Any comments Shane? lets see you spin this one.

It's $10,000 per incident of unlicensed online gaming in the Nevada, not sure what it'll be in NJ but you can be sure they won't be too keen on the "#1 online poker site in the US" trying to steal their customers money.

I still have money on Lock, please don't scare them to away with my money.

Honestly, if Lock got their **** together I think they could be successful post US regulation. For example, I have money on Bovada and I would probably continue to keep money on Bovada after regulation is passed.

This is a pretty childish post.

actually, it's pretty a factual post

1. shane is a hyperbolic spin machine
2. lock is now unquestionably operating an illegal online casino in 2 states and shane has often claimed that lock is either legal or in a grey area. Whether or not that was an accurate assessment of the legal situation then it is unquestionably not now.
3. the fine is $10k per incident in NV and gaming commissions love assessing/collecting fines.

you've had an axe to grind with Lock going back as long as I've read this forum. not sure what they've done to you but you made your point.

the quoted is exactly true of you as well. frankly, you're not helping anyone by trying to create panic and hysteria.

I'm helping every person who doesn't put a dime on the site.

It is your intent that makes it childish. If online gambling was legal, Lock/Revolution would probably lose a certain amount of traffic. But like Kleinstein said, if Lock improves they can probably be successful.

As for your third point, is that a fine for unlicensed online gaming companies that are located in NJ or NV?

The government is not going to allow lock to continue operating in the US once they are taxing licensed operators!

And the fine is for anyone located inside the states who wagers on an operator regardless of their location.

Obviously if the feds or a significant number of states move to regulate iPoker, then the current offshore sites will suffer. And there could be direct repercussions like seizure/fines/longer wait times for cashouts. So yes I think US players playing on the offshore sites should be vigilant and keep an eye on things over the long haul. This includes the normal cautions about not keeping too much online, accepting that your funds aren't 100% secure, etc. I also suspect the sites will adapt, possibly by shutting out customers from certain states depending on regulations. But I can't for the life of me figure out what aggressively confronting Shane has to do with this topic.

Cool. Should be about 4-5 years before the hammer comes down if we are using UIGEA as a guideline.

im not a fan of LOCK at all, but wow you sound like a jaded ex gf.

In my opinion Lock isn't going to have to worry about the us gov getting involved because its only a matter of time before row and US players wake up and realize its a terrible company to invest in. The management is obviously very incompetent in running a properly functioning site. The software is poorly operating week in and week out. Promotions are put out and then later after the winners go to claim there prize they implement new guidelines as to how they can withdraw the money (like having to play it in the casino 1000 times over first). The integrity of the company has become completely non existent. You can deposit money in minutes but it takes months to get it out ( so I've heard I'm 2 months in and still waiting). The support teams are excuse my French( full of sh$t). Their own pro was caught scamming Locks players. The CEO has shady dealings with previous poker sites (so I've heard). They have begun to segregate the players from individual sites from the network on most limits when originally it was announced for higher limits only (only reason it was announced at all is because players called them out on it). It is plain and simple( Lock will be the destruction of Lock). They are doing a fine job of imploding on their own why would the US gov have to get involved. If and when any US sites open everyone will jump ship like the last chopper leaving Nam! Lock will be yesterday's news and the entire team will find another way to prey on the weaknesses of many who have dreams of becoming the next Dwan or Ivey. So who cares about the US gov getting involved. They have made agreements with individual states and they will get their cut from the legit sites that are to come. That's when they will drop the hammer on any other non- legit sites that are cutting into their pie. Lock is in my opinion destined for disaster and I'm sure they know it which is why they are hanging on to all our $$. They will walk with most of it in the end anyway.

Pretty much this. I think some regs believe that it's going to just take off and initially you'll be lucky to fill tables with the new regulated software when the reality is that you'll still want to spread your money to get action. Maybe I am wrong and it takes off from the start, but I don't believe this to be the case.

Source?

You do realize we are probably a year away from any of these sites going online and probably many years away before enough states join for it to even matter right?

I'm w/ you on Lock being terrible and wish regulation would come sooner than later, but saying GG Lock with 3 states having "legal" online pokerz and no structure for any sort of intrastate sites (or even in state sites at this point) is pretty uninformed on your part.

GG Lock............. in about 2016.

This. It's only a few states, and even then, it takes a while to invest and pull off a poker site altogether.

It is going to be very difficult to go after every player that wagers on an unlicensed site. They also will not be able be to collect 10k from most of the players that they fine. Because of these two reasons it would not be financially viable to try to inforce this law. Because of this, non-licensed sites will likely continue to operate. If the sites are able to stay competitive, they will likely be able to keep a portion of their US player base. Keep in mind that non-US players will not be able to play on the US sites therefore there is a fairly large player base for non-US regulated sites to compete for.

Small brains don't understand such logical thinking.

2012 Population Estimates:

Nevada: 2,758,931
New Jersey: 8,864,590
USA: 313,914,040

Source: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html

Nevada and New Jersey make up 3.7% of the U.S. population. While it might hurt them slightly, I believe Lock can manage a 4% loss in market share due to regulation.

If we assume Lock can fix the current issues then I see no reason why Lock should be overly concerned about two states regulating within their boundaries. Oh, and the government moves slower than that old lady trying to find that parking spot in front of you so I wouldn't worry too much about "more states coming soon." We'll know how lock is doing far before any other states regulate.

You are right on for New Jersey, but as far as Nevada goes:

From Caesars Entertainment Earnings Conference Call:
In Nevada, we received an interactive gaming operator license from the NGC, a key conceptual lunching of real-money online poker in our state. We expect to begin offering online real-money poker in Nevada in the coming months...

Other news reports have put first Nevada Poker Games at 1st Half of 2013

Caesars said it would be 1-2 years before online poker would start in NJ

That's if every poker player who lives there and plays at Lock would also move away after the regulation, one can assume not every one of them would do that. Furthermore, the U.S. isn't their entire population.. I realise 3.7% to 4% was just rounding, but 0.5%-1% actual loss in their player base seems far more accurate to me.

Good point, but I'll believe it when I see it. Southpoint or w/e the name was said it'd launch by Sep. of last year. How many players do they have?

Nevada makes up less than 1% of the U.S. population. Yes, I'm sure regs will flock to Vegas. When they realize just how withered traffic and player difficulty is in Nevada they'll probably bitch about it on 2p2 and deter others from joining the regfest.

I was just providing a conservative worst-case estimate to assume that literally every person playing in those states abruptly quit unregulated sites and exclusively played on regulated sites. Also, you have to factor in the "regs" leaving for these two states, so I believe 4% hit to be pretty close to what they'll lose but its obviously all just speculation. It could definitely be less though.