Very interesting conversation with one of PPA's DC Lobbyists

[j2zooted]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The thing that infuriates me, though I've heard it before, is "He said that the biggest push in favor of the legislation came from the NFL and some of the other pro sports leagues." Let's boycott the NFL.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get it .. how does NFL benefit from online gambling ban?

[/ QUOTE ]

they got the fantasy sports carve out, then look good by supporting the pro-family movement.

[ubercuber]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The thing that infuriates me, though I've heard it before, is "He said that the biggest push in favor of the legislation came from the NFL and some of the other pro sports leagues." Let's boycott the NFL.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get it .. how does NFL benefit from online gambling ban?

[/ QUOTE ]

they got the fantasy sports carve out, then look good by supporting the pro-family movement.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny, they look like hyprocritical bastards to me.

[pig4bill]

[ QUOTE ]
Banning online poker is an issue of personal freedoms guauranteed by the Constitution - the pursuit of happiness?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's ridiculous. Priests are pursuing their happiness when they molest little boys. Doesn't mean they have a Constitutional right to it.

[Poker_Hoar]

Yes, it's a great post. But it's also very self serving for the PPA and their lobby. I made a living in the online gaming space for the past three years--not as a player but in the industry itself. It is a good rally piece to try to regain support behind the issue.

Some of the facts are a little twisted.

Look, a gaming site(s) was behind setting-up the PPA. So there was support, if hidden from public view. Who paid for most of the player memberships?

The real question for me is what the US DOJ and COngress will do in the coming six months. Will the pressure that we have seen concerning arrests and legislation become more intense. If so, what hope in the world does the PPA have as a grassroots player organization? For example, with the leading players crippled for the time being from a dollar standpoint (Party, 888) who will foot the bill for counter measures against more legislation? The sites showing the USA the middle finger? I doubt it.

I have the feeling this is the US' next "Crusade" and very little is going to stop it in the short term.

You can call me a pessimist. In terms of making money I am moving on. If it looks like a good game again then great, I will be in the industry doing what I do well.

In the mean time I think the PPA did a terrible job and I removed myself from their mailing list. Luckily Party Poker paid for my membership (as they did for just about everyone else, probably). If another, better form, of lobby leadership comes along then I will pledge my support for them. I thought NROG was way more on target than the PPA ever was, FYIW.

Good Luck.

[Hock_]

[ QUOTE ]
I think they also need to be working on producing a working regulation module to show this could be a very profitable industry if taxed in the US. The crooks on Capital hill can never turn down a cash cow....

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, one other thing he mentioned is that PPA commissioned a respected economist to generate a model estimating the tax revenue lost from both the sites and players by not taxing & regulating. I've seen the number in some PPA press releases but can't recall it offhand.

The crooks on the Hill only can't turn down a cash cow if the milk is flowing into their own back pocket . . . or something like that.

[Ron Burgundy]

Thank you for this post. It's nice to know that the PPA is actually doing something.

But why do we have to get this information from 3rd parties? Why do we find out what the PPA is doing from a friend of a friend of a lobbyist? The main reason everyone is skeptical of the PPA is because Micheal Bolcerek isn't the one providing this info about their activities.

[Ron Burgundy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The thing that infuriates me, though I've heard it before, is "He said that the biggest push in favor of the legislation came from the NFL and some of the other pro sports leagues." Let's boycott the NFL.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get it .. how does NFL benefit from online gambling ban?

[/ QUOTE ]

they got the fantasy sports carve out, then look good by supporting the pro-family movement.

[/ QUOTE ]

The main reason is becasue they're paranoid about a sports betting scandal with players losing on purpose to make $$$ for themselves or others. There was a big scandal at Notre Dame a few years ago, and the NFL wants do everything possible to prevent that.

[NoSoup4U]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In fact, the banking industry lobbied very effectively. They were behind early holds on the bill and they secured the main thing that they sought -- an out that lets them not do anything if it isn't reasonably easy to do. They were particularly aggrivated about the possibility of having to code checks and intercept them by account.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should recognize that lobbying to get that exception is very different from lobbying to oppose the legislation altogether.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm fine with that. It just isn't right to say that they "did no real lobbying." They didn't care about stopping the bill, so they didn't try. They got what they wanted.

In fact there were four main lobbying efforts on this bill. The banks didn't want to have to make certain changes and they didn't. The ISPs didn't want to have to try to firewall off the poker sites and they didn't. The horseracing lobby didn't want to have the bill affect their wagers and it didn't. PPA was the only group that didn't get what they wanted in any way, shape or form.

I freely admit that their job was harder, but the fact remains that they failed completely. Maybe it was hopeless, I don't know.

I also think that they did a terrible job of persuading the poker community that they were doing anything effective during the critical fund-raising period. When opinion leaders in the community like Mason and David are openly derisive, that suggests that the PPA failed at its PR mission -- they couldn't even sell their own side on their usefullness.

Despite the fact that I gave them money, they never once wrote to me to say what they were trying to do. They never wrote to me and said "We need more money now because we want to do X, Y, Z" Even though the PPA guy was making posts here, he never made a clear case that they were spending the money effectively.

Even now, we are not getting a well-conceived plan of future action or explanation of what happened to the money we already sent from PPA. Your post was fine and good information, but why I am getting "a friend of friend says" kind of reports? Why didn't I get it in my email directly from PPA?

[Hellmouth]

[ QUOTE ]
Thank you for this post. It's nice to know that the PPA is actually doing something.

But why do we have to get this information from 3rd parties? Why do we find out what the PPA is doing from a friend of a friend of a lobbyist? The main reason everyone is skeptical of the PPA is because Micheal Bolcerek isn't the one providing this info about their activities.

[/ QUOTE ]

A little transparancy would help a lot with getting support from the general poker community. Every time a piece like this comes up there are always at least 30% of the posts that range from sceptical to downright distrustful with regards to the PPA. A lot of that would go away if they would just be a little less secretive.

greg

[Asianj]

Great post