A less optimistic article

Jan · #1 10-06-2006, 04:32 PM

http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/debacle.c...men=1&sub=0

BluffTHIS! · #2 10-06-2006, 04:35 PM

That article just has the worst possible interpretations, and doesn't reflect any knowledge greater than the average poster here. Furthermore that rag is probably a shill for the B&M casinos who aren't our friends in this.

excession · #3 10-06-2006, 04:40 PM

It's wrong about checks - we already know that the Banks won't have to check those

JPFisher55 · #4 10-06-2006, 04:40 PM

How are banks going to block Neteller EFT's. Neteller is not a bank, they complete EFT's through their bank which I have read is Barclay's. No US bank will block an EFT from Barclay's. Neteller might have to change the coding on its EFT's through its bank, but I doubt it.

stormy455 · #5 10-06-2006, 04:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It's wrong about checks - we already know that the Banks won't have to check those

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, no we don't. It's widely assumed, but it won't be known until the regulations come out. Checks are specifically prohibited in the law.

stormy455 · #6 10-06-2006, 04:59 PM

IMO, this article is a very poor amateur attempt at analyzing the bill. We have much more thorough and well reasoned analyses in this forum.

maurile · #7 10-06-2006, 05:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's wrong about checks - we already know that the Banks won't have to check those

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, no we don't. It's widely assumed, but it won't be known until the regulations come out. Checks are specifically prohibited in the law.

[/ QUOTE ]
Correct. The law treats checks no differently from EFTs. People are assuming that the regs will treat them differently, but we won't know that for sure for 270 days or so (although it seems to be a good bet).

Nate tha\\\' Great · #8 10-06-2006, 05:12 PM

"with the proviso that I’m not an attorney"

crzylgs · #9 10-06-2006, 05:17 PM

This article sucks. Just glancing through it I found [ QUOTE ]
What is controversial is the fact that the ISPs may have to deny you access to the online gambling sites.

[/ QUOTE ]
which was a part of earlier bills but was flat-out not included in the UIGEA.

mscharliestanton · #10 10-06-2006, 05:27 PM

i have read somewhere (it was someone from the banking association) saying that he didnt think they had the ability to go through the 40 million checks the banks receive each year. maybe there will be random "spot checks" every so often. anyone know more?