[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What you have not responded to is why you simply cannot or will not mail him a check for money that you hold that is undisputedly his. You certainly cant deny that you have the ability to issue checks. Nor can you deny that issuing him a check for his money does not violate the provisions of the UIGEA in any way. I understand that the check will not be issued by a US bank and this will slow and to a lesser extent cost the player in conversion fees when he deposits it in a US bank. But he has already indicated that he is willing to accept that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. This is what bothers me as well. It seems likely that PokerRoom has at least one consultant living in the US. How do they pay that guy? Send a check in the mail. What could be hard about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

The logic of this is inescapable!

Even e-pass has "operations" is south FLA. If they are facilitating such a clear flagrant violation of at least the spirit of the UIGEA by providing for the transfer of funds related to "unlawful internet gambling"; how the hell are they getting paid?

How are all the US pro sponsors of various on-line sites getting paid their cuts?

If one thing is clear, even the DOJ says individual players are not subject to criminal prosecution for playing on-line poker. The poker operators seem to want to use the law to keep the funds in the un-numbered accounts for as long as possible. Even a basic understanding of on-line poker economic and simple banking economics would tell you their is tremendous reason and quite a bit on money behind this scam.



D$D