how long before PS UB and FT drop?

[Sniper]

Bill, I agree that there is an impact...

but, I also think it's important to understand that there is a difference between... "everyone" and "the sharks", for 2 reasons:

1. This forum has a large concentration of "the sharks"

2. Even if there are no US Fish, the US Sharks can still feed on the non-US Fish

[Billman]

Sniper,

As I mentioned before, I apologize for not making my targets a little more clear. It's sometimes difficult to remember to qualify your statements when they already seem clear in your own head.

I'm mostly talking about the US market. Right now the non-US market is quite healthy and seems to be growing at a nice clip. There are plenty of sites to play on and one doesn't even need to go through an eWallet for most of them.

What I'm talking about here is how this impacts those sites that are US facing. Right now between Party, iPoker, Crypto, and Boss there is a wide enough game selection on non-US sites that a lot of the draw of the US facing sites is diminishing. According to Poker Site Scout 3 of the top 5 poker rooms do not allow US players.

If US players have significant difficulty getting money onto US poker sites then the most likely people to be playing are not fish but sharks. And as the fish population dries up in US poker rooms Euro, Canadian, and Asia players won't exactly be all that excited to play in shark infested waters when they have excellent liquidity elsewhere.

So, the mindset I'm approaching this from is less about how these setbacks impact Joe Fish in the US but in terms of how they impact US facing poker sites. How they impact Joe Fish is important but that's a micro concern while I'm trying to tell a macro story.

This is why I've repeated the mantra that the DOJ doesn't need to be 100% effective. All they have to do is be effective enough to kill off the fish population. Once the fish population is gone even the sharks won't want to play at the US facing rooms and would seem to be much more likely to figure out ways to play on non-US sites than to jump through increasingly difficult funding options only to land in a pool of tough games.

Bill

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
This is why I've repeated the mantra that the DOJ doesn't need to be 100% effective. All they have to do is be effective enough to kill off the fish population. Once the fish population is gone even the sharks won't want to play at the US facing rooms and would seem to be much more likely to figure out ways to play on non-US sites than to jump through increasingly difficult funding options only to land in a pool of tough games.

[/ QUOTE ]


That "mantra" is an obvious truism. But it rests on the assumption, speculated on but unproven, that the DoJ will in fact be effective in killing off the access and desire of the US fish to play in the new environment. Plus as Sniper noted above, US fish aren't the only fish in the sea.

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
So, the mindset I'm approaching this from is less about how these setbacks impact Joe Fish in the US but in terms of how they impact US facing poker sites. How they impact Joe Fish is important but that's a micro concern while I'm trying to tell a macro story.

[/ QUOTE ]

The primary US facing sites, also have Non-US customers... they have suffered thru the UIGEA and the Neteller fiasco... and there's still significant player numbers at those sites... it's now been a month since the Neteller lockdown... that's the Macro story (for now)...

So, walk me into the future (slowly)... what do you think is going to happen to cripple PS, FT, UB+ABS, & Bodog?

[bigbb33]

BluffThis, can you comment on how this will affect myself (a Canadian player, in Ontario)? I know it hasn't been discussed too much but is there any reason to believe that the Canadian govt is going to attempt to create the same legislation, other than just pure guesses?

Also, if FTP or whatever bans US players etc, as a Canadian will I still be able to withdraw or will the entire site just go under at once, in your opinion?

Finally, if the worst comes true, will US players still be able to find legal ways to play on sites like Party Poker, and thus will I have to play with the non-US players + US sharks or just non-US players?

Thanks

[BluffTHIS!]

bigbb,

1) I don't follow the canadian legislative scene closely, however from what I've read here, it seems unlikely your country will outlaw online poker though they may regulate it, which might include too high of taxation for a site to want to be in business or a player to want to play.

2) There is no reason not to believe FTP is an honest site that will honor all of its financial committments.

3) If the *very* worst case scenario comes true in the US, which I have argued here to be less likely than others think, only US pros and a smaller number of the most degenerate fish who are likely to be sports bettors, will find ways to play.

[BluffTHIS!]

Billman,

Since you haven't responded to my most recent posts here, I would like to ask you a couple simple questions:

1) Do you now concede that the worst case scenario is less likley than you originally believed or made it out to be?

2) Or do you believe the present situation, this day, is the worst case scenario?

[Billman]

Sniper,

Well, I think it would be difficult to walk you through specifics because then I'm predicting the future rather than making assumptions based on trends. In other words, even though the DJIA has been on an upward trend since it's inception and I might offer that it's more likely than not that the DJIA will be much higher 20 years from now than it is today, I can't tell you what IBM's stock price will be 20 years from now.

Also, I think that while you're technically correct in what you say that your conclusions may not be correct. The non-US players they have are still with them because they still provide sufficient liquidity. We're only about a month out from the Neteller fiasco and I don't believe we've seen the full shakeout. The major non US poker sites all went up by about 20% while the major US poker sites decreased 20%. My hypothesis here would be that those were Europeans and Canadians jumping ship.

Right now the US facing websites seem to be in a struggle to bottom out from the Neteller mess. As soon as it seems like their numbers are on the rise they'll have a few days that test the lows again. Meanwhile all the major non-US sites are on an upward trend. What happens in 6 months when Party is #1, Stars #2, and Everest and Ongame are #3 with Full Tilt trailing in 4th or 5th spot?

Will non-US players remain loyal? Will they chase liquidity like people did in Oct when Party shut its doors? Will US Full Tilt and UB players flee to Stars as the last remaining site to offer US players sufficient liquidity?

I don't know exactly how those scenarios will play out. I have my thoughts about which companies are better or worse prepared to deal with a constant weakening of the US market but that's another thread on another day :-)

[Billman]

Bluff,

As I mentioned earlier, I've given you the parameters under which I will continue to engage you on this topic. You've chosen not to address my questions so I have no intention of responding to any of yours.

Dialogues are two way streets. Both parties must feel like their obtaining value from the exchange. Until you can address my questions I consider all of your diversions to be nothing more than an attempt to salvage some sort of victory from our exchange. This shouldn't be about winning or losing. It should be about an honest, intellectual exchange of views.

Bill

[BluffTHIS!]

Bill,

Yes you gave the condition that the onus is on someone else to disprove a highly speculative and less reasonable assertion that you made, instead of on you to prove same, despite being given a rebuttal, partially speculative as well to be sure, but which is more likely given the past history of online gambling (i.e. sites will find easy ways around a blacklist *if* it comes to that), the tecnical difficulties involved in actual enforcement, and the lack of effectiveness of government action in stopping other activities it deems illegal. This is the same as if you said the moon was made of cheese, and that it was on me to disprove it. You are now not engaging in honest debate.