[olivert]

[ QUOTE ]

Olivert, I have NO doubt that Party's exit is looking at "the long term", but question whether the short term sacrifice would have been suffered AT ALL, had Mr. Garber et al paid better attention to their main market and worked a LOT harder to stop the legislation .... THAT is the point of MY post. Why give up about $800 million in revenue if you could stall a bill another year ?

Now, on to yours .... your sense of history is appallingly lacking, as is your knowledge of gamblings role in various societies.

You claim "Gaming" is NOT a "free market" business and that it "Never has been. Never will be." According to you, "the governments make all the rules."

Have you been under a rock for 8 years ? The online sector of gambling has been as close to a free market activity as I can recall. It was only the move of certain firms to self-entanglement with the public capital markets that has caused a hick-up. Those firms which avoided the public captal markets are still thriving. (As for what happens to PStars' levels if the regulations dry up US player funding doesn't make their profits in the interim any less real. 270 x $1.7 million adds up to a lot of business Party left behind.)


Gambling is and will always have a "free market" sector, regadless of government licensing or crackdowns. Free market has to be understod as inclusive of both "legal" and "illegal" activity. A free market is not defined by characteristics of legality or illegality. (Plenty of liquor flowed in the US during Prohibition, to take an obvious example.)

You equate "gambling" with "legal gambling". Sonny, gambling goes on whether it is legal or not. Do you think it doesn't go on in China TODAY, where it is illegal ? Korea ? The United States ?

As for Party's exit from the US market being focussed on development in China and Russia, you could NOT be more mistaken. It was a flight because Party, presumably, has a long term goal of RETURNING to the US. It has nothing to do with China or Russia.

Why does it have NOTHING to do with China or Russia ? Because neither China nor Russia would CARE whether Party had exited the US vis a vis someone like PStars. WHY would you think that either country would shut out a PStars due to US business, you really think they give a rat'sass about UIGE Act ?

(For the record, I happen to think that Asia IS the huge future market for poker, but that is apples and oranges relative ot a Party exit from the US.)

The ONLY benefit of Party exiting the US, after sleeping away $800 million of value on the legislative front, is that it will be able to come back.


[/ QUOTE ]

You overlook one thing:

The likes of PokerStars and FullTilt didn't chose to stay private.

They remained private because they didn't get their IPOs out the door fast enough before the door closed.

They also know that they couldn't afford to shut themselves off from the U.S. market during the 270 days between the signing of the UIGEA and the implementation of the regulations.

Otherwise, both PokerStars and FullTilt would resemble ParadisePoker.com, which has turned into a virtual ghost town.

In case you haven't noticed:

1. Bodog has stopped advertising in the US and has evacuated its personnel from Costa Rica to Antigua, where the Antiguan government will NOT carry out extradition orders for online gaming executives. Even "Cole Turner" sees the writing on the wall.

2. Absolute has changed its deposit bonus promotions to favor non-us players, by pushing Visa and Mastercard (which can be used in places such as the UK and eventually Spain and Italy).

Even PokerStars is reducing its US marketing costs for the time being while it waits for the impact of the regulations. Even the new TV ads looked cheaper than the old ones.

You were congratulating the "genius" of PokerStars and FullTilt for staying private. You couldn't have been more wrong. Neither PokerStars nor FullTilt wanted to stay private by choice.