The war starts?

[malo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, i think you misread the article.
I got the impression the DOJ was going to investigate the investment banks that brought the gaming companies public.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think so. The investment bankers have committed no obvious crime. But they probably have lots of information which may be used against their gaming clients.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am ignorant about the nuances of international finance, so forgive my dumb questions.

My understanding has been the Swiss view the banker-client relationship as confidential, just as the US views the lawyer-client relationship.

They will, in certain circumstances, violate that relationship to cooperate with authorities with investigations. The activity being investigated has to be a crime under Swiss law.

Now money laundering and terrorism is a crime in Switzerland. But isn't their definition of money laundering narrower than DOJ's? Aren't they smart enough to figure out that all this money flying around is not financing terrorist activities? More likely to tell DOJ to stick their subpoenas where the sun don't shine---in a polite Swiss way, of course?

Also, something occurred to me last night: once again, the companies targeted are publicly traded, not privately owned. FWIW.

[Richas]

My impression is that this story is a reflection of the anger in the City of London about this rather than a big threat to UK justice.

The investment banks doing the listings have broken no laws here, the DOJ is leaning on them for info to go at the betting firms not going directly for the banks or their officers. It is another indication that the DOJ are serious but I think we knew that anyway.

As for the WTO and UK/EU - no it's not the seventh cavalry coming to the rescue any time soon but the EU will fight the US on this one especially if and when (Sept 2007) some of the main players come onshore to the UK. This may take years but it could be a significant factor in helping you out of this mess (eventually).

As an aside the UK gov is still getting grief over the 2005 Gambling Act not least the Observer and another documentary on Monday, the BMJ report on gambling addiction help in the health service but the experts in the field are still saying as part of these that the government is right to regulate to protect children and the vulnerable.

[sobefuddled]

This is not a new war. Google "Gold Chip Technologies." Granted those guys were stupid but....Follow the money. Who really stands to benefit. These things happen because someone somewhere will benefit big time. How do they benefit? Follow the money.

[Poker_Ace]

Much of this is old news. A friend of mine from the UK with ties to some of the publicly traded gaming companies told me that DOJ threatened the U.S. investment banks with prosecution if they participated in underwriting the IPOs; the U.S. investment banks withdrew in response. This looks like DOJ is following up on that threat.

[fasteddy1970]

Bachman: You're already seeing how afraid they all are without so much as a court case. There's no court case against partypoker and NT and yet they ran at the first sign of trouble. What makes you think any of the others will stand and fight when faced with the enormous costs and risks involved in a suit against any government much less ours?

[Gregg777]

[ QUOTE ]
Bachman: You're already seeing how afraid they all are without so much as a court case. There's no court case against partypoker and NT and yet they ran at the first sign of trouble. What makes you think any of the others will stand and fight when faced with the enormous costs and risks involved in a suit against any government much less ours?

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone who "ran" had US liabilities.

You are talking about a multi billion dollar a year industry.

All someone needs to do is set up a system that is not vulnerable to the US.

Absolute said they wouldn't pull out regardless. I am not familiar with their setup, but they may have looked into the matter and see very little risk, explaining their strong stance.

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
Bachman: You're already seeing how afraid they all are without so much as a court case. There's no court case against partypoker and NT and yet they ran at the first sign of trouble. What makes you think any of the others will stand and fight when faced with the enormous costs and risks involved in a suit against any government much less ours?

[/ QUOTE ]

The common thread to date has been public companies and/or sports books, which Fulltilt and Pokerstars are not.

[fasteddy1970]

Greg: as we're seeing, it's not necessary to make the actual sites run away. It only takes strangling the funders one at a time. How long after they get a notice from the US govt. to cease and desist will ePassport be serving us?

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
Greg: as we're seeing, it's not necessary to make the actual sites run away. It only takes strangling the funders one at a time. How long after they get a notice from the US govt. to cease and desist will ePassport be serving us?

[/ QUOTE ]

Neteller is easily found and it took the founders being on U.S. soil to put a great giant scare into them.

What is epassport's setup? I still don't see them invading another country and raiding offices of an e-wallet (unless there are WMD's there).

There are millions to be made here. Funding sportsbook, DOJ says thats a no-no, pokersites haven't been tested yet.

[fasteddy1970]

That's just it, they don't have to invade. All it takes is a bit of saber rattling and these guys run away. I'm not saying I blame them but so far that's how it's been.