You equate offering occasional live satellites in remote B&M casinos, yielding massive fields of (gasp) up to 600+ players for the ME, with the online and demand created among prospective players more than 50 miles from those occasional B&M events .

I maintain the "ever-available", 24/7, online experience and demand for it were something different than a one-off trip to a B&M venue to enter and play in some live event you cite.

Perhaps, you believe that there IS no difference between the two models .... In which case, try shopping at Borders Books, Blockbuster Video, Montgomery Ward or other merchants which ignored a new user/customer demand with their more limited established B&M services.

In any event, spare me the ad hominem argument.

They were occasional because the wsop didn't have a tour and the wpt did not exist yet. 600 was massive at the time in the same context that 10000 was massive at the peak internet boom years. Taking trips to the casino with friends was something people did then before society stopped leaving the house. Folks started playing online because of watching it on TV or seeing a commercial for easy $. That is where the online demand came from.

The b&m model and online model have always been the same because online poker literally copied casino poker brick for brick. Can you name the differences between the two business models? Aside from logistics of managing a room vs a server, it's acquire players and rake them, that's all their is to it. This is not a personal attack, but I dispute your version of events because its clearly lacking context from someone who was also there and your lawyerly posts keep rephrasing the same inaccuracies without acknowledging the point that there was already demand for poker before the sites got big whereas there is no demand for decentralized poker now.

P.S. yes I still buy books from a bookstore and so do many others.

Im confused what any of this has to do with anything being discuss ITT.

also Gzesch is about the least lawerly lawyer I;ve come across on 2+2. Thats a good thing btw.

1. Back to chickens and eggs. ....Ain't no business, ain't no show. Who do you think sponsored all those poker television shows and online marketing efforts ? It wasn't Binions*and it wasn't Jack's Links, either..

(*As an aside, one company once ran some television advertisements for the WSOP which were co-branded directly with Binions. That was short-lived.)

2. Funny you talk about online sites' copying the live experience as closely as possible in the context of online poker. I know for certain one site, which offered a 3D-like experience, made you pick your cards up to look at them, and encouraged chat on the table, and directly took that as a design and marketing strategy. Some other sites copied it, then they all abandoned it as multi-tabling demanded a more uniform, uncluttered experience ....

3. I can certainly describe the differences between the online poker business model and the traditional B&M live poker model, but that's too much of a digression from the thread topic and not something you just get for asking. Stick to your comfortably general belief that "that's all there is to it".

4. I don't know whose remarks you think lack context about online poker and WSOP evolution, but I do not recall seeing you "there" back in the day.

Lou is right about the derail, this has little to do with the thread, other than I think there is potential demand for all sorts of decentralized gambling, of which poker can be an element in the future.

This topic belongs here: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/3...prove-1132963/

Though sort of annoying, btc is correct that there are much easier ways to address above and all sites do some form of it now.

But thats not important, poker is just a test case. that point btc does not compute.

Edit: but link to that thread was pretty funny.

So are there any secure new cryptocurrency sites operating already? Been very confused with all the launch dates and so on

As a total IT noob, don't really get all this blockchain madness.
When people say all the players at the online tables will verify each others cards because there is no central server etc. will this process be instantaneous? It's not like dealing cards on each street will last for 10 seconds?

Not trolling and not interested in deep technical explanations, just tell me will it be insta or with delays

Coinpoker is easy to sign up to and has great software. There are still in pre ico and so you can't withdrawal or deposit but there are free rolls going on.

acebusters also has test tables. You use eth and convert it to "nutz". Their software isn't as developed but they are going for a bigger goal

breakout gaming I think is running games too but you need to validate completely and I think go through a payment processor.

Yes its instant. You don't have to wait for verification, you can continue to play on and if anyone cheats THEN you call on the blockchain. The blockchain always verifies correctly and you lose your escrow if you don't hand in your "keys".

The game is never expected to call the blockchain since there is no incentive to do so.

It is very much like a lightning transaction. The blockchain has nothing to do with the cards and shuffling/dealing, It is only there to force players to pass in their "keys".

It is the biggest misconception out their in regard to p2p poker

Thank you for the clarification, many of us are not really interested in very technical stuff but still want to participate and have a simple understanding. Im sure your recent explanations will be valuable for me and many more.

Are people here putting alot into the coinpoker ICO or waiting for virtuepoker and others? What makes one blockchain poker better than the next?

Buying coins in an ICO is not a "player" decision as such; it is a wager on a business model or concept

I personally believe (1) that other gambling channels are much more adaptable to a decentralized concept than is poker, and (2) adding decentralized payment processing systems to off-chain operations provides 85% of what 90% of those players who care about crypto will want to see in future business models. FWIW, adding crypto-denominated gaming to exisiting off-chain models will provide another 10%.

If two things are clear from the history of online poker,

1. poker sites which launch later need to compete for business against existing poker sites, this is true across centralized/decentrlaized platforms, the current of which are pretty adept at leveraging their current advantages

2. the player market for online poker demands three things first, liquidity, liquidity and liquidity. I would suggest that payment processing and perceived honesty/anti-collusion are important, but secondary to liquidity.... "there just aren't games/tournaments running when I want to play"

The future will be interesting, and I could be very wrong in my personal beliefs.

Yes, but since these CHPS can be used for both playing on their site and traded (If I understand their model correctly) buying into the ICO can act as either/or depending on whether you poker with the chips or hodl them. In my case probably both.

That is correct, and I am not sure Gzesh realizes that specific point about Coinpoker. It is a new model. It is expected that the coins will be deflationary and I wouldn't be surprised if in the future they locked in a contract that regularly destroys x% of raked coins (CHPS).

Coinpoker has a finite amount of chips they are producing, called CHPS, and these CHPS that players use as chip act as shares in the project's success. So the CHPS will be held by investors and players alike, and will go for a market driven rate/price to those that want to player poker on the site.

The model is not as new as you might think.

See, e.g. https://www.sec.gov/news/public-stat...ton-2017-12-11

I'm a little confused, that links is a writing from less than a month ago. Coinpoker is effectively offering shares of their project by having a finite amount of chips their casino uses. What sites are you referring to?

I want to crosspost this from the coinpoker thread because its a question many will have and it's quite significant if the players as a whole begin to understand the answer:

Not sure how you can conflate CHPs with company shares.

Company has a cap table with percent ownership by each owner . That adds up to 100%. Those are shares.

Company has a product, CHPs.

Players do share goal with company in increasing value of CHPs (because its quite likely owners are also holders of CHPs), but that doesn't change the cap table.

What would be the relevant distinction then? Is it that shareholders are involved in company decisions and CHPs holders are not or its more than that? From the player's view its quite an important distinction that there is now mutual incentive to create a good product and playing environment. And players stand to directly gain from this if they hold the sites' token.

^^ yes this is clear and important distinction.

Yes, shareholders and CHP holders both benefit from CHP inflation.

No, CHP holders in no way have any sort of shares or ownership in company.

CHP <> equity.

You are speaking from a regulatory perspective, only. For all intents and purposes from the players view, it is certainly equity and no doubt special privilege in regard to the operations and future vision. And this can be programmed directly into the tokens as well, and a made immutable, and I am certain it will be.

has absolutely nothing to do with regulatory. Just Business 101.

Equity in CoinPoker as a company? It's certainly NOT. In the same way if I Buy Gold from Mining Operation, I simply get the gold, no equity in the mining operation whatsoever.

What point are you trying to make? I'll help translate.

What is the privilege equity gives you?

umm

speaking in general terms regardless of how entity is structured (LLC, C-Corp) etc

1) pro rata share of any company profits in the form of periodic distributions to owners

2) pro rata of proceeds from sale of company.

maybe you are using the word "Equity" in a metaphorical sense. It has a very specific meaning in the business world.

You have forgotten the business world is changing and the definitions are evolving and changing as well. When a player has "CHPs" they share the value of the project and inevitably part of the direction of the project. These are the things that an investor looks for when they buy shares. Periodic distributions are rake back.

I am still convinced for all intents an purposes it is the same thing and that you have not updated your definitions in regard to this changed business model.