[IMG]http://ejad.best.********/java/population/images/food_chain.jpg[/IMG]

fyp

Weren't motions due to be filed yesterday?

Nothing on pacer. It's like the boy who cried wolf with this FTP filing. Two one week extensions since the PokerStars MTD, and they still haven't filed. Strange since we know it's already written. So what's the problem? Maybe they ran out of our money to pay their lawyers? Ifrah must be very disappointed.

My guess is guys like Durrr and some of the other pros at FTP aren't all that interested in running a multinational poker site.

It's not like they just write a check and then FTP whirrrs in the back of the room like a perpetual motion machine churning out money.

Just because someone is a good poker player doesn't mean they have the skill or desire to run a business. Plus, I obviously am not privy to durrrs finances, but if you think the guy just has hundreds of millions laying around to pay players back and start up FTP, I think you'd be sorely mistaken.

Then, even if he did, he'd have to make the assessment that buying FTP is the BEST thing he could do with those hundreds of millions, which, again, I highly doubt.

Anyone else have that hunch that today and tomorrow are going to be epic?

I have this feeling every day for a year now....

Can someone please explain to me who the hell Matt Glantz is and why what he says should be viewed with any more interest than posters here? Who are his presumed sources? Or is this just a way to get hits on his blog? If he has reliable sources, I'm definitely open ears, but as of now it just seems like another person who won't name names to make anything credible.

That's from the 2010 version of the Reid 'Poker' bill, and is probably not even in the top 3 of it's brushes with the constitution, but commercial gambling regulation has always been treated as a state policing power so the constitution can be ran over.

In fact, it was Reid as Nevada gambling commissioner that ran over constitution to push the mob out of Las Vegas, citing simple associations with criminals to strip licenses, etc.

The problem this bill may have before the courts is that it can't pretend to be both State police regulation and a Federal regulation of interstate commerce, but even believing that this section of the bill will get struck down wouldn't be very reassuring to a buyer, given the length of time involved to get it stuck down.

The flip side to that is Reid may not be the problem at all, since he and Steve Wynn are close friends, most argue that he likely isn't, but even if that language is stripped from the 2010 bill, we already know that Caesars/MGM were successful in getting similar language added to the proposed bills in CA and NJ.

While PokerStars was able to essentially write the intrastate poker bill in NV, if i-poker goes State-by-State, or Reid's 2012 bill doesn't bulldoze the constitution, these other licensing States could refuse (as a policing action) to allow their players access to sites that use assets which operated in the US after the UIGEA.

Which points to the solution Glantz implied, Caesars becomes the new owner of PokerStars (perhaps MGM could acquire FTP) and all of that pesky language in the NJ/CA bills would likely disappear.

Why guess? We know for certain that Durrrr did put together a group of 'friends' interested in buying FTP, which is how he ended up under an NDA, but the deal fell apart for reasons he couldn't say because of that NDA.

The interview where he talked about it should still be available on Subject Poker.

why would we?

Has this been posted yet?

http://pokerstarsus.tumblr.com/post/...ull-tilt-poker

That article says nothing new and is entirely misleading in its title

nope, but the site doesn't seem legit

the tweets from Barnes are old stuff and were discussed already ... plus that

seems just plain wrong ... didn't heard something like this and didn't find it.

this 'news site' is probably just am affiliate who tries to generate clicks

I totally admit to grunching a bit here, but I just want to make sure I understand...
some people are suggesting that it would be a good idea for FTP assets to be purchased by a group of poker players? Would this be because it worked out so well when FTP was owned by poker players instead of businessmen before?

...Or that it would be a good idea for a B&M interest to purchase the assets instead of PokerStars? Would this be because any B&M interest would be absolutely understanding and forthcoming in seeing that worldwide FTP accounts, to the tune of $330M+, would be repaid as part of their generous offer to buy some software?

Seriously?

I am more lost than ever in this mess. Seems like they were close to a deal....now going through all sorts of legal issues and I have no clue how they impact anything or if it means they are closer or even further apart in making a deal.

And no reliable cliffs lately.

cliffs: nobody knows a damn thing about anything thats going on. Matt Glantz is very close to being the new Chinamaniac.

Somewhere ProSpace is saying "I'm a conspiracy theorist, am I?"

He said stuff I disagreed with too, but he was consistent that this whole crackdown on online poker was done on behalf of casino interests wanting to use the power of the federal government to grab market share they couldn't attain on their own. If any of this ends up correct, I'd say his "conspiracy" just turned into partial prophecy.

Not that it was all that far-fetched or hard to see to begin with. It is, afterall, what large corporate interests use state power and regulations for...to eliminate current competition and create barriers to entry into the market for future potential competitors.

EDIT: That's not to say i believe he's wrong if no casino interest buys any site, or that I believe in fact any site will be bought by B&M.

Why PokerStars is
buying Full Tilt Poker

Page 27, great article, nothing really new, but solid summary of where we are at now.

You're in the majority. This thread is a **** salad tossed with a mixture of pessimistic negativity, naive optimism, and blind speculation. Real news from reliable sources will come when it comes...

Actually there is something new in the article. What we learned from the article is that DOJ would have approved GBT deal if PS hadn't come with better offer. Obviously GBT deal was not very good for ROW players. But it is obvious that DOJ doesn't care as much about ROW players as their own citizens, so they didn't insist on full repayment for ROW players at the beginning of the negotiation and only asked for it after PS showed up with better offer.

SDNY apparently agreed to it at some point, but I doubt that it ever got approval from AGUSA since any ROW player not paid in full could have filed a remission claim with AFMLS just as if they were a US victim of the same alleged fraud.

I've always believed that if/when online poker (and all online casino games) are legalized in the US, the first batch of licenses would be granted to established, big name B&M casino's and their corporations, i.e. Ceasars Entertainment. I don't see Poker Stars or Full Tilt "being allowed" to make it big in the US when the time comes if you know what I mean.

But I think they will argue that ROW players will be made whole through that RB deal GBT offered even though they probably know that deal sucks.

When was this written?

Wow, and it says Wynn sent his CFO to FTP after BF thinking about buying FTP... had no idea that happened...

And it says GBT was only going to pay $60M up front and then pay the DOJ the last $20M over a couple of years...

blah blah blah

So where are we at now? next week?

I heard James Holmes has 5k+ tied up on Full Tilt! But why did he choose a Batman movie and not the WSOP?