Pinnacle Exits US Market

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Since the Internet Gambling Bill went into effect, we have lost the ability to do business with many quality banks."

[/ QUOTE ]

This is kind of scary. I don't mean to sound alarmist, but is Stars next?

[/ QUOTE ]

This fact, isn't NEW news... we had heard that some of the banks had alerted their clients that their business was no longer good (if they were accepting US players)... I believe Stars already dealt with this issue.

It is certainly an issue to watch, if the number of banks doing this has increased...

[/ QUOTE ]

Glad to see you're on top of this, Sniper. Your posts are always very informative.

Is it a fact that Stars has found a new bank, one that is OK with UIGEA? I know they changed their PR -- replacing RBS with "major European bank" -- but I assumed this was a short-term move to appease RBS until they found an alternative bank.

Of course this also begs the question: if Stars was able to deal with this issue, why couldn't Pinnacle?

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
Should we worry about the remaining poker sites?
Stars/FT/UB..etc

[/ QUOTE ]

Define "worry"...

It appears clear that when the Regs are put into place that players will have a harder time moving money around, and sites may have a harder time finding banks willing to hold their business. What remains to be seen is how committed both the players and the individual sites are, in dealing with the issues that will be raised.

A major sportsbook, like Pinnacle, pulling out of the US business, cannot be seen as a good sign. But it may just rank on par with Party's pullout... meaning, there are other options, so for the time being they probably just ceded their US business to a competitor.

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
Of course this also begs the question: if Stars was able to deal with this issue, why couldn't Pinnacle?

[/ QUOTE ]

My "guess"... there is more to the story than we are hearing at the moment... let's see what shakes out as more people start chasing the story...

Also, Sportsbook != Poker Site (at least by some interpretations)

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
A major sportsbook, like Pinnacle, pulling out of the US business, cannot be seen as a good sign. But it may just rank on par with Party's pullout...

[/ QUOTE ]

The reassuring thing about the poker sites has been the public/private company dichotomy: public companies left, private companies stayed. Since Pinnacle is private that argument is no longer valid, excepting a) poker site != sportsbook b) other Pinnacle-specific motivations we are not aware of, etc.

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A major sportsbook, like Pinnacle, pulling out of the US business, cannot be seen as a good sign. But it may just rank on par with Party's pullout...

[/ QUOTE ]

The reassuring thing about the poker sites has been the public/private company dichotomy: public companies left, private companies stayed. Since Pinnacle is private this has me worried.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe, Pinnacle is preparing to go public... and the value of a public offering is greater than the value of the US business [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The reassuring thing about the poker sites has been the public/private company dichotomy: public companies left, private companies stayed. Since Pinnacle is private this has me worried.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe, Pinnacle is preparing to go public... and the value of a public offering is greater than the value of the US business [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly possible [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The reassuring thing about the poker sites has been the public/private company dichotomy: public companies left, private companies stayed. Since Pinnacle is private this has me worried.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe, Pinnacle is preparing to go public... and the value of a public offering is greater than the value of the US business [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly possible [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they can IPO/ go public in the UK or Canada or Hong Kong or Switzerland. The US business wasn't preventing them.

lol democratsandsenateleaderReidfromNevadawillsavetehi nterwebgamblingsitesaments.

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
No, they can IPO/ go public in the UK or Canada or Hong Kong or Switzerland. The US business wasn't preventing them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just very wrong. Public poker sites (all listed outside of U.S.), and I believe public sportsbooks, all ditched the U.S. after UIGEA. It is a logical conclusion that a sportsbook with U.S. customers would not go public post-UIGEA.

[ QUOTE ]

lol democratsandsenateleaderReidfromNevadawillsavetehi nterwebgamblingsitesaments.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's amazing how little some people understand politics, or physics. First law of motion: an object in motion tends to stay in motion. Politics: It's a lot harder to change the status quo (as our heroic Frist and Co. were able to do) than keep the status quo.

[LeapFrog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The reassuring thing about the poker sites has been the public/private company dichotomy: public companies left, private companies stayed. Since Pinnacle is private this has me worried.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe, Pinnacle is preparing to go public... and the value of a public offering is greater than the value of the US business [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly possible [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they can IPO/ go public in the UK or Canada or Hong Kong or Switzerland. The US business wasn't preventing them.

lol democratsandsenateleaderReidfromNevadawillsavetehi nterwebgamblingsitesaments.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that was a joke... heres another:

lol
ohnoestheskyisfallingallcompanieswillfoldandUwillb eforcedto9to5aments

Here is the link that was posted in the thread on the internet forum:
http://www.gambling911.com/internet-...ng-011107.html

Granted it is from gambling911 but it brings up the point, maybe the officers fear US retaliation (as in federal prison)? Each company will evaluate those risks on their own and some of them may not be willing to take it.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Each company will evaluate those risks on their own and some of them may not be willing to take it.

[/ QUOTE ]


Those who have already gotten rich off US customers will be more inclined to lock up their win and exit, especially if they care about being able to travel to the US or must fly over the US where they run the risk of a plane having to make an emergency landing where they can get yanked off.

But those who are still making their fortunes, or those already under indictment like the other 2 wsex guys, won't be as likely to care about US law and will view the rewards as greater than the risk.