The players have options, and options dissolve monopolistic conditions.

Masses only seem to mobilize when certain key individuals start to become directly effected and have no option but to confront the eminent change. Mexico could be significant because many vocal and more experienced players emigrated there since black friday.

These players might feel that Canada could be an option if they lose Mexico but others disagree:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...8193/?page=all

From just the info in this thread it does look like a regulation model that could support international player pools. They are saying that servers need to be in Mexico for inspection. Assuming these are mirror servers then this is not an issue that restricts the player pool, nor is requiring a .com.mex domain name. It isn't even a huge technical hurdle or cost. It's a pain but they want to be able to seize the software and servers if there was some cheating scandal like UB.

As for the other impacts...tax etc for sites and players, the translated statement lacks the detail. As a lobbying tactic saying join the UK pooled player model, no tax on non Mexicans and surely a mirror server in our local office meets the requirement for inspection would seem to be OK. There may be some technical complications re the mirroring of the RNG but every regulator can get that they can't all be the base for an international player pool. Having a requirement for some Mexican servers is likely not bad for Mexican players.

The process does look very disorganised compared to the recent UK changes but that may be because this is at an earlier stage.

When I read the words "Mexico" and "regulation" in the same sentence, I was lol.

But when I realized that it involved a shakedown, I felt bad for grinders that live there.

That's because all of the "Mexicans" (Americans and other pros) aren't playing play money.

This has been a long time in the works. We've covered this for months; here's an article from three months ago (free):
http://pokerfuse.com/news/law-and-re...r-september-9/

The bill was later delayed for a couple of months due to political back and forth. Political differences were apparently resolved, and the new law presented to the house recently.

Lol

We are talking about it here: http://poquer833.com/foro/threads/nu...-sorteos.6636/ but there is nothing there hasn’t been said already. Maybe the 34th post (second page) that has a link to a site that is going to try and explain the law. The site is still a project and is a bit slow at breaking it down.

Online gaming in México might end up becoming the domain of Casino Caliente which is already investing on that and in my opinion is very much involved in the making of the new law.

Casinos are already expecting a small boom for live poker. Online poker doesn’t have a very bright future at the moment.

It will be voted tomorrow as announced by the president of the special commission.

Looks like the need for Mexican based servers will trigger player pool segregation.

http://pokerfuse.com/news/law-and-re...ket-next-year/

That's just that author's opinion, not based on more research than reading the bill or this thread.

I am not in any manner an expert in Mexico's igaming laws, but this provision, even if actually required under the proposed law, does not seem too difficult to meet:

"Offshore operators who do want a license can apply, but must run their games on a .com.mx web domain. They must also establish a registered business in Mexico to run the gaming operations."

I did not see anything about segregated player pools. I will be talking with Mexican gaming counsel.

thank you and please keep us updated on whether this means segregated player pools.

something like pokerstars.mx would probably imply segregation like pokerstars.it : / (and the death of online poker for grinders living in Mexico). This should also have grinders in Canada concerned imo.

This is the law propossed
http://gaceta.diputados.gob.mx/PDF/6...141127-XII.pdf
page 66-67 talks about online gaming
From what I understood pokersites just need a .com.mx domain and an address in the country. It doesnt say anything about segregating the mexican market. So I expect this to be similar to stars.uk, stars.eu, etc
The thing to worry is that sites thinking is too much hassle and its not worth the reward and they just leave the market altogether.

On the bright side LAPT mexico seems very likely if this law goes thru so stars.com.mx its very possible but dont know about other sites.

The relevant section is not about the domain name and the registered business, but that all gaming activity must occur on servers located in mexico.

Well, my Spanish is pretty rusty and I will be asking Mexico counsel. There may be a lot of room under this proposed igaming law, as under some other jurisdictions' laws, for interpretation.

I recall when Stars' live tournament was busted in Monterey, reportedly because they were dealing live cash games on the side.

Makes me sad when I think about the ridiculous amount of $ friends and I have dumped into the Mexican economy that otherwise wouldn't have happened. And won't happen again under certain legislation.

Oh sure. I was just saying that the section you quoted in the article--regarding the domain names and the regulated business"--was not why the author of th article concluded that poker games in Mexico may be segregated. Rather, it is the section regarding location of servers.

[fwiw the article is a bit ambiguous as it is an abridged version of a paywalled article on pokerfuse PRO]

+5000

Hola, did it pass today because it was more than 2/3's vote or does it still need to be approved by the senate (and the president)? I am seeing conflicting things...on your forum, on twitter, and in this article, it sounds like it passed...

http://www.excelsior.com.mx/nacional/2014/12/03/995733

but in this article it says it needs to go to the senate...

http://www.aztecanoticias.com.mx/not...egos-y-sorteos

Gracias!

Requiring in-country servers for the gaming activity of Mexican players does not present a technological barrier to combined player pools. I'm guessing that it could go either way, depending on interpretation by the regulators. It's a bit early, imo, to conclude that there will be segregation.

I wrote the pokerfuse PRO article, where I stated that "The provisions listed in Article 71 can only be interpreted as creating a segregated player pool."

I live in Peru, so my Spanish isn't rusty but I queried the precise meaning of the Spanish phrases used in the law and got a legal pair of Peruvian eyes to confirm that it would encompass the random number generation process necessary to deal the virtual cards for online poker.

Having read every bloody Article in the law, and the footnotes, it seems to me that the Spanish and French regulatory models--which both use segregation--are the ones which the text's authors have tried to emulate.

I'll be delighted to be proved wrong, but it seems that the general language of the text allows for very little wiggle room.

Thanks for the clarification. Certainly if the RNG has to be in Mexico, the player pool has to be segregated. I don't think you can have different RNGs for different players in the same game. Sounds like it is indeed bad news for the US grinders in Mexico.

****

wow dude, not good. all signs point to segregation. how ****ing silly. New Zealand, here I come