The Post is Owned by Fox which is pro/invested in DFS.The real joke is the uber liberal,uber permissive,uber hypocritical New York Times whose hysterical misinformed articles and editorials spurred this publicity hound to action.This whole mess started as an accusation of insider trading and has extrapolated to a complete ban of the industry in the near future without a shred of evidence of wrongdoing.

Witch hunt's are the order of the day in the new America.''Victims'' must be protected with or without due process.Why didn't DK/FD have the good sense to bribe this prick Schhneiderman like the casinos did?

Hence the famous words of Patriot Patrick Henry.
''Give me DFS or give me death''

P.S.He's an American Patriot not a DB for New England.

If it wasn't this, it was gonna be something else though.

I can't believe the industry didn't see this coming.

The main reason I thought legality wouldn't be a problem is because the sites made it seem like there was 0% chance of it being a problem at all. Just made sense to think "They have a commerical on every 30 seconds, no way they're worried about any type of gov't crackdown, got big media/big sports leagues special interests, etc"

Patriots do have a lot of douche bags though.

If and when its over, I'm not going to say gg. Because as you say, they played their hand terribly. Imagine if their ad campaign was more of a tutorial about the skills you need to acquire to succeed at DFS....along with resources needed to get those skills. Instead, their ads practically screamed "GAMBLING!!!!". Now they want to play the skill card. Let's hope the industry has some really good lawyers who can lay out a case. The sites themselves don't seem to have anyone capable of doing so.

I'm interested to see how this fight goes. There's just too much money involved for these sites to just vanish. If every state or the feds decide they're gambling, it might actually be good for other forms of gambling like sports betting and online poker- DFS will be fighting for them inadvertently and the gov't will have to either make it all legal or none of it legal

None of it legal sounds about right.

According to the Post the NFL is backing off, not a good sign.

No the post is an actual paper and what they report is generally true. The just sensationalise it a bit...I guess there is still time to stop it. The main way is if the doj thinks the case is tough to win or if it's wildly unpopular (but they obviously don't care about popularity much unless it will hurt their power long run)

DK has hired powerhouse NY lawyer Randy Mastro to handle the case,what exactly can he do? And has our preening phony schmuck Gov.Andy Cuomo issued a statement yet.I know he's very busy being the bottom boy for the green and casino lobbies, but surely he has to comment one way or the other.

[QUOTE=BillyPhelan;48643584]DK has hired powerhouse NY lawyer Randy Mastro to handle the case,what exactly can he do?

They have also hired David Boies,rake is gonna go waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay up.

Got emails from DK and FD about assemblyman Marc Levine wants to ban dfs in California.

thread needs more protesting imo

http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/...-daily-fantasy

NY Post wrong again

https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...raftkings.html

DK's legal injunction has a few interesting details, but mostly same old DFS rhetoric. They are claiming that the AG "misread" NY gambling laws, DFS is a skill game that is not based on chance or the outcomes of sporting events, and that AG has bullied their payment processors to stop accepting users from NY. DK also complained that they weren't notified about being investigated in NY.

month of Sept. - "DraftKings ads have aired a skull-clutching 16,259 times over the course of the month, which works out to 135 hours and 25 minutes of 30-second spots. That's more than five and a- alf days, or a full work week, of commercial messaging that's been hammered out in the span of a 29-day period..."

"FanDuel ads have aired 9,463 times since Sept. 1. That translates to nearly 79 hours of total airtime, or a little north of three days..."

http://adage.com/article/media/draft...el-spe/300658/

You aren't going to find @OpReport or Chris Grove share these articles as they do not support detractors of DFS:

Department of Justice will not weigh in on DraftKings, FanDuel controversy


Why Fantasy-Sports Sites Can Ignore Schneiderman for Now

Does DFS need some kind of ranking/handicap system where average players get a few extra lineups per entry like strokes on a golf course?

lolz

Yeah that was pretty awesome

I think they should emphasize the predetermined prizes argument. That makes it more like a contest than a "bet". In reading the coverage the New York Times keeps using the term bet to refer to an entry fee (probably because their main author on this subject has never played fantasy sports.).

Also, the main reason sports betting is not allowed at the federal level is the prospect of game fixing. In DFS with all the lineup combinations such scenarios cannot occur.

I've sent emails to both my senators, house representative, and attorney general. I encourage you all to do the same.

I will try to summarize what I think Lerz was trying to state, but was doing a very poor job of doing by using terrible analogies:

The fact that 1% of players win all the money does not necessarily mean that DFS is a skill game. This is because a small portion of the players could be playing a ton more entries than the average player. Obviously, this does not mean that the players playing 500 entries in a tournament are long time winners, but for the above stat they would be "winning" most of the money, just because they have a large percentage of all the entries. Therefore, just because 1% of all players win all the money, does not necessarily mean it's a skill game (many of those 1% of players could be overall losers).

As an easy hypothetical: If I and 99 other players enter a tourney and only buy 1 entry, and Player X enters that same tourney with 10,000 entries, Player X will almost always "win all the money." So the above stat would be true. 1% of the players won all the money, even though Player X is likely losing money overall (he won't win first every week, he's buying too many entries, etc).

You can always buy more lineups. These two things do not compare.

Isn't ignoring the problem in the first place part of the reason DK/FD are in this mess to begin with, also Joe, amongst all of your industry shilling has it ever occured to you that perhaps the AG has a specific reason to target only FD/DK with these allegations? FD/DK were ordered to turn over records, evidence, etc to the AG, just wondering if you can admit that there could there be a slight, albeit remote chance that that investigation found something amiss as a reasoning for this C&D order?