My micros suggestion

[Smurph64]

It's interesting to note that with some sites remaining open and really its up to Neteller to determine whether they are going to continue to provide transfer services, no one may need to go.

That being said I am not sure the games will get harder. With the closing of Party to US that will make some major changes and it depends on the fish to shark ratio.

We are going to lose a lot of fish but we may loose the same proportion of sharks as well so things may not change much at all.

It's hard to say yet.

[KingOtter]

I'm hurrying to finish off my Party bonus. Beyond that I don't know.

I'm not quitting poker. I think there will be sites available to us. I'm thinking the legislation will get modified down the line. I'm considering moving into NL, since that's where the majority of the bad players who do make it online will want to play. I'm also going to be spending some time at local bars playing, too, I think.

I dunno... still kinda waiting and seeing.

[OziBattler]

[ QUOTE ]
That way the government can regulate and tax those servers. Basically, the government is going to say, "You can't play poker on the illegal overseas servers, but you can play poker on our regulated and taxed servers."

[/ QUOTE ]

I find this somewhat amusing because in australia the one place where I am not allowed to play online poker is on sites run in Australia......

[SL__72]

WPEX is where its at obviously. Staying open, rake free and fighting the man while they are at it.

[knockonwood]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That way the government can regulate and tax those servers. Basically, the government is going to say, "You can't play poker on the illegal overseas servers, but you can play poker on our regulated and taxed servers."

[/ QUOTE ]

I find this somewhat amusing because in australia the one place where I am not allowed to play online poker is on sites run in Australia......

[/ QUOTE ]

oz, which site is this?

[OziBattler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That way the government can regulate and tax those servers. Basically, the government is going to say, "You can't play poker on the illegal overseas servers, but you can play poker on our regulated and taxed servers."

[/ QUOTE ]

I find this somewhat amusing because in australia the one place where I am not allowed to play online poker is on sites run in Australia......

[/ QUOTE ]

oz, which site is this?

[/ QUOTE ]

dont quote me on this or treat it as gospel but I dont think its legal to run a site from here so there arent any but and I vaguely recall that betfair (whom I know very little about or who they are associated with in terms of poker skins etc) are associated with an australian sportsbook and thus we cant play there. Of course I could be wrong but I think it was betfair...I read it somewhere on Internet forum ages ago.

as I said, dont quote me....but its relatively mute anyway, we can continue to play poker from australia and not pay taxes on winnings so we aint got it so bad.

[marchron]

[ QUOTE ]
It occurred to me earlier today that I think I know what the next step is going to be. The Poker Player Alliance is currently lobbying to have poker "carved" out from other forms of online gambling. I believe this is going to happen. Then I believe, all of the sudden, we're going to get a batch of online poker rooms that are hosted by servers in Las Vegas and Atlantic City. That way the government can regulate and tax those servers. Basically, the government is going to say, "You can't play poker on the illegal overseas servers, but you can play poker on our regulated and taxed servers." You think the rake is high now? What til that happens. Do you think it's right for our government to do this? If you quit now, and pull all your money out of other sites, this is exactly what you're going to allow to happen.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's a possibility.

I find it very hard to fathom that the sites are simply going to roll over. They depend on American players to feed their rake, and that means they need the fish, who attract the sharks. They're willing to go to incredible means to do it, too: between deposit bonuses and commercials for the .NET free side (where they, obviously, earn nothing), they give away truckloads of money to get it back. I don't know what loophole they will use, but there will be a loophole (this is a government law, after all) and there will be a way to exploit it. Maybe they'll set up kiosks in B&M's to trade cash for online credits, so first-time B&M'ers can ride out their poker jones from the comfort of their own home. I don't know. Maybe they'll eliminate reload bonuses for us vets and use that money for more frequent and higher-paying freeroll tournaments.

I don't see them taking this lying down. In fact, I still can't believe Party rolled over so early without seeing how things were going to shake down. Even if the new rules are inescapable and online poker is [censored], there's still the nine-month grace period to maximize American cash in-flow.

[Xhad]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see them taking this lying down. In fact, I still can't believe Party rolled over so early without seeing how things were going to shake down. Even if the new rules are inescapable and online poker is [censored], there's still the nine-month grace period to maximize American cash in-flow.

[/ QUOTE ]

The prevailing theory is that it has to do with being publicly traded on the London Stock Exchange; 888 was the first to drop for exactly that reason, and every british site I know of including the Crypto sites is following suit.

[marchron]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see them taking this lying down. In fact, I still can't believe Party rolled over so early without seeing how things were going to shake down. Even if the new rules are inescapable and online poker is [censored], there's still the nine-month grace period to maximize American cash in-flow.

[/ QUOTE ]

The prevailing theory is that it has to do with being publicly traded on the London Stock Exchange; 888 was the first to drop for exactly that reason, and every british site I know of including the Crypto sites is following suit.

[/ QUOTE ]
What does that have to do with the price of eggs? They got hammered in the LSE today; if they came out strong and said they had no intention of losing one customer because of this bill, it might not have been such a bloodbath.

[Ignignokt]

[ QUOTE ]
What does that have to do with the price of eggs? They got hammered in the LSE today; if they came out strong and said they had no intention of losing one customer because of this bill, it might not have been such a bloodbath.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have to agree - I've read that Party has a much higher percentage of US players than any other London-traded site; cutting them off will cause profits to plunge and plunge hard.

The issue as far as I can see is non-poker gaming; as the most visible gambling entity in the world, there's probably a lot of fear within Party Gaming that the next CEO to be marched to jail in handcuffs could be theirs.