Party/Sporting Bet shares jump on talk of US law change

[Grasshopp3r]

No, it looks more solid, though weak volume may be the killer. Sustaining the upward trend for that long is too unlikely. Party does have growth elsewhere.

[Tofu_boy]

Hope............ [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
No, it looks more solid, though weak volume may be the killer. Sustaining the upward trend for that long is too unlikely. Party does have growth elsewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

Grasshopper... that release is market manipulation, plain and simple...

My comment has nothing to do with, whether or not, I believe PartyGaming is currently an undervalued stock.

[Johnny McEldoo]

[ QUOTE ]
that release is market manipulation, plain and simple...


[/ QUOTE ]

Sniper,

What makes you so certain this is the case? I'm not saying it's not a possibility but I don't understand how that is the only reasonable conclusion to draw. Why is it not feasabile that these guys could be starting to get a glimpse of the regs or the banks thoughts about the ability to enforce them?

[BluffTHIS!]

Johnny,

He's certain because of the low probability of a carve-out coming to pass in the short term, despite the efforts of the PPA and poker players.

[Johnny McEldoo]

True enough. But this article mentions nothing about the hopes of a carveout in the current legislation.

This is about the banks ability to enforce the regulations when they come out. Hasn't there always been a reasonable chance that the banks would piss and moan about whatever is sent their way?

It seems possible that discussions about the regualtions are starting to take shape and there is a sign of the banks showing resistance.

Just curious why people are discounting it so quickly.

[BluffTHIS!]

Actually the article does talk of a carve-out, but without using that term. Instead they use "change" or "repeal" IIRC. So that is what the buzz (BS) is about.

The publicly held companies that already left the US market, did so primarily to avoid legal risk and uncertainty, which they have a fiduciary obligation to do for their shareholders, and not because of the prospect of effective enforcement. Less effective enforcement will benefit only the privately held sites still in the US market (or new ones who enter), and won't entice party back into the market. The exception might be if they did a LBO and went private again.

[mikeroddick]

anyone know what the symbol for PartyPoker is (or the ADR) to buy on the NYSE.

I don't believe believe the article, but I will be purchasing a $1,000,000 chunk tomorrow at market open (if i can get the symbol).

PS...a $1,000,000 purchase is not a signicant action and not to be construed as stock advice.

[mikeroddick]

Never mind...I found it PYGMF

[Uglyowl]

Party stock quote


Sportingbet stock price