Not sure if lottery revenue is public knowledge or not but if it is you could compare pre uigea revenue to post uigea and post black friday. If poker really does have that big of a affect then you would see a noticeable difference in revenue after the uigea went into affect. I don't remember hearing the lotteries crying back in 2005 about poker taking revenue away from them back then and if poker really was I'm sure they would of made their voices heard.

I won't try and disagree with point 2 since it is very possible. Although I'm sure those people will still be able to find the $10 a week they blow on mega millions even if they are playing poker which leads me into your first point...

Regarding your first point people like the idea of taking $5 and turning it into 50 million. That isn't the same thing as taking $250 and playing a poker tournament and winning 100k. Sure people playing poker want to win money but it's a very different sensation. When people play the lottery they spend hours thinking about winning the mega millions and what they would do with the money which makes it worth spending the $5 to them. Even though the odds are terrible it is still a chance that they might win so when they are getting yelled at by their boss, collections agency's won't stop calling, car broke down again, etc.... they can just imagine winning and how great it would be without all the problems in their life. This is also the reason why the lotto's can get away with such ****ty payouts and cash options. All the lotto does is sell tiny bits of hope to people. Poker does not give this same sensation which is why people will always play the lottery even if they still have poker and if push came to shove and if someone only had $5 a week to either play poker with or the lottery I bet most people would pick the lottery.

You could be right, except that:

• You are probably not one of the people who has to be convinced (meaning you are not an elected official);
• If adding the i-poker in doesn't produce a significant increase to revenue, quite a few states won't even be bothered to do so. I think the profit of the NYS lottery is about $3B per year. Revenues from i-poker are dwarfed by that figure.

Illegal gambling is ten times larger than legal gambling in the US. Federal legislation that will shut down a chunk of the current offshore US-facing i-gambling, while licensing and regulating i-poker, which creates jobs, new corporate tax revenues and direct site tax revenues as well as increases foot traffic to b&m casinos (which generates more tax revenues), will put more money in state coffers. Besides which, states can be opted out of i-poker to protect their lotteries if they so choose, although I have no doubt that they will quickly discover that they are missing the boat.

But make no mistake: State lottery commissions are not worried about the net effect of licensed i-poker on total state revenues. They are only worried about the possible negative effect on total lottery revenues. They are protecting their ass, not the state's fiscal health.

Sadly I don't think me and you being NYS residents will have to worry about this since I don't see us getting online poker here anytime in the foreseeable

omg omg omg

Bingo! But since the lottery money is going to pay teachers, firefighters, police expect them to use those good folks with a lot of ohhhhh pleeaaasee think of the chiilllddrreenn.

Rooting hard for this for those of you who may be in opt-in states! (Im in MA, we're not opting in)

One time

Oh come ooooon don't say that

I'm in Mass. also Letsgambool. Is it definite that we wouldn't opt in? Is it because of Grossman and the Lottery?

The info in the op tracks with what I've been hearing for a couple weeks from a few different sources. This isn't just random rumor.

Damn it, I was tempering my expectations, and just letting this roll off as more rumor. Now I'm excited.

Debbie Downer predicts even IF something is attached at some point it will not survive into any final passed legislation.

I'd like to be able to play online legitimately, but I've given up on the government entirely. I just don't see it happening, and if so, it's not like we're going to see Stars back in the US any time soon, if ever, and anything less is <yawn>.

I have spoken with the author of this article and she says this may or may not be a rumor. She is quoting the lobbyist who made these remarks but won't share any more with me.



This is still in the rumor zone imo.

gtfo

Let's please not hijack this thread with arguments that have been swirling for years now.

But then why are you so (correct me if I'm wrong) pessimistic?

Serious question.

I mean let's say the proposition is more likely true than not, Reid would not just get it in for a flip, would he?

My view has changed in the last week or so, but I'm still not bullish.

PX, I disagree that State lottery directors are looking only at the possible negative effect of ipoker on lottery revenues. They are not monolithic in their approach.

Rather, the views I have heard expressed over the past couple of years are much more similar to those of B&M casinos, their perceived competition.

State lotteries which are looking ahead a bit are looking to expand into and within the online arena. They were first to get the DOJ to back off the Wire Act to get online access. They often view online opportunities to offer "other games" as a natural expansion of their "easy access" gaming. Why should they cede the field to B&M operators ?

Haha, an old colleague in the senate told me to "watch the news this week" super cryptically on Friday. I wonder if this is what he was talking about, he knows I play poker. He works for a freshman Senator NOT on the committee though, fyi. I'm probably in about the same boat as Karak. These conference committees can fall apart faster than ScreaminAsian can make a Congressman are aliens with hearts of soft metals joke.

This.

The rumors definitely exist. I'm not always privy to the inner workings of the negotiations, but from what I'm hearing they hadn't broached the topic yet. So any rumors could be defense playing trying to make any Reid effort more difficult.

I think if a Federal licensing bill gets passed lotteries would push to opt-out even if the $$$ from a Federal licensing bill would increase state coffers overall.

I think they are opposing a Federal licensing bill because they dont think handing control over to big casino interests is the best way to maximize lottery and state $$$$.

They arent opposed to online poker, but they want to be able to control who and how its offered in their state as much as possible, not just take a tiny cut from a Federal pie where none if it goes to the lotteries.

Any idea what this bill will look like?

but don't the states, especially the smaller ones realize the liquidity issue in segregated pools? sure they want to maximize revenue for the state and if they can be convinced that ipoker would be an add on as opposed to cannibalizing lottery revenue then certainly opting into a nation wide poker network is the better route. They wouldn't even need to worry about the overhead of creating their own regulations and actually providing the service.

Sadly, I think you underestimate the stupidity and narrow mindedness of your average state level bureaucrat.

That having been said, I am trying to reign in my hope so as not to be disappointed but God I hope this works.