Quote:
Originally Posted by D33P
- this goes against the principle that was the foundation for the rome agreement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyBass
This is what puzzles me . Its just so nonsense.
4 Countries have been negotiating for years to make a shared pool based on the principle , its European Union and Regulated market + only players PHISICALLy in those countries
could play ,
Ok just to expand a bit on this, I believe there's a misunderstanding here about what segregated liquidity was really about.
In France and Spain, it is nothing to do with where the player is located, and everything to do with wanting all gambling activity falling within the purview of the local regulator. The regulators explictly drafted law that permitted international play on local licensed sites. They knew this when forging the shared liquidity agreement in July. They want PokerStars to open up the pool internationally!
Here's the key thing - the reason why they wanted "closed liquidity" is so that
all activity fell under their licensing. They didn't want a French player playing with someone who was licensed in, say, Malta, or Isle of Man, or Curacao. This makes sense: They cannot verify how stringent the regs are in all other jurisdictions in the world. Do they have appropriate AML? Software testing? Player verification? We don't want our citizens playing online poker with someone licensed elsewhere, where they could be in some sketchy place that allows the player to use cheating software or do unchecked P2P transfers.*
But they
want people internationally to play on their site That's just even more people falling under their watchful eye, more people falling under their idea of what regulation should be, and more obviously tax money.
So with the July 2017 agreement, they've said - [i]ok yep, these 4 regulations are mostly on the same page, we have the same kinds of regs, good AML checks and player verification, so as long as a player is licensed in one of us four, then that's all good.[i] Again, it has nothing to do with the location of the player. If someone from, say, Brazil or Germany plays on our license, then that's great - we know it is safe (because its either under our regs, or a fellow July 2017 regs), and the player pool grows.
That's why PokerStars opening internationally is not "against the principal" of shared liquidity regulations in any way.
[* There are less altruistic reasons for closed liquidity as well, i don't pretend that this was the only reason. It was, however, the public justification]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Federer20
Netherlands isn't regulated, think the UK and Belgium are
Netherlands is hopefully regulating in 2019. Some in the industry have even suggested to me that they think there's a chance NL will form part of the Southern European market, not dot-com.
As it stands now, operators have to be very careful if they continue operating in the market, they cannot advertise in NL, use the dutch language of dutch website, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anuj22
Quote:
Originally Posted by PumaPerez
thats .EU installator.
You're probably getting redirected on download.