'Black Friday' and associated fallout megathread

[Pascal-lf]

Far as I'm aware US players haven't done anything illegal by playing? Sites have broken the law by accepting deposits/allowing withdrawls and for owning an illegal gambling business (unlicensed) operating within the US, but at least from the articles quoted on the FBI takedown notice and in the document floating about it says nothing about it being illegal to play on such a site?

 

[TheNoob]

'Sup Pas!

It definitely says "PlayerX bets XXX" in the hand histories. Thing is, I'm pretty sure the parties they're referring to in the legalese are the site owners, (Tilt, Stars, etc) and the banks, since that's what the actual UIGEA (or whatever the acronym is) concerns itself with.

I don't think the DOJ has the manpower to track down every player in the US either. Of course, the top hundred money winners might be a little easier to find… hell, they can just go to OPR and click on the top players names for Stars and Tilt. enterthewu19 has $1.9 million in earnings in the last two years so he might want to worry if he lives in the US… Me, I'm not gonna sweat the knock on the door about my remaining .59¢

This was my question, that is who are the persons "engaged in the business
of wagering".

If that is me (and not the banks as suggested), it seems to state pretty
clearly that the person is committing a federal crime by accepting funds as
a result of that wagering.

Being somewhat disinclined to commit a federal crime, I'm not too sure
that I would be looking forward to receiving a check cut by PSTARS.

What a stupid, stupid mess this is.

 

[Sven Deuceman]

im absolutely crushing the freerolls, for example only 400 people in canada freeroll when the usual amount is around 2k seems that the us player ban affected everyone.

i think most were having an issue with the old software directing to the .com register page. that's what happend to me until i went and got the uk software and now i'm not having any issues but yeah traffic is lo but i'm muckin brasillians and ukraines like crazy so i can't complain.

 

[beantownmaniac]

I doubt I'll ever be talking to the FBI regarding this, of course.








You never know. Will they U.S. Government be able to get access to members and their transactions? They always say ignorance of the law is no excuse. Here's a link with a brief explanation of the law.

http://pokerterms.com/uigea.html

 

[cardriverx]

We will get out money back.

Playing poker online was not illegal and is still not illegal. It's all about the banks accepting the checks and deposits and such. The $$$ will come, it may just take a while (3-6 months).

 

[onemorechance]

Dwan and Galfond both guarantee a million in payouts from FT and Stars

Tom Dwan @PhilGalfond agreed. I'll match it. Now gonna go get drunk and complain about the doj ;(
5:17 AM Apr 17th

PhilGalfond - Everyone is panicking too much (Tho I understand). We are extremely likely to be paid our $. I'll guarantee $1m in payouts from FTP/Stars

 

[Leo 50]

I am really pissed that I can't play poker online in the U.S.

Having said that I am really pissed at the FT executives who have tried to con their way into the U.S. poker community.
I want to play, they want me to play but if they really 'bought' a bank to get around the laws (as much as I hate the law it is a law here in the US) they are going to jail.

I was able to get into the FT store and will be trying to use my PP's for some t-shirts hats etc. They might be collectors items soon.

I guess it's live poker for me, retire the various site software on my computer and start searching for more home games.

I'll still be checking in here to see how everyone is doing.

Good luck everyone!

 

[DetroitJimmy]

Far as I'm aware US players haven't done anything illegal by playing? Sites have broken the law by accepting deposits/allowing withdrawls and for owning an illegal gambling business (unlicensed) operating within the US, but at least from the articles quoted on the FBI takedown notice and in the document floating about it says nothing about it being illegal to play on such a site?

That's because they don't want to make that part illegal. This way when the regulate, over rake, and over tax it, there won't be complaints the government is running an illegal monopoly gambling operation. Even though they will be and it WILL SUCK!

FTW

 

[ZeusCayman]

That's because they don't want to make that part illegal. This way when the regulate, over rake, and over tax it, there won't be complaints the government is running an illegal monopoly gambling operation. Even though they will be and it WILL SUCK!

FTW

Why is it that everyone thinks the government will "monopolize" online poker if they decide to allow us to play regulated only with Americans? Why wouldn't other companies outside of the Las Vegas casinos be around for competition?

I find it hard to believe that with all of the money on the table with online poker, that other companies wouldn't sprout up to share the market.

Am I missing something?

 

[Lofwyr]

Why is it that everyone thinks the government will "monopolize" online poker if they decide to allow us to play regulated only with Americans? Why wouldn't other companies outside of the Las Vegas casinos be around for competition?

I find it hard to believe that with all of the money on the table with online poker, that other companies wouldn't sprout up to share the market.

Am I missing something?

The government controlled process by which licenses are granted? They'll have their hand directly involved in how much competition there is in a regulated US online poker market. Obv this will directly relate to the amount of rake we'll pay and the bonuses offered. Main hope would have to be that the 3 or 4 major US B&M casinos don't go all oligarcy on us and agree to various prices (e.g. they choose not to compete as it were).

 

[rssurfer54]

I wish I was 21...

Okay, here is a real question. If I am going to be in Europe for the summer, will I be able to play when I am there?

 

[DetroitJimmy]

Why is it that everyone thinks the government will "monopolize" online poker if they decide to allow us to play regulated only with Americans? Why wouldn't other companies outside of the Las Vegas casinos be around for competition?

I find it hard to believe that with all of the money on the table with online poker, that other companies wouldn't sprout up to share the market.

Am I missing something?

They will because they are greedy. Even if it isn't a monopoly, It will be run by the few powerful(very rich) people who can afford to pay lobbyist. This country was founded on some great beliefs and they are all going down hill.

Pretty much nothing will be done to attack the real problems in this country. Resources being used to fight un-needed and useless wars on things(drugs,terror,and poker?WTF?) instead of countries that are doing us harm.

The USA is a country that spreads propaganda in the mainstream media nearly as much as those in the so called "axis of evil." Bush should be tried for war crimes for sending our troops in harms way! Where in the hell are the WMDs Georgy? Huh Colon Powel? Dick Cheyney?

Okay I've been off topic long enough on this rant. The point is the government will F%&* up online poker just as bad as anything else they try to "control." You better bet your ass the only reason they are doing this is to get their slice of the pie. And after the eat it quicker than they can get it they will demand more. In the end you will be lucky to be playing for half your pie.

Bastards!

Edit: The US government should try itself for the RICO act, LOL!

 

[viktor111]

this is at ultimatebet.com

Is it still safe to play Online Poker?

Sorry for my ignorance, im kinda new to this

 

[dj11]

I have read the releases several times, and each time "Illegal Online Gambling" has been mentioned.

Being a member here for years, and browsing untold numbers of threads about this issue, I have yet to find any that put online poker into the Illegal Online Gambling category.

This is a loophole in the law.

Unlicensed yes, it is, but not from want of trying to get licensed. Before a jury, how will the Gov make a business trying (and trying hard) to get monies owed TO the consumer look bad.

This has Supreme Court written between the lines. And just that fact means it will take years to get there and be resolved.

 

[Pascal-lf]

If they say that you can only operate legally in the US with a license, then unlicensed companies are illegal.

 

[cardriverx]

I have 6600 FTPs and I can now enter the store.

What should I buy?

 

[KerouacsDog]

I have 6600 FTPs and I can now enter the store.

What should I buy?

just looked, no drugs/alcohol/hookers, how about a T-shirt?

 

[ZeusCayman]

The government controlled process by which licenses are granted? They'll have their hand directly involved in how much competition there is in a regulated US online poker market. Obv this will directly relate to the amount of rake we'll pay and the bonuses offered. Main hope would have to be that the 3 or 4 major US B&M casinos don't go all oligarcy on us and agree to various prices (e.g. they choose not to compete as it were).

This is what anti-trust laws are designed to prevent. It is against the law to meet with your competitors and price fix.

As long as the licensing process is set up correctly, the only thing that should dictate how many companies offer online poker is how profitable the company is and whether they can stay open. Whether or not a company receives a license or not depends on whether they are abiding the regulations the government has put forth. Why in the world would they assign a set number and tell us that only that amount of online poker companies can be open at one time?

That makes no sense.

You all may feel that the world is collapsing around you, but many of the allegations against the government have become unreal. In all fairness, I love poker as much as anyone on here, but the big 3 knew what they were doing was shady.

In the end, this could be a great thing for online poker. With all of the support and effort the poker community is putting towards legalizing poker, we will be heard and things will change.

We are still a nation for the people, by the people, no matter what you want to tell yourselves. The only thing that has changed is that we have decided we don't like the corruption in DC and we're ready to change how we do things because, believe it or not, things didn't just get this way over night. It's been this way for a while.

 

[Gunner57]

Viktor,

If you have an account on one of the sites that was busted you can play if you can still get the software ect. If not you can go to a few sites that are still running in the US.

As a consumer it is a grey area if you are comitting any crimes by playing poker online. I think it is something you must decided to do at your own risk.

Personally I will keep playing online for as long as I can access my sites. More than likely however I will need to play more live going forward. (thankfully there is a card room about 1 mile away from my house) But I am going to have to build a live bankroll in order for me to play well as live play costs more $ in rake....

Anyone down for low stakes Home Game in San Diego?

 

[cardriverx]

just looked, no drugs/alcohol/hookers, how about a T-shirt?

lol, I think I'm gonna get the sunglasses and the deck of cards.


Don't think anything will ever become a collector's item though. We'll see.

 

[Pascal-lf]

This is what anti-trust laws are designed to prevent. It is against the law to meet with your competitors and price fix.

As long as the licensing process is set up correctly, the only thing that should dictate how many companies offer online poker is how profitable the company is and whether they can stay open. Whether or not a company receives a license or not depends on whether they are abiding the regulations the government has put forth. Why in the world would they assign a set number and tell us that only that amount of online poker companies can be open at one time?

That makes no sense.

You all may feel that the world is collapsing around you, but many of the allegations against the government have become unreal. In all fairness, I love poker as much as anyone on here, but the big 3 knew what they were doing was shady.

The government could easily set a high tax rate per $ raked though which would force rake on all sites up. Rake tends to converge at around the same levels - look at Stars/Tilt/UB/iPoker/Cake - as a natural occurance.

I doubt this will ever be a great thing for poker; if anything, it's more likely the government will ring fence American players and allow them to only play against Americans, as was seen in Washington recently. This would reduce traffic, the number of fish, the amount of choice, etc, and destroy one of the great things about online poker; that you can play with anyone around the world (pretty much)

 

[hawtshawt420]

@Detroitjimmy. I agree with you on war on poker but

 

[ZeusCayman]

The government could easily set a high tax rate per $ raked though which would force rake on all sites up. Rake tends to converge at around the same levels - look at Stars/Tilt/UB/iPoker/Cake - as a natural occurance.

I doubt this will ever be a great thing for poker; if anything, it's more likely the government will ring fence American players and allow them to only play against Americans, as was seen in Washington recently. This would reduce traffic, the number of fish, the amount of choice, etc, and destroy one of the great things about online poker; that you can play with anyone around the world (pretty much)

Why would the tax rate for an online poker campany be any different than any other casino?

Another thing that doesn't make sense to me. If you look at poker players individually like competing businesses, then when US companies compete with US companies, the winner gets taxed because the winner is making the money. When a US company loses out to an international company, the international company's country of origin taxes them and the US receives no money from the US company because they didn't profit. Why would poker be any different? Everyone says that the main reason the government shut down the Big 3 and made internet gambling illegal is because they weren't getting their piece of the pie, but they were getting all they should as long as poker players are paying their taxes. And if they aren't paying their taxes, then that's an issue of tax evasion, not an issue of poker.

 

[DetroitJimmy]

@Detroitjimmy. I agree with you on war on poker but

Looking at your screen name I see you may agree with the war on drugs too.

 

[Pascal-lf]

Why would the tax rate for an online poker campany be any different than any other casino?

Another thing that doesn't make sense to me. If you look at poker players individually like competing businesses, then when US companies compete with US companies, the winner gets taxed because the winner is making the money. When a US company loses out to an international company, the international company's country of origin taxes them and the US receives no money from the US company because they didn't profit. Why would poker be any different? Everyone says that the main reason the government shut down the Big 3 and made internet gambling illegal is because they weren't getting their piece of the pie, but they were getting all they should as long as poker players are paying their taxes. And if they aren't paying their taxes, then that's an issue of tax evasion, not an issue of poker.

What you're describing is protectionism, and it's got plenty of problems. The benefits of a free market are well discussed and work in practice - there are plenty of examples in practice, such as the EU.

American poker players losing money to players from other countries means money is leaving the country; that's not an issue of tax evasion. Regardless, they want to tax the companies as well as the players, and if they did that then they would make more than they are currently making. Over here, for example, we pay VAT (value added tax, 20% typically) on all our purchases, but companies still have to pay corporation tax on their revenue.