Venetian/Las Vegas Sands testifies before Congress for a national online poker ban - Page 5 - Poker News

Two Plus Two Forums Poker News & Discussion News, Views, and Gossip

Venetian/Las Vegas Sands testifies before Congress for a national online poker ban

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 5 of 5

1 2 3 4 5

Page 5 of 5

1 2 3 4 5

12-13-2013 , 04:57 PM

#101

decoctor

newbie

Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 43

I think Sands endgame is to have legislation written so that somehow they willl be part of a group that will have a monopoly in online gaming. Usually the people that scream the loudest have some ulterior motive behind the scenes holding their cards to their chest. Few healthy donations to campaigns and super-pacs here and there, then all of a sudden MGM, Ceasars, Wynn, and Sands will be the only entities allowed to operate online gambling in the US.

Quote

12-13-2013 , 05:40 PM

#102

ChoakMyDee

old hand

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 1,768

Wow, Abboud was caught lying. Against having casinos on phones but failed to mention they have phone gambling at the Venetian LOL...what a POS. I hope the other representatives were aware of that and not just Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Long and Mr. Barton.

I really hope that the word gets out and many more people boycott the Venetian.

Quote

12-14-2013 , 07:47 AM

#103

RigCT

adept

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 787

Joe Barton comes across really well in that Youtube vid. He's obviously a big fan of poker. Thanks for posting.

Abboud seems scummy/slick to me.

Quote

12-14-2013 , 09:25 AM

#104

Doc T River

Master of the Edit Line

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 13,059

Quote:

Originally Posted by p2ryan

Can someone explain how the use of the mobile app in lets say reno doesn't violate the wire act? Is the wire act only over state lines.

Wire Act covers interstate (over state line) betting.

Quote

12-14-2013 , 09:27 AM

#105

Doc T River

Master of the Edit Line

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 13,059

Quote:

Originally Posted by RikaKazak

I know it won't do any good, but I emailed the Venetian today. comments@venetian.com

Basically just said, "Because your organization is anti online gambling, I will never step foot in your building again. Congrats on losing a customer today."

I know it will do NOTHING, but sure made me feel better. (and it's true, I used to play the deep stack donkaments all the time)

I would have left out the never as circumstances can change. Personally, I won't step foot in the building as long as Adelson is alive. Not that I said that to them.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I think a nice course of action would be contacting the members of the committee and asking them about Abboud's testimony and if he didn't lie to them when it came to mobile applications they offer the public.

Last edited by Doc T River; 12-14-2013 at 09:32 AM.

Quote

12-17-2013 , 04:43 PM

#106

Rich Muny

Former PPA VP

Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 28,236

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChoakMyDee

He answered about the in-room app when the question was about that AND the Cantor app marketed by Venetian "for all smartphones, tablets and PCs (that) allows you to wager anywhere in Nevada"

Quote

12-18-2013 , 06:53 AM

#107

Richas

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 3,440

This is a cross post from legislation. I thought some here might want to see how much rot Sands and Adelson are talking:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richas

There has been some more research on Problem Gambling rates, this time it is England.

You may recall that the UK rates from the Gambling Prevalence Survey were
1999 - 0.6%
2007 - 0.6%
2010 - 0.9%
and that the seeming rise in 2010 was at the boundaries of statistical significance on one measure (DSM-IV) but not significant under the other measure (PGSI).

You may also recall that we recently got the figures for Scotland which was 0.7% in 2012, exactly the same as in 1999.

Well the England figures are out today (the questions got moved to a Health Survey rather than the dedicated Gambling Survey).

here is the link to the survey
http://www.hscic.gov.uk/searchcatalo...&returnid=1685

Here is the PDF of the gambling chapter
https://catalogue.ic.nhs.uk/publicat...-behaviour.pdf

In England for 2012:

The PGSI measure FELL to 0.6% for men and 0.1% for women - about 0.35% overall
The DSM-IV measure fell to 0.8% for men and 0.2% for women - about 0.5% overall.

So next time you hear an expert saying that access to online gambling will increase Problem Gambling, or you hear Adelson claim it will be a disaster for society - remember that in England and Scotland we have had fully legal access to online gambling since it started and over that time it now seems likely that Problem Gambling rates have fallen.

Even if you get in to the obvious problems with surveys and different screens for PG - that the screens catch slightly different groups and that the numbers that are Problem Gamblers are small as it is so rare that these small changes may be sample issues - Plus the potential that shifting to a health survey rather than a dedicated Gambling survey altered the sample a bit...it is absolutely clear that the rise of Internet Gambling has not increased Problem Gambling in the UK, nor has the big increase in advertising for gambling and online gambling in particular. If anything Problem Gambling has fallen over the period (just as it has fallen in the US as it went from 3 states with casinos to 33 states with casinos).

Next Spring we will get a further analysis of the Scottish and English figures, combining the results and doing some analysis of it but the jury is in - Internet Gambling does not increase Problem Gambling.

Quote

12-18-2013 , 02:06 PM

#108

p2ryan

adept

Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 821

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc T River

Wire Act covers interstate (over state line) betting.

I know this but DOJ clarified the wire act o ly pertaining to sports betting which led to all these states pursuing online gambling in their states. Also states have began discussing pacts.

Quote

12-18-2013 , 03:18 PM

#109

Doc T River

Master of the Edit Line

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 13,059

Quote:

Originally Posted by p2ryan

I know this but DOJ clarified the wire act o ly pertaining to sports betting which led to all these states pursuing online gambling in their states. Also states have began discussing pacts.

If you knew that, why did you ask if the wire act was only over state lines?