One of his big donors is Cantor-Fitzgerald,here are some of CF's business interests.



Aqua Securities, an alternative trading system for block trades which is currently used by nearly 200 institutions and brokers as an alternative to algorithmic trading of large orders. Nothing keeps the stock market fair and level for the average Joe investor like massive block trades done in nanoseconds.lol


TopLine Game Labs, a technology company to create short-duration fantasy sports and entertainment-based social gaming. Headquartered in Los Angeles, TopLine Game Labs was, in 2013, building a platform-agnostic architecture to power game experiences for sports.[29]

And this gem.
http://www.cantor.com/portfolio/cgtechnology

That is not quite what the Petition said.

There was a lot of complaining about how unfair the AG was to spring this on DK. Then a lot of stuff about how "skill" was key in deciding whether a "game" was legal..

But, unless the Court distinguishes DK players' activities from traditional sportsbetting, there is a problem.

DK cannot deny that offering sportsbetting is illegal under the NY law cited by the AG. So, basically it argues that making its offering a "game" avoids sportsbetting laws, and "skill" games are not gambling.

I hope DK wins a court decision that NY gambling law re picking sports winners avoids coverage on the basis of "skill", an essential element of sportbetting btw.

Enough with the shilling bulls**t,Joe's is a player and involved in the DFS industry,he doesn't pretend otherwise.If Schneiderman has proof I'm being ''fleeced'' I want and deserve to know how.If he's banning DK/FD because
they're running a ''scheme'' he should turn away from the tv cameras and provide some friggin facts.I doubt he will,the AG is typical big govt.bureaucrat,he does things because he can, not because they're right.

Bradley C's weekends are about to get a lot more boring

Absolutely, as you can see here, I personally tried to get them in the same room to spearhead self-regualation and they were warned of this moment in 2013:

via: http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...haos/75434974/

Just because I dont hate and try to keep an objective, balanced stance on DFS, does not make a me a shill. What will surprise you is that I will personally will benefit from FD&DK model failure and these regulation changes with my new project.

Maybe it's the donations from the B&M casinos?


via: http://nypirg.org/pubs/goodgov/2014....sino_money.pdf


I honestly don't know, I have yet to read anything about it, there is always a chance of anything. Do you have a link?

Each lineup is your shot at the prize. If you suck compared to your competition, you should get more shots to make it fair. Can the average guy afford to just buy more lineups? That shouldn't be considered a skill.

What about a points handicap so better players start with a negative score?

a weekender wins the milly and ends up in the 1%.

I've never thought of it like this, and I imagine tons of other recreational players haven't either.

Fd to stop accepting deposits in ny

o/u on dk and fd millionaire next week?

2 mil for FD 3 for DK?

eh im sure its purely coinicidental. after all,

I thought the request for injunctive relief by DK was an interesting read. I was wondering why payment processors were telling the sites to stop taking action from NY players. Now we see it was because they were being threatened with immediate action. DK properly points out that the processors have contracts with them and would be violating those contracts by shutting down, and it was wrong to be threatened with immediate action while the sites themselves were given five days before the cease and desist order was to take effect.

We also see the basic strategy for a future court case as the DFS lawyers argue that DFS is a skill game. As I suspected, the attorneys are latching on to the designation of season long fantasy as a skill game and pointing out that DFS could be even more skill-related.

I think they make a pretty good case at least for obtaining an injunction. I just wish I were the judge.

The one thing I don't get is how advertising plays into it. The method, message, and quantity of advertisements should not bear any weight on whether or not it is legal, right? If their advertising was misleading or false in a manner that was illegal wrt advertising laws then wouldn't that just be grounds for a lawsuit or something else, but not a declaration that the whole business is illegal?

There has been messaging (via ad) that has pushed legal boundaries. But the general claim is that the big spend and blast of FD and DK (more DK than FD) before and starting this NFL season has brought the light to the industry.

Take the online horse racing industry in the US (ADW - advance deposit wagering), over 3 Billion dollars gets pushed through it annually at 18%+ raked, and its likely a few people read this post will have never heard of it. The ADWs self-regulate and arent overly noisy, it's business as usual.

Build better lineups.

Most contracts have a little something called a termination clause. I'm not a lawyer obv, but I don't see how it's wrong for the AG to warn the processors that he views DFS as gambling and therefore they could be liable for processing gambling transactions. After all, isn't DK complaining that the AG didn't warn them earlier that the legality of DFS was being investigated? Can't have it both ways.

I've gotta admit I admire the sites' confidence in their skill game argument. A lot of their "conclusive" evidence is awfully flimsy--the flaws in the Ed Miller article that were already mentioned, using random lineups with as little as 90% of the salary cap spent as the baseline in their computer simulation analysis, non sequitur about the binary nature of sports betting--but they do a very good job of playing the indigant, innocent victim. Seems like they have a decent chance of winning the case, and it will be interesting to watch unfold.

They may self-regulate to some extent, but I think that is a disingenuous narrative (some may even say obvious shilling). See for example the NY Gaming Commission's horse racing regulations. Also, as the AG has explained, horse racing has explicit state exemptions whereas DFS does not.

In the link to NY Gaming Commission's regs, I do not see a single mention of online wagering and the language under: PART 4009 Pari-Mutuel Operation, seems to be all B&M, am I missing something?

I believe horse racing has a PASPA exemption, I could be wrong.

Horse racing is a state licensed and regulated form of gambling. In the New York State Constitution, it has an exemption from the state's anti-gambling laws. So do the casinos. So does the lottery.

The internet horse wagering is a progression from inter-track inter-state wagering that started back in the early nineties. Interestingly, there are online horse racing tournaments that could be considered skill games. I believe most of them are single-entry competitions and the rake is lower than what is the norm for standard horse races.

https://www.horsetourneys.com/

https://www.gaming.ny.gov/pdf/New%20...%202015-06.pdf

https://www.gaming.ny.gov/pdf/091912....ADWReport.pdf

The sites confidence is probably just hubris at this point. They don't seem like they were prepared for any of this.

Not sure what else they can do besides run the "skill game and not gambling" narrative into the ground.

That's going to be their defense because to admit its gambling is certain death. Unfortunately though, if they lose in court, I don't see much chance of a legislative fix since the sites and their crummy advertising combined with insider trading scandals have earned a shady reputation.

It's gambling. We know that. It's a skill game, but at the end of the day there is a ton of variance in DFS. Just like poker, you need to use bankroll management and get in lots of volume to get your true winrate.

Really nuts with what is going on with this industry. It's like watching the last ten years of the poker industry compressed into one year.

hmm the Casino money contributions is quite an uncovering of relevant information here, one which 2+2 forum posters are famous for, very interesting, to be fair I admittedly assumed you worked for FD in some capacity as a refferal source or something so assumed your intents were biased to that vein although it appears I may be the one here who was biased, and I never implied a negative connotation to the use of the word "shill" I guess its a degenrates way of saying that you have a "job"

Interesting article below how the racetracks support the moves by the AG. Look at the list of the AGs donors two dog tracks on the list (a dead sport it there ever was one.)

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...o-halt-fantasy

Tioga and Vernon Downs are harness tracks/racinos.There is no dog racing in NY.NY pols have been feasting off the tracks/racinos forever.The tracks just want DFS operators to have the same ''privilege.'' Did the DFS frat boys really think they could maintain the status quo without a pocket full of political hacks on their side? There would have been no shortage of pols willing to accept DFS ''donations'' in this whore house of a state.

I think what you have been saying is that, regardless of whether or not DFS itself is a skill game, when money is on the line, it's clearly still gambling according to the law. In NYS it's perfectly legal for people to be gambling, but explicitly illegal to operate/promote an unlicensed gambling business.

This article from 2013 about a NY appeals court ruling on texas hold'em being a skill game seems to completely back up that logic.

""The language of the statute is clear," the Second Circuit said, noting that New York law defines gambling fairly broadly as games that involve a material degree of chance and allows for federal claims...

The appeals court also said the "game of skill" argument put forth by the defendant "improperly conflates the important distinction between gambling, which is not prohibited by the IGBA, and operating a gambling business.

The ruling probably boils down to an unstated premise that playing poker for money is popularly considered gambling, and not much more is needed,"... "The judges, of course, do not put it that way, but they may as well have. None of them were willing to write an opinion that poker-for-money is not gambling.""

http://www.law360.com/articles/46320...nd-ny-reversal