Sorry if this is not thread-worthy as it is just another speculation but what do you think U.S. market would be without Ps, FTP and and Party?

atm, there are 3 states that approved online poker bills - Nevada, Delaware and NJ.
According to Pokernews, there is a bill upcoming in Illinois

Out of these four, two are strongly opposing the return of the market leaders. NJ opposes Pokerstars purchase of a casino while Illinois has a "bad actor" clause that:

Here is the bill.

Ok, Atlantic city feels Pokerstars would be bad for their business but Illinois says clearly it is all about the money. Why would they oppose more business coming into the state?

Will other states oppose Pokerstars, Fulltilt Poker and Party Poker entering their market, as well?

Party would be eligible in 2016, which is probably before they have cards in the air. It's also important to remember these are just proposals and subject to backroom negotiations and changes.

Stars has basically no chance of doing business in the US market anytime between now and when hell freezes over, but Party and others who didn't need the DOJ to shut them down should be fine.

Quinn suggested that money from new Illinois casinos could help pay for schools and the state's nearly $100 billion in pension debt.

one
hundred
billion

edit....
Good info in the LEgislation forum as Hood says in the next post.. Just in case the mods don't move this thread...
Post #5
The bill:
Creates a Division of Internet Gaming (DIG)

and confers authority on the DIG to make rules, "including but not limited to":

(1) the types of Internet games to be offered;
(2) price points for Internet games;
(3) player fees and percentage of rake commission or other fee for Internet games; <---- Looks like the state sets the rake?

This is being discussed in legislation:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/57...-bill-1308059/

h
e
l
p

naw, just depends on how the casino moguls play their cards and how the lobbyists work ... all the 'bad actor' clauses can be explained in different ways.

PS has a deal w/ the DoJ that says clearly:

this is tricky, because it only says explicit 'Federal Government' but nothing about State Laws. But on the other side, it says that PS did nothing wrong.

like eric hollreiser said


and btw: Party made also a deal w/ the DoJ (this Dik**** paid some hundred million or am i wrong) ... and the others poker rooms only left the us market b/c the big 3 were shutdown.


imo it's also wrong to say AC don't wanna PS. The casino company fear PS because, when they enter, other rooms don't need to go online. so the pay a million of bucks to the AGA (& others) and they in turn pay the politicians ... but others don't care who generate the taxes (e.g. Lesniak who was quite happy PS was interested to enter AC), so PS isn't a big underdog

under circumstances PS could even enter nevada. either via a combined playerpool (intrastate) or directly. like the 'Caesars wanted to sell PS the WSOP' story showed, some companies wouldn't mind to deal with 'the enemy' as long as they can outplay the others (caesars with all the debts is maybe more desperate, but other companies could also reach out their hands for a big friend)

it will be interesting, when california will allow online poker (a lot of parties involved) and what the 'native american tribes' plan to do. so it is a long way to go.

this thread should be closed.