Can someone explain what the PPA wants? and why

[Jeffmet3]

I've been somewhat out of the loop recently, and I've just dont reading to catch up, but I'm very confused by the PPA.

It is called the Poker Player's Alliance, and has some very vague goals and mission statement on its website.

But it never states anything specific whatsoever as to what it wants to achieve.

So I looked at the About Us page, where the Board of Directors is listed, and this is where I'm confused; no one on that board derives their income from playing online poker.

In fact, the vast majority profit directly or indirectly from online poker players.

The placement of Howard Lederrer, Chris Ferguson, and Greg Raymer as well as the freerolls for "joining" the PPA hosted by Pokerstars and FTP leads one to assume that the vast majority of the funding for the PPA comes directly from poker sites.

So, while online poker players and online poker sites have some common goals, can someone explain to me why I should believe that the PPA has my best inerests as a poker player in mind?

Because to me, this looks exactly like a lobby for online poker organizations masquerading as a "poker players' alliance."

(i apologize in advance if anything i said is incorrect. i'm genuinely interested in learning more about this.")

[_dave_]

[ QUOTE ]

So I looked at the About Us page, where the Board of Directors is listed, and this is where I'm confused; no one on that board derives their income from playing online poker.

In fact, the vast majority profit directly or indirectly from online poker players.


[/ QUOTE ]

Lololol can of worms [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

This is indeed a valid concern, and much of the readon for 2p2 Vs PPA conflict in this forum, or so I believe being a rare lurker here.

Let us hope this new thread garners some fresh clarity on this issue [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

dave.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
So I looked at the About Us page, where the Board of Directors is listed, and this is where I'm confused; no one on that board derives their income from playing online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do...over 50% of my annual income is from online poker.

Also, I believe Howard Lederer, Chris Ferguson, and Greg Raymer all make decent money playing online. I don't know the percentage of total income for any of them, but I imagine they'd notice if they could no longer play.

[ QUOTE ]
But it never states anything specific whatsoever as to what it wants to achieve.

[/ QUOTE ]

PPA acts as an advocate for all poker, online and B&M. The goal for online poker is explicit legalization. PPA is advocating the Wexler bill, IGREA, and the Study bill. This effort includes lobbying, generating letters from members to Congress, media relations, etc. They also participate in court cases that have potential to get poker declared a game of skill. They're also active at the state level in Mass, where the governor just proposed a bill that outlaws Internet gaming (even for players). There are a number of other areas the PPA works on as well.

[ QUOTE ]
So, while online poker players and online poker sites have some common goals, can someone explain to me why I should believe that the PPA has my best inerests as a poker player in mind?

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems to me their interests of the PPA align well with our interests as players. I check my inbox every day and I have yet to see a lot of members asking me to get PPA to change their focus. I post here very regularly and work to ensure our views are represented by PPA, and I've had no trouble with that at all. That's why I'm there, so ensuring we're represented is something I'm passionate about.

If you could list some areas where you think interests diverge, I'll try to address them. If you want me to bring something to PPA, feel free to PM me. You can also post questions on the PPA Forum.

Rich Muny
Member, PPA Board of Directors

[JPFisher55]

Who do we expect to pay for representing and protecting the interests and rights of online poker players? Individual players can sign up and become a paying member, but who, other than online poker sites, are going to invest the big money that might be required for political and legal activities to protect online poker? So why shouldn't they and the media that they advertise be the majority of the PPA board of directors. The board TE does have one online player not affiliated with a site.
I would be much more concerned if the board had a lot of B&M casino reps. Then I would wonder if they represented or cared about the interests of online poker players. But the board of directors of the PPA consists of almost entirely individuals that profit from or play online poker. So why is this not good for online poker players?

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.
can someone explain to me why I should believe that the PPA has my best inerests as a poker player in mind?
.
.
Exactly what are your interests? Online player? Online professional? Other?
.
.

Because to me, this looks exactly like a lobby for online poker organizations masquerading as a "poker players' alliance."
.
.
I am not sure "a lobby for online poker organizations" is not almost completely in sync with the interest of "poker players" as far as legalization efforts are concerned. I do not know of any goals that the PPA harbors that are inimical to my own. If it somehow came out that they really wanted only Full Tilt to be legalized, I would then have significant concerns.
.
.




[/ QUOTE ]

Tuff << stealing D$D's little arrow thingy trick [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[TheEngineer]

One more thing. Like any organization of the PPA's age, there are areas for improvement. Member communication is a top one. PPA is already sending out more emails. PPA can now send email much less expensively, so this will improve. Also, PPA is invigorating the PPA forum. Grassroots and state-level work are on the short list as well. PPA has shown a lot of improvement in this area since John Pappas took over (compare the PPA response to Mass to that of WA). I expect to see a lot of growth there over the next year, and I look forward to helping that.

Rich Muny
Member, PPA Board of Directors

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Who do we expect to pay for representing and protecting the interests and rights of online poker players? Individual players can sign up and become a paying member, but who, other than online poker sites, are going to invest the big money that might be required for political and legal activities to protect online poker? So why shouldn't they and the media that they advertise be the majority of the PPA board of directors. The board TE does have one online player not affiliated with a site.
I would be much more concerned if the board had a lot of B&M casino reps. Then I would wonder if they represented or cared about the interests of online poker players. But the board of directors of the PPA consists of almost entirely individuals that profit from or play online poker. So why is this not good for online poker players?

[/ QUOTE ]

Great points.

[Jeffmet3]

Thanks for the response, I'm going to try and answer each point.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So I looked at the About Us page, where the Board of Directors is listed, and this is where I'm confused; no one on that board derives their income from playing online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do...over 50% of my annual income is from online poker.

Also, I believe Howard Lederer, Chris Ferguson, and Greg Raymer all make decent money playing online. I don't know the percentage of total income for any of them, but I imagine they'd notice if they could no longer play.


come on, i don't believe that is true at all. I thought Howard Lederrer essentially stopped playing poker. I have never seen him on Fulltilt, and would surmise that there is very little chance that he made greater than $1,000 from online poker this past year. Combine this with his $millions from Tiltware, and online poker is essentially nothing. Chris Ferguson is doing his "challenge," which is essentially just short-stacking and hit-and-running, but his income from online poker is nothing compared to Tiltware. Greg Raymer I know less about because I don't play much on PokerStars, but considering he has a 7-figure deal from PokerStars, makes money from other ventures, and plays in bigger NL games that I don't think he's a long-term winner in, I'm assuming his online poker income is neglible as well. So all of these people are profiting from online poker, not through it.

[ QUOTE ]
But it never states anything specific whatsoever as to what it wants to achieve.

[/ QUOTE ]

PPA acts as an advocate for all poker, online and B&M. The goal for online poker is explicit legalization. PPA is advocating the Wexler bill, IGREA, and the Study bill. This effort includes lobbying, generating letters from members to Congress, media relations, etc. They also participate in court cases that have potential to get poker declared a game of skill. They're also active at the state level in Mass, where the governor just proposed a bill that outlaws Internet gaming (even for players). There are a number of other areas the PPA works on as well.

Okay, still vague and representing of a large group, but this sounds pretty good.

[ QUOTE ]
So, while online poker players and online poker sites have some common goals, can someone explain to me why I should believe that the PPA has my best inerests as a poker player in mind?

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems to me their interests of the PPA align well with our interests as players. I check my inbox every day and I have yet to see a lot of members asking me to get PPA to change their focus. I post here very regularly and work to ensure our views are represented by PPA, and I've had no trouble with that at all. That's why I'm there, so ensuring we're represented is something I'm passionate about.

I think more of a reason that you don't get flooded with requests and emails by members, is that most of them don't really care. I'm making another assumption here, but can you honestly tell me that greater than 50% of the PPA's members signed up with no promotion and reason to do so? So not by signing up for a PokerStars or Fulltilt freeroll, or to get a deposit bonus at Fulltilt? Because when I look at that 800,000+ members, and remember all the incentives to join, I feel like this number is extremely misleading as a very large percentage joined for a few dollars in free equity. If I had to think about what a Poker Players' Alliance would do, I would think it would work for the better welfare of the players. Maybe monitoring poker sites, doing regulation. For instance, with Absolute Poker, where was the PPA? There are still numerous players who are short money owed to them from Absolute. Shouldn't the PPA be working to get these players all of their money back? In addition, there are a lot of accounts that have been hacked by a few individuals. The PPA could work to help bring about criminal prosecution of them. Also, while I pretty much trust the sites in their taking steps to lock players' accounts for using bots or other illegal actions, having a board of online players being able to see the evidence to ensure that it is legitimate should be something that the PPA does. Also, the question about taxes is asked a ton of times and it is overall a very gray area. The PPA could research the tax code and come up with suggestions tax filings. It could also recomend CPA's who are well-versed in online poker tax filings.


If you could list some areas where you think interests diverge, I'll try to address them. If you want me to bring something to PPA, feel free to PM me. You can also post questions on the PPA Forum.

Also, what type of online poker does the PPA want? I saw Tuff_Fish's trip report, and that was kind of what got me interested. His idea of what online poker should be is extremely different than mine. If I was forced to play just 1 table of online poker, I would quit as I would find it way too boring. I remember reading his plan to get poker legalized in California, and thinking that if I had an opportunity to vote for it, I would vote NO. I think the PPA has an image problem as well which would be much better helped by getting some younger members. I don't have statistics of the age breakdowns, but at least for the one forum I mostly post in here, MSNL, just about everyone is 18-25.

Rich Muny
Member, PPA Board of Directors

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually don't even think that I'm a member of the PPA. I never wanted to waste my time playing in the freerolls. About me, I'm a 20 year old college student. Although I'll be taking a hefty paycut, I don't plan on playing professionally when I graduate.

[beanie]

I think these points are really valid but it would shock me if the FTP or PokerStars guys thought the Frank bill was a good bill. It would seem to put them out of business immediately.

I don't agree that this needs to necessarily be pushed by the masses because I do believe that the masses care, just not enough to really do much.

There does need to be a base level of participation from online players that doesn't exist at the highest levels of the PPA. I think that the PPA would do well to have players like Taylor Caby and Brian Townsend part of the group if they were willing.

To have online players understand the laws that will affect them is something the PPA is not doing a good job with at the moment and it is likely the easiest thing to correct. When I read stories from Cardplayer, they seem so biased as to not even be worth reading. So it is a challenge to get your message out there without that bias.

Do remember that I am a supporter of the PPA and I have done a lot to push your web presence but as a supporter I am currently confused.

[Coy_Roy]

[ QUOTE ]
I think these points are really valid but it would shock me if the FTP or PokerStars guys thought the Frank bill was a good bill.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm curious as to why you don't mention Bodog, aren't you affiliated with them?

Sorry if I'm wrong.