Apparantly The B&m Casinos Aren't Against Online Poker

[bull62 0]

Particularly interesting is the link towards the bottom of the article to the notes from the keynote. http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2007...ine-gaming.aspx

[Jennings7 0]

cliffnotes?

[drcossack 0]

cliffnotes?

Didn't really read in detail, but:

Oddly, the bill specifically protects state-run lotteries and horse racing, but not poker. And as a result, the legislation instantly devalued the stocks of foreign-based online gaming companies operating in the U.S., including Party Gaming, 888 Holdings, and CryptoLogic

[Amplifi3d 0]

More good news

[Chicago99 0]

Well, it came from the motley fool so some red flags should go up...though it doesn't seem as retarded as a lot of what they say (it mostly just summarizes things that are going on).

[Jeepster80125 0]

Particularly interesting is the link towards the bottom of the article to the notes from the keynote. http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2007...ine-gaming.aspx

Where does it state that B&Ms aren't against online poker?Didn't Harrah's gaming group give a bunch of money to support the UIGEA?I think I remember that Harrah's is one of the biggest campaign contributors to those who pushed the UIGEA through.I could be wrong, but I would love to be corrected.

[psujohn 0]

cliffnotes?

The article doesn't say much. From the convention panel we get:Harrah's and MGM would enter the online poker business if it's opened to the US (big surprise). Harrah's would use the WSOP branding (big surprise)D'Amato put the timetable for legalization of online poker at 12 to 18 months. Loveman put the over/under at 18 months to 2 years for poker, but perhaps 8 to 10 years for broader Internet gambling. The other panelists agreed that online poker would probably be legalized first, with other casino games to come further into the future. They all talk about leaving licensing/taxation up to the states. I'm pretty sure Maryland (nanny state at its best) would ban it outright if it came to that. Hell I can't even play an un-raked home game legally in this state.

[uncooper 1]

Against that backdrop, last week during G2E, Frank Fahrenkopf (president and CEO of the American Gaming Association, the D.C.-based lobbying outfit representing casino operators such as MGM Mirage (NYSE: MGM), Harrah's Entertainment (NYSE: HET), Wynn Resorts (NYSE: WYNN), and Ameristar Casinos (Nasdaq: ASCA), as well as equipment manufacturers International Game Technology (NYSE: IGT) and Shuffle Master (Nasdaq: SHFL)) outlined the three bills currently in play to address that problem. The Poker Players Alliance (PPA), led by former U.S. Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, is in support of all three bills.

Both Harrah's and MGM Mirage would be interested in pursuing online gaming opportunities should online gaming become legalized and regulated in the United States.

It doesn't say anywhere that they actively support online gaming, but if its legal status were to change they would certainly be interested in making some money.

[bull62 0]

It doesn't say anywhere that they actively support online gaming, but if its legal status were to change they would certainly be interested in making some money.

Again, the interesting part is the notes from the keynote address.

On the morning of Wednesday, Nov. 14, at the Global Gaming Expo in Las Vegas, American Gaming Association President and CEO Frank Fahrenkopf moderated a panel to discuss the online gaming issue in a session entitled State of the Industry: Internet Gambling at the Crossroads. Panelists included Gary Loveman, CEO of Harrah's Entertainment (NYSE: HET); Terry Lanni, CEO of MGM Mirage (NYSE: MGM); Alfonse D'Amato, chairman of the Poker Players Alliance (PPA) and former U.S. Senator; and Andre Wilsenach, CEO of the Alderney Gambling Control Commission, which regulates eGambling.Both Harrah's and MGM Mirage would be interested in pursuing online gaming opportunities should online gaming become legalized and regulated in the United States.Notes on a few issues:- Technology. Lanni cited MGM Mirage's experience a few years ago operating an online gaming site based out of the Isle of Man in illustrating that the technology does exist block players from certain jurisdictions (in that case, the U.S.), verify age, and include a problem gambling component. However, it was difficult to compete under these circumstances against unregulated companies where the gambler does not have to go through extensive processes to gamble. That said, the software is ready if needed.- Taxation. Both Loveman and Lanni support regulation and taxation at the state level. "States regulate gaming quite effectively," said Lanni.- Brand. Both Loveman and Lanni believe that having a strong, trustworthy brand is a major competitive advantage. Loveman suggested that Harrah's will use its World Series of Poker brand. Lanni, meanwhile, cited a study saying that 70 percent of gamblers gamble online without the confidence that they will even get paid if they win. "Now there's a business," Lanni joked.- Problem gambling. Wilsenach suggested that the Internet provides more effective treatment for problem gamblers than do brick and mortar casinos.- Timetable. D'Amato put the timetable for legalization of online poker at 12 to 18 months. Loveman put the over/under at 18 months to 2 years for poker, but perhaps 8 to 10 years for broader Internet gambling. The other panelists agreed that online poker would probably be legalized first, with other casino games to come further into the future.