It really staggers me that Party is pulling out of the US market

[FeltBelt]

Stars' lawyers, as I have discussed here before, have it right: the landscape for online gaming operators in the US has not significantly changed. I have no idea why Party has not come to the same conclusion as Stars, but I guess Dikshit isn't a very good lawyer.

Sigh.

[Jerry D]

Party, and the other sites that are pulling out are making a big mistake. Big companies are known for screwing up and making very bad decisions, this is Party's version of the Edsel.

[Guthrie]

[ QUOTE ]
this is Party's version of the GM Edsel.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, it's really tough to make money selling cars made by your chief competitor.

[dibbs]

The Party higherups didnt just make the decision on their own, they definitely consulted lawyers, probably not cheap ones either, and the lawyers interpreted the language in a way that obviously said possible jail time for the big guys at Party.

Under pressure, if a lawyer tells you theres a decent chance youre going to be spending years in a cement box and sharing showers with felons instead of relaxing in penthouses across the world, do you gamble?

They apparently reacted too quickly, they took the cautious route, and theyll pay for it.

[Pokeraddict]

I have a feeling Party has something up their sleeve. I did not at first but as time goes on and listening to other's thoughts I have begun to wonder.

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a feeling Party has something up their sleeve. I did not at first but as time goes on and listening to other's thoughts I have begun to wonder.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's too late. You don't just drop some 80% of your customers and expect them to come back once you reveal your "secret plan." Google "network externality."

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a feeling Party has something up their sleeve. I did not at first but as time goes on and listening to other's thoughts I have begun to wonder.

[/ QUOTE ]

nice teaser. now share "something".

[JPFisher55]

The two founders of Party Gaming made the decision for themselves not Party Gaming. They have cashed out over $1 billion since they took the company public. They want to be able to travel to the US. So they let the company go under by their decision. They warned all their shareholders about this risk and they are not subject to shareholder lawsuits like they would be if Party Gaming was a US company.

[HumanACtor]

[ QUOTE ]
The two founders of Party Gaming made the decision for themselves not Party Gaming. They have cashed out over $1 billion since they took the company public. They want to be able to travel to the US. So they let the company go under by their decision. They warned all their shareholders about this risk and they are not subject to shareholder lawsuits like they would be if Party Gaming was a US company.

[/ QUOTE ]

This explanation makes no sense.

They tank their company into oblivion so that they could travel to the US? Why not step down?

[JPFisher55]

They are the two founders. They own alot of the stock. Due to numerous factors, they cannot sell all their stock. They cannot just step down as controlling shareholders. Also, they may be able to sell the shares of the shell for some additional cash.