SafeandSecure is looking for support, so WHO are they ?

MiltonFriedman · #1 09-21-2007, 01:02 PM

They are NOT www.safeandsecure.org. That is a fire protection and alarms company from Canada.

There is no website up at the url safeandsecureir.org, which was provided in a post from them.

They clearly have a public relations arm and are going around to various media to promote somthing. They have popped up in iGamingBusiness and the Remote Gaming Assoc with endorsements, but url links leading nowhere.

So, how about it Safe And Secure .... Who ARE you and who pays your bills ?

What is your mission ?

We know you want regulation, but why not support the Wexler Bill ?

Grasshopp3r · #2 09-21-2007, 01:40 PM

This is their site address:

http://safeandsecureig.org/

DeadMoneyDad · #3 09-21-2007, 04:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
They are NOT www.safeandsecure.org. That is a fire protection and alarms company from Canada.

There is no website up at the url safeandsecureir.org, which was provided in a post from them.

They clearly have a public relations arm and are going around to various media to promote somthing. They have popped up in iGamingBusiness and the Remote Gaming Assoc with endorsements, but url links leading nowhere.

So, how about it Safe And Secure .... Who ARE you and who pays your bills ?

What is your mission ?

We know you want regulation, but why not support the Wexler Bill ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Safe and Secure is a new entry into the anti-UIGEA lobbing market. I would imagine just the 2+2 hits to the Newsweek PR planted story was a major coup for this new group. A whois shows the site as just recently registered and to whom. I have yet to look for thier funding sources. It is not impossible to find once they make contact with the Hill. But given the links on their site I would guess it is a broader audience than just on-line poker. There are links to articles that support most forms of any on-line gambling, sports betting, on-line casino games etc.. Interestingly they seem fairly supisous of the on-line poker crowd given our skills game argument.

They are going through some growing pains, you think the PPA is bad. I could point out a few nasty PR headaches they will face just from some of their associations and I don't mean politically with the broader gambling issue. Perhaps I should pimp my services there.......

Just kidding,

D$D

JeffreyS · #4 09-21-2007, 04:58 PM

I appreciate you asking about the organization. We have been created to promote the opportunity for everyone to be able to legally gamble online, whether on poker, sports betting or other games. Please visit our site to see a list of the organizations that support our efforts. While there, I also encourage you to use the tool that allows visitors to voice their support for legalized Internet gambling by sending email messages to their elected representatives.

MiltonFriedman · #5 09-22-2007, 11:37 AM

So, basically, you are "supported" by UK entities who are interested in access to the US gaming market ?

Rents at 17th & M Street in DC are pretty steep. Where do you get your funding ?

From your site, which looks pretty professional, it seems you are totally wed to the Barney Frank Bill. Is that an accurate read ? If not, why not ?

If your organization was asked to support a POKER-specific beneficial effort, would it do so ?

Jay Cohen has asked you to STOP claiming your "Initiative" will resolve WTO issues. His argument seems pretty good that you do nothing with the Frank Bill except slough-off discretion to States or sports leagues. How, precisely, would your Initiative resolve any WTO issues ?

Finally, why would your Supporters, a bunch of UK entities, give a rat's ass about the rights of US poker players ?

Tuff_Fish · #6 09-22-2007, 11:50 AM

[ QUOTE ]

.
.
Finally, why would your Supporters, a bunch of UK entities, give a rat's ass about the rights of US poker players ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me take a stab at that... Uh... money perhaps?

Tuff

MiltonFriedman · #7 09-22-2007, 12:28 PM

We have a winner .... they do not give a rat's ass about our rights, only how to channel our money.

BluffTHIS! · #8 09-22-2007, 01:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
We have a winner .... they do not give a rat's ass about our rights, only how to channel our money.

[/ QUOTE ]

And the same can logically and fairly be said of the affiliate farm interests that control the PPA board, at least as far as caring more about protecting the specific business models of online poker that benefit themselves, rather than the rights of the broader membership who seek to have as many choices to play as possible.

As far as the specific organization in question here, it has party poker written all over it. Funny they try to do this stuff covertly with a front organization instead of just seeking a declaratory judgment on their own initiative. More proof that party gaming is led by inept bunglers.

DeadMoneyDad · #9 09-22-2007, 01:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So, basically, you are "supported" by UK entities who are interested in access to the US gaming market ?

Rents at 17th & M Street in DC are pretty steep. Where do you get your funding ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really if you have an operation run by a PR/lobbiest type wearing two hats. Resistering a domain name is cheap.

[ QUOTE ]
From your site, which looks pretty professional,

[/ QUOTE ]

Clean little front end but damn short on quality material, mostly off the shelf. Some link problems but for a month not too bad.

[ QUOTE ]
If your organization was asked to support a POKER-specific beneficial effort, would it do so ?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the $64 question. I can tell you almost verbatium their answer, but I want to see if I have the phrasing exactly right.............

[ QUOTE ]
Jay Cohen has asked you to STOP claiming your "Initiative" will resolve WTO issues. His argument seems pretty good that you do nothing with the Frank Bill except slough-off discretion to States or sports leagues. How, precisely, would your Initiative resolve any WTO issues ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually here in the US unrestricted betting with these on-line "cream cookies" where you can bet on anything there is a market for it, from sports to who's out next on American Idol, would really open a federalist can of worms, let alone send the NFL and College sports folks round the bend.

[ QUOTE ]
Finally, why would your Supporters, a bunch of UK entities, give a rat's ass about the rights of US poker players ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't get me wrong here, they would love any leg up since on-line poker is legal in the UK. They will not have all the growning pains a new US poker site would have or the potential abandonment issues the ones that left might face, or the UIGEA "violator" issue US friendly sites fear.

Not a bad marketing strategy IMPO.

However you should know that many of you have already helped get them a place at the table in future UIGEA Congressional efforts.

Their innocent sounding call Congress and tell them you support the information in the package they delivered is a naked bid to claim "ownership" of all the anti-UIGEA calls Congress gets. This is a back hand way to claim a large grassroots "membership" without having to do the work of actually signing up a single member. As a pure political move I'm actually quite impressed, personally I'm pissed off.

D$D

Tuff_Fish · #10 09-22-2007, 01:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
We have a winner .... they do not give a rat's ass about our rights, only how to channel our money.

[/ QUOTE ]

If their giving a rat's posterior about channeling my money gets me unrestricted online poker, freedom to move funds about safely, a certified "honest" site, and advertising freedom in the USA, Then we do indeed "have a winner".

Tuff