Conspiracy Theory: Put on Your Tin Foil Hats

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think it is very far-fetched, actually.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do.

I'd love for this conspiracy to be true, but it seems like the conspirators went to an awful lot of trouble to achieve something they could have accomplished with much less effort and gotten done much sooner. If Harrah's or some other American gaming corp wants online gaming legalized, why not just go through the typical lobbying channels? If Harrah's, Caesars Ent., MGM et al want Frist or some other Senators do something for them, they typically just cut a bigger check and send it directly to their campaign coffers, or threaten to fund their opponents -- not engage in long, drawn-out legislative shenanigans that would invariably cost them lots of money if this was their 'real' motive.

Party made something like $850 million dollars in revenue last year. I suspect a legitimate American company with huge brand awareness and endless resources like Harrah's or MGM could make two or three times that if given the opportunity. You think they're going to spend a year or two orchestrating this kind of conspiracy when they could be making all that revenue right now? If the answer is "but they want to gain market share" -- that seems pretty silly. Party/Stars/888.com couldn't hope to compete with the B&M behemoths and their aura of legitimacy/infinite advertising resources/huge brand awareness.

[LucidDream]

[ QUOTE ]
B&M casinos would never purposely pull something like this. The continuous growth of the online poker industry has brought a ton of new business to the B&M casinos. People play online, polish up, think theyre hot [censored], and figure I'll go give the casino a try. There is no reason why the casinos would risk losing that continuous flow of new players to fight each other over something that might not even end up working out (because some online sites will not be backing out and will have a greater chance at the market than startup B&M online rooms). Good try though.

/theory

[/ QUOTE ]

Your theory makes no sense. If online poker is banned people will be forced to play in casinos. On top of that, just like poker players, casinos think in terms of long term profit. This move would be much better for their bottom line than letting all the business go to companies like Party, Stars, FTP, etc... I really don't understand how online poker helps B&M casinos, online poker is what keeps me at home instead of in a B&M casino.

[kb09pkt]

I didn't mean to immply billions a year, but billions over the long run. I do also agree that this will hurt the B&M's with less people deciding to play live. I played live poker long before the internet poker and WPT boom occurred, and the influx of new players coming in to play live in undeniable. Internet Poker and the WPT were the best thing that ever happened to the B&M's.

[Jeremy517]

[ QUOTE ]
Your theory makes no sense. If online poker is banned people will be forced to play in casinos. On top of that, just like poker players, casinos think in terms of long term profit. This move would be much better for their bottom line than letting all the business go to companies like Party, Stars, FTP, etc... I really don't understand how online poker helps B&M casinos, online poker is what keeps me at home instead of in a B&M casino.

[/ QUOTE ]

The 2002 main event had 600+ entries. The 2006 main event had 8800+ entries. Online sites have sent hundreds of thousands of entrants to tournaments around the world. Casino cash games are far more plentiful than they were in the recent past. B&M casinos realized that it is in their best interest for people to continue to be able to gamble online.

[viper930]

[ QUOTE ]

This makes perfect sense. Even if the players DID figure, why not go to Vegas now that online poker is gone, it would be a very SHORT TERM boost in B&M revenue. Over the long term, it would cause a very negative impact to the popularity of the game and the number of players frequenting the b&m cardrooms.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Gugel]

[ QUOTE ]
B&M casinos realized that it is in their best interest for people to continue to be able to gamble online under the B&M casino's own terms.

[/ QUOTE ]

[DING-DONG YO]

[ QUOTE ]
B&M casinos would never purposely pull something like this. The continuous growth of the online poker industry has brought a ton of new business to the B&M casinos. People play online, polish up, think theyre hot [censored], and figure I'll go give the casino a try. There is no reason why the casinos would risk losing that continuous flow of new players to fight each other over something that might not even end up working out (because some online sites will not be backing out and will have a greater chance at the market than startup B&M online rooms). Good try though.

/theory

[/ QUOTE ]

wow, well glad you know everything.

I think it is extremely possible.

If the US casinos were to open online tomorrow and have to compete fully with already established internationally based online casinos, the US casinos would be on a level playing field, and who wants that?

Under the theory above, this puts US casinos in a perfect position. Wait 2-3 years until people largely forget about the current sites. Then legalize/regulate/tax and US casinos get a jump start on the market. They could corner it in this scenario.

If you want to disagree, fine. But go stick smug little [ QUOTE ]
/theory

[/ QUOTE ] comments you know where. Did you ever even visit this forum (legislation) before Friday?

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
B&M casinos would never purposely pull something like this. The continuous growth of the online poker industry has brought a ton of new business to the B&M casinos. People play online, polish up, think theyre hot [censored], and figure I'll go give the casino a try. There is no reason why the casinos would risk losing that continuous flow of new players to fight each other over something that might not even end up working out (because some online sites will not be backing out and will have a greater chance at the market than startup B&M online rooms). Good try though.

/theory

[/ QUOTE ]

Your theory makes no sense. If online poker is banned people will be forced to play in casinos. On top of that, just like poker players, casinos think in terms of long term profit. This move would be much better for their bottom line than letting all the business go to companies like Party, Stars, FTP, etc... I really don't understand how online poker helps B&M casinos, online poker is what keeps me at home instead of in a B&M casino.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you ever been to Vegas? Do you know how many cardrooms have opened or expanded thanks to online poker? Do you know how much those players spend at other games, in restaurants, on rooms?

Online poker has made a freaking fortune for the B&Ms

[LucidDream]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This makes perfect sense. Even if the players DID figure, why not go to Vegas now that online poker is gone, it would be a very SHORT TERM boost in B&M revenue. Over the long term, it would cause a very negative impact to the popularity of the game and the number of players frequenting the b&m cardrooms.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

You still aren't looking at the big picture. You are talking about online poker and I am talking about online gambling.

Do you think if you could gamble on the site bellagio.com they wouldn't offer online craps, slots, blackjack, horseracing, sportsbetting, and everything else. They would make infinite on house games.

Online poker is peanuts compared to all this.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
If the US casinos were to open online tomorrow and have to compete fully with already established internationally based online casinos, the US casinos would be on a level playing field, and who wants that?

[/ QUOTE ]

MGM opens bellagio.com tomorrow, or Harrah's opens "WSOP.com" just for online poker, or Caesars opens "Luxor.com" -- and they're on a 'level playing field' with 888, PartyGaming and Mansion.com?

The existing sites would be dwarfed by the legitimate and known B&M sites, almost instantly.

Half of my buddies, who know I make money playing on line and have won satellites to varios B&M events -- many of them continue to believe Party et al 'juices' the flops, uses prop players and rigs the deck for them, etc. Think of the inherent advantage the legitimate gaming corporations would have if the state sponsored and regulated their online casinos and poker rooms. I'm surprised it's even up for debate -- if online gaming were legalized in the US, the B&M mega corps would instantly dominate the US market.