Act software already in place in all US financial institutions could easily trap and include such transactions for Fed review.

But, after that, the US side has no knowledge of where the money goes after NetTeller has it. And NetTeller is not US based, so, I think they would be pretty much non-responsive to routine requests for information from US authorities.

So, the Feds would probably have to seek some leverage through cooperation of international agencies such as they probably do when gathering evidence of larger crimes like drugs, tax evasion and terrorism.

Now, if they do start tracking and see patterns of large amounts of US funds going back and forth, I would guess they might look into that. But, even if they finally get info that points to off-shore poker sites, I would bet they would be more likely to turn it over to the IRS for investigation of tax evasion.

Poker4Gambling

10-13-2006, 10:03 PM

I think players only need be concerned that live in one of the 11 states that have internet gambling laws:

Michigan, Illinois, Louisiana, Oregon, Wisconsin, Washington, Indiana, Nevada, New York, New Jersey and South Dakota

The federal bill is targeting funding which there will be ways around as long as there are sites that accept US players (which there always will be). As to the overall effect, flip a coin at this point. Oop's a 3 sided coin because there is always the chance of little to no impact.

Oh and is there any truth to the rumor that Frist is preparing another bill that will make it illegal to have sex in your own home in any room other than the bedroom with lights out and the sheets pulled completely over you?

JohnnyFX

10-13-2006, 10:09 PM

Exactly what do you foresee them prosecuting an internet poker pro for? Please specify exactly what law they would be guilty of violating.

John21

10-13-2006, 10:11 PM

A friend of mine who is (was) a Paradise player, called me yesterday when they shut out Nevada. I just told him to go over to Stars and he did.

His biggest concern over the whole ordeal was what kind of pic he should use for his avatar.

As long as there is some option or easy work-around it'll probably stay about the same. Word-of-mouth is slow, but it still works.