So who's REALLY behind this anti-online gaming push?

[Zobags]

Could it be the credit industry? How many fish out there got several credit cards and maxed out the cash advance portions on each card to put the money into online gambling? That is what degenerates do, right? I would be interested to see if the amount of uncollected credit card debit has significantly increased in recent years (but I am too busy/lazy to check).

[Benholio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Relatively short list of those who want offshore online gaming to be shut off in the U.S.:

NFL
NBA
Major League Baseball
NCAA
NHL

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolute BS IMO (except maybe college). The NFL could pay lip service all day, but they enjoy quite a bit of revenue due to gambling fueling interest in their games. Of course, they would never publicly admit this.

Jeff

[/ QUOTE ]

The NFL has long been a fierce opponent to sports betting everywhere. Heck, they hired a former aide to Frist as a lobbyist to try and push UIGEA through, and dumped a good bit of money into that effort.

[ispiked]

[ QUOTE ]
Could it be the credit industry?

[/ QUOTE ]
I highly doubt it. It's almost the exact opposite, really. The credit card industry thrives off people who don't pay off their credit cards. This is why they love to give college kids credit cards who'll run up huge amounts only to have their parents pay it off.

[bobbycharles]

I'm not saying any of the "name" pros (Ivy, Ferguson, Helmuth etc etc)are for OR against online poker as they all obv. make money thru their association with FullTilt, Stars and the like.

What is curious to me, however, is the blatant lack of comment from any of them regarding the latest developments. This would lead me to believe, as another poster suggested, that something else is afoot such as a desire by the major casinos to corner the market in online gaming.

Moneymaker and to a great extent our friend Fossilman, had an enormous impact on the surge in online poker. I myself, am here because I saw Moneymaker on TV and said "I can do that."

In addition, fish have been swarming not just to online poker rooms, but B&M's as well. This certainly has had a financial impact on the big cash pros and the casinos alike.

Wouldn't it make sense to have heard from some of these folks by now?

Most of the comments have been from guys like me that are worried that our full/part time hobby/income will soon dry up entirely.

Thoughts, or am I way off base?

[sweetjazz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A regulated gambling atmosphere would be far worse than the one which existed two weeks ago, certainly not even close to the party heydey. Licensing will eliminate competition and drive up the rakes to astronomical levels (think of what it will do for customer service also). I'd take a free (international) market for gambling over a government protected racket anyday.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how customer service could possibly be adversely affected. I mean, give me poor customer service and I'm done with your company. Period. Licensing, also, will not drive rake up as much as some might think. Why? I would imagine several of the big casinos will be getting online, should that avenue open up. They'll have to compete against each other for rake, correct? Rake is not standard on the strip. It's not standard in LA. Why would it be standard online. Any attempt for the government to impose a required rake would illegal, I would think.

[/ QUOTE ]

There will be a couple of reasons for rake increases if online poker becomes based in the U.S. and taxed and regulated here.

First, every site will have to pay significant taxes on their rake income to the U.S. government. They will pass on some of that cost increase to consumers, through higher rakes, less bonuses, etc.

Second, it's not clear how "free" the market for online gambling in the U.S. would be because of the fact that it will be heavily regulated. The regulations could make it difficult for new companies to enter the market, for example, and this lessening of competition will hurt the consumer.

I don't think people realize just how little the rake has to increase to turn solid winners into marginal winners and marginal winners into breakeven players. And all the while, most fish would not be able to see the difference because the increase would still be masked by the short-term variance.

[MarkGreb]

Harrah's already offer play money games online to it's Total Rewards program.

It's a small step to add real money play.

The Bicycle Casino also has it on their website.

[DuDot]

How is it that an issue like this can cause so much rumor and speculation to be passed along as factual? Fear and ignorance?

[ericp42]

I suspect it is a balance of trade issue.

These types of boards are populated with winning players, to a fair degree. The fish we feed on, in addition to the sports bettors, and slot junkies, generally do not make withdrawals. That's a bunch of money going overseas, and just a trickle coming out.

Balance of trade, combined with some US gaming donations to the election coffers, plus the bone for the Southern Baptist Convention... you got yourself a deal!

I will admit the potential for terrorist money movement exists. But the way most of you guys bitch about epassporte fees, I know the terrorists don't want to be paying the vig either, trying to bet both sides of the Superbowl. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[chopper5654]

this may have been said, but the NFL is the "starring role," and the religious right is the "supporting role" with the about 3 republicans making up the "rest of the show."

all are interested in telling me and you what is moral and what we can do in our free time...all the while protecting our children and us from OURSELVES. with congressmen and senators like this representing me, how will i ever cross the street w/o one of them holding my hand? after all, i've never done that successfully...lol.

morons (govt, not 2+2ers)

[dinopoker]

[ QUOTE ]
What is the old saying that Former New York Giants' GM George Young said, "If it is not about the money, it is about the money and when someone SAYS it is not about the money, it is REALLY about the money." The moral stance is just a cover for the money. The US gov't is p!ssed bc they can't get their cut!

It is ALWAYS ABOUT THE MONEY!

[/ QUOTE ]

You're only partly right. Money is a factor, but it's mostly about the publicity. By introducing an anti-online gambling bill, a nothing congressman like Bill Frist gets his name in the papers, his face on TV and his name on the lips of various commentators who wish to sound out an opinion. The more controversy surrounding a bill like this, or an issue like this, the more it forces various politicians to take sides, and the more it benefits the person who introduces it. Lobbyists begin to show it attention as well, and with them comes the money from interest groups, be they religious right or groups like the NFL, NCAA or the B&M casinos. That part may be about money, but originally it's about some goof politician trying to get his name in the paper.

That's why I think many of us screwed up by writing letters to congressmen, or forming the PPA or whatever. The more we bring legislation to the forefront like this, the more likely it is to pass, because, like I say, it forces politicans to pick sides, and who is going to get negative press if they vote against illegal gambling? If the country had ignored UIGEA and said something to the effect of, "internet gambling, bah, who cares?" the whole legislation issue might have died a quiet death in commitee.