Sensationalist Party Gaming Headline of the Week

[oldbookguy]

[ QUOTE ]
DOJ to Party, well, we know you are stand-up guys who came to us voluntarily to settle this credit card stuff, but you misunderstand the Wire Act ... It doesn't even apply to online poker, you should have asked us last year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Trouble is, the hard headed DoJ ran by Bush / Gonzales says the courts are wrong, they are right, the Wire Act DOES apply to poker.

Maybe, just maybe they will, as you speculate, recognize the courts rulings though I doubt it.

Why would they now, they have not in the past 6 six years in other cases prefering to get the former go along Rep. congress to simply write a new law, though that option is gone now.

obg

[Legislurker]

Im beginning to think the default plan is to let the issue linger for the rest of the administration, barring Antigua getting full sanctions. I hope they are arguing for things based on growth and the size of the domestic gambling industry. Thats the only external shock I see likely unless the banks score a coup with a rider erasing UIGEA quietly. I think Bush et al think they did enough to appease Dobson's child molesters, and can't be bothered to mind the fallout.
I don't have sources but what responses I have gleaned from pesky emails tell me this has fallen so low on the radar its considered beneath full attention.

[Uglyowl]

I think the Karl Rove resignation is a good thing, he was close to "Focus on the Family" and James Dobson.

[Legislurker]

I think close isn't the word. He used them deftly, but like most "evil geniuses" he probably knows what stooges/tools they are. I honestly think he is setting up for a BIG payday from Romeny to run his campaign. Im thinking 15-25 mill. Chump Change for Mitt. The scorched earth lame duck policies are decided on, and he is getting out with his name somewhat intact, and jumping ship. I don't think Giuliani can afford him, or their egos get along. Two smart people in one White House makes for a crowd, historically speaking.

[JPFisher55]

[ QUOTE ]
The potential I see here for a deal has 2 parts:

1. Uncoded Transactions processing + waiver of prosecution in return for lots of money.

2. Comfort letter that poker alone does not violate Wire Act.

Setting the bar high on Part 1 will allow DOJ to collect "back taxes" on poker companies which ran uncoded credit card transactions. Thus, a free pass it is not.

DOJ Clarification on #2 should be free, look at the In Re Mastercard decision by the 5th Circuit; so what is the ethical issue you seem to discern ? It would allow Party to re-enter the market, sell itself to Harrahs or whatever else it has been angling for for the last year or so.

Are deals like this cut ? Uh ... in real life, yes. No one is doing anything unusual under this scenario;

Party to DOJ, you know that credit cards settlement is pretty genrous of you and we would like to take it, BUT we can't afford to do so because we lost our US market.

DOJ to Party, well, we know you are stand-up guys who came to us voluntarily to settle this credit card stuff, but you misunderstand the Wire Act ... It doesn't even apply to online poker, you should have asked us last year.

Party to DOJ : DOH!!!, okay here's your check for $X.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope that you are right and this deal occurs. I would not mind Party Poker and Pacific Poker paying for the poker exemption for the rest of the online poker sites that probably did the same things as those 2 companies.
However, my credit cards have never worked at a poker site or ewallet.

[oldbookguy]

I would disagree here, any candidte who wins the GOP nomination and is associated with Rove would be a rallying point for the Dems and many in the GOP. Heck, even Hillary would win against any campaign ran by Rove. That is not to say he may have a far right corner back seat somewhere. Even I, a republican who wants a good moderate, would go to the left to keep him out of the White House.

obg

[yahboohoo]

It's interesting to watch any new news like this get dissected with equal parts fear and optimism.

Half a billion dollars = "free pass?" That's like a marketing definition of "free," as in "buy one non-prosecution agreement for $500 million and get a feel-good letter for 'free.'"

The current administration has zero incentive to resolve the online gaming issue prior to the 2008 election. In the meantime, they have plenty to gain by keeping things as is: scare tactics that lead to hefty payouts without any cases ever going to trial. With billions coming in through fines, why should they see any reason or feel any pressure to change things (e.g., legalize)?

For the next 14 months, they certainly won't worry about any else except getting their man (or woman), their chums and themselves elected.

[oldbookguy]

This no incentive by the current administration is one reason we ALL need to keep writing, especially those of us represented by a GOP member. Let that person know our feelings and let others (friends and family) know as well.

And above all, let them know we DO vote and will be keeping this issue at the top of our agenda when pulling that lever!

obg

[chrisptp]

[ QUOTE ]

Payment alone is not going to 'buy' them back into the U.S. market.


[/ QUOTE ]

No, but it will probably be the price of admission for any site that wants to even be up for consideration for whitelisting by the usfg.