They never got any support, Pokerstars should of been pouring millions into them every year since Black Friday.

That's a good point. And it begs the question, why wouldn't they even put up the money to keep PPA afloat? They stand to benefit more than anyone.

If that's not a sign that regulated poker in the USA has no hope in the future, then I don't know what is. If Stars doesn't see enough value in stepping in helping them out then you know there is no hope.

I don't really blame them for not putting any money into it, though. Putting money into it up to this point didn't even get one state with shared ROW player pools. If even one state had access to the ROW player pool Pokerstars would put a lot more money into this situation.

There's not enough money in ring fenced player pools to lobby for regulated poker. If Pokerstars were smart they would accept USA players in states with no anti-poker laws and force them to make deposits and withdrawals using cryptocurrencies. That way they wouldn't be in violation of UIGEA by interacting with banks directly. If the government passes a new bill, then stop accepting USA players again.

Nothing in UIGEA addresses crypto. That's basically what WPN is doing right now. They're disabling a lot of player's debit card option for deposits and forcing them to use crypto only.

I gotta take you to task on this bit of revisionism .... You're trying to make a distinction between opposing amendments to a bill and opposing the bill. The amendments weren't up for a vote, they were in the bill. You can't split them, so you can't split hairs here.

"we support advancement of this bill in any form that assures consumer protections."

That is plain English, and that is NOT what he PPA did

https://twitter.com/ppapoker/status/743128094383411200

https://twitter.com/ppapoker/status/745367443011342337

https://twitter.com/ppapoker/status/768472768014905345

And if this is anything but an impationed plea on behalf of Pokerstars, well it's not so let's forget the if's


Whether or not any of it made any difference at all is probably moot, and however you want to spin it is also moot. You're still pissing on us and telling us its raining.

If you're not at all willing to address the perception of the players, I don't know what else there is to say

There is a reason Pokerstars isn't supporting the PPA

Pokerstars doesn't care about poker in the USA, they want casino, poker is not a money maker today, it's that simple

The amendment was a recent addition. It could have been removed. It was added with hope that the Morongo would acquiesce. Instead, the Morongo doubled down, and with good reason.

PPA had every reason to push the bill that had already earned solid support. For one, we sunk a lot of money and activism into it.

The CA bill without the bad actor clause failed ONLY because of Pechanga and Aqua Caliente opposition. The one with the bad actor clause failed (by a much larger margin) because of Morongo opposition and because it had no momentum at all.

CA iPoker continues to go nowhere today not because of PPA, Poker Stars, or any other non-tribal stakeholder, but because the tribes do not agree on how to move forward.

That calvinayre article is terrible

Really? One million members? Yeah, right. Only 80,000 facebook follows though – doesn't seem to compute, especially once you weed out the Russian bots, enemies of poker and general hangers-on.

I simply don't believe the PPA's membership is anywhere near 1m. The NRA only claims ~5 million ffs. The PPA's claim is a joke. The PPA is a joke.

Wow, this is really sad. I mean, the PPA has done such a stellar job listening to its members, taking their input, reaching out to willing activists just looking for some direction, directly engaging members at the local level, helping start legislation in the 40+ states being ignored completly ....

oh, wait

nevermind

Here is the sad fact, the PPA is simply not the organization that the players need, or want for that matter. But not just that, it has no desire to be that organization.

Grassroots

I think I know what that is. That is when a completely unknown microdonk with a passion for the game in a state where it is a felony to play, sets out virtually alone to write a poker bill (PPA could have written it for him, or given guidance, or anything really, but they declined) and see it introduced in his state legislature.

The only problem is that completely uknown player doesn't have much reach. He doesn't have the e-mail addresses of 10K Washington State players (PPA does), so mass mailing of his effort was out of the question.

And he only has a few hundred Twitter followers (PPA has 22K, still not much, but a retweet now and then would spread the reach) so that reach is limited too.

He didn't have any money, and yet he got a legislator he had never met introduce his bill anyway

The PPA didn't lift a finger to help this man until that bill was introduced in the state house. And even, that help was pitiful

This is for sure an instance where the PPA could have demonstrated definitively that they were a grassroots player organization, rather tha Pokerstars' shills. They declined

Would we have gotten a bill passed if they help? I doubt it, nowhere does it happen first try. But we might have gotten a public hearing, which would have been HUGE. And there would have been momentum (which there is none now, and the Dems control both chambers again, so its unlikely we can get anywhere. In fact, it's still getting worse in WA, we can't even play for playchips on Pokerstars now FFS)

I like you Rich, I respect you, and I know you take a lot of **** on these pages. But that is the unfortunate role of the guy in charge of player relations for a group that doesn't give a **** what the players think or want.

Give us the PPA the players want, the players deserve, and I'll go fundraising for you. Walk into any cardroom in my state and you'll see players throwing $20 around like they are pennies. I could talk them each out of one of those $20 if I had a product to sell.

Be that product

Let's look at this, because this is what you have to face in every state dominated by Tribal gaming. If you're going to say there is no solution in CA, then there is no solution in all the other Tribal gaming states, and your nonsense about dominoes falling is exposed for being just that

I can tell you, what the Tribes in WA are unwilling to do, and that is create a new gaming market in which a foreign company will make all the money

So unless you can come up with solutions that don't do that, forgetaboutit

*Hint: Lottery

Last time I'll beat you up about this one, I promise ....

"We will support the bill in any form that provides player protections"

"We do not support the bill in this form, because ..... (nothing about lack of player protections, it simply excludes Stars)"

Do you see the contradiction yet?

Do you?

Because Stars doesn't believe an in a longterm future for online poker. They want to get their customers into casino games instead and know there's no way for that to happen in the US in the near future.

Just like Curtis said, I respect you a lot Rich. But come on, tribes are federally regulated entities who have compacted with statewide legislators LONG before Stars became interested in the U.S. regulated market.

Tribes aren't going anywhere and neither are their gambling interests.

I agree with pretty much everything curtinsea has said.

---

To Gin 'n Tonic: The CalvinAyre article agrees with your sentiment. The truth about PPA's "1 million activists" is revealed in that piece further down.

I can't really blame them.

How much money did they spend on lobbying for poker up to this point? Only to get a couple hundred players to log on in the states where it is legal. If that's all 7 years and millions in lobbying gets is 200 players online, then what would be the point in continuing on? Plus, poker boomed in South America. Which, kinda replaced the American player pool and made it nowhere near as important for the company to regain them in order to make a profit.

It seems Amaya only bought the site because they thought they would be back in the USA by now and are changing their business plan, as a result. I've seen people speculate that they want to sell the site now. Maybe, if that happens a more poker friendly company will purchase it. At which point, lobbying efforts will commence, but it will require the sale of the site it seems.

I'm sure Amaya never anticipated to have to BEG to come back to the USA and generate billions in taxes for the government. It's hilarious a company has to come to the states and beg to pay taxes.

Only in America. Is it any wonder why we're trillions in debt with that type of management?

The PPA for poker players is like Hillary Clinton for the Democrats. Pretty much self appointed, and not well thought of by the group they claim to represent.

Nice posts Curtinsea

They helped pokerstars block Indian casinos that were on verge of opening California sites several times cause of the “pokerstars can’t operate in Cali until only after we have run our own sites for 5 years” clause.

I see that PokerStars is being mentioned a lot, and I have some problems with the way they operate. Two examples:

1. They pulled the rug out from under players after promises had made to them based on what they had already done in the drive to make it to Supernova Elite.

2. "Poker News" is not an independent company covering poker stories. It is owned by PokerStars. I didn't know that until recently and a lot of players go to that site for information. I find that very troubling.

3. I would definitely like to see one or more big sites in the US, but I would hope that if that happens, PokerStars, and everyone else, would be given no more than an equal chance to gain customers. I don't like the idea of an operation on the Aisle of Man that's been doing some shady things telling us how to run poker.

Just as US ingenuity came up with Google, Microsoft and SpaceX, we can do the same thing with poker. Maybe there could even be small niche players, for example a site specializing in SNGs. Starting from scratch instead of trying to be the next PokerStars could lead in come interesting directions.

Finally, one more issue. I think that the trend toward "crypto only" is a horrible idea. You can not force technology on people that are not ready for it. There are still people that don't own a computer, in fact, many US Senators have never used one.

If you told people tomorrow that we are switching to only driverless car a year from now, a lot of people wouldn't do it. If you see the faces of some of the people in driverless car videos, you know what I mean. A lot of those people were scared.

As to crypto, I've talked to a lot of people in their 20s and 30s, including college students, that have no idea what "Bitcoin" is. My wife has a degree and has worked in the medical field for 48 years. She sits at a computer with two monitors and a phone and troubleshoots medical record issues in several US states.

My wife is smart and she for the most part keeps up with the cutting edge of technology, especially in medicine. She could tell you a lot about different types of cancer and the treatment outcomes, and is aware of other medical treatments and outcomes as well, and now she works on the adminstrative side.

When I asked what she thought about Bitcoin, she said, "What's that?" There is no way that you're going to get millions of poker players to switch to crytocurrencies anytime soon. FWIW, I won't switch largely because of the wild value swings of a Bitcoin.

WPN has already been making the switch to strictly crypto.

I wouldn't be surprised if this partially attributes to their overlays in MTTs. As they've disabled a lot of player's debit card deposit option in recent months.

Switching to crypto strictly is the only move that would save an unregulated site in my opinion. When you keep the debit card option open you violate UIGEA and give the government a reason to shut you down. If there are no transactions with banks then there is no law being broken.

Did you intend to post this in some other thread?

I thought Poker Clif's post was relevant to the thread, but maybe you're referring to the crypto-talk at the end of Post #88.

I'm not very informed on cryptocurrency, but imo Poker Clif's other points (#1,#2,#3) are extremely valid and represent a competent understanding of ongoing issues related to the regulated online poker/gambling industry.

Poker Clif's post is a bit out of left-field for this thread, but it does touch upon issues at least tangentially related to the thread, so in the immortal words of Mills Lane "I'll allow it!".

But if the post leads to a lengthy derail of this thread's main thrust, it may be deleted in the future.

How's that for being wishy-washy?

So long as he doesn't start telling us about his wife's favorite color or what she had for lunch I'll live with it.

As they should, considering that being hung out to dry used to be the punishment for treason. Always appreciated Curtinsea's legislative posts but truly enjoyed seeing him & the rest holding Rich accountable for his nauseating spin.

I still have mine that I paid for in their store with FPPs.

So the dream was to go back to the days when PartyPoker and PokerStars could be used by US players. That ship has sailed. Even if it were permitted here, regulation by the Feds and the states would mean that it wouldn't be the same.

In the beginning I was hopeful. That sorta died after I sent in my money, but never got a cap. But then I talked to my friends and acquaintances. None of them really understood online poker or gave a damn about it. We were never going to get many politicians interested in it.

I'm not as disappointed in the PPA as many in this thread seem to be. I've watched videos of state legislative bodies in Michigan and other states. I think that their representatives do a very good job of making the case for online poker.

My only problem is that those hearings usually don't include the testimony of players. I'll never forget one of the post on these forums that I read shortly after Black Friday. It was a single mother wondering what she was going to do because her job was playing online while her kids were in school.

I spent two years as a live-in caregiver for my mother-in-law. She usually was asleep by 1900 and I played evening tournaments. I didn't get paid much by the family so poker was a part-time job to make some money (I play full-time now.) A lot of people don't understand that poker is a real job, that people actually feed their families that way. Legislators need to understand this.

Played poker with Mills Lane at the MGM on the night he reffed the Tyson - McNeely fight. He picked up his chips and said "have to go to work", could have left them on the table and might not have missed his blinds.

What about the safety of the ports though?

lol, ask Peter King, who caved on attaching the UIGEA to the Ports Bill because he put America Frist !