 
Holdem Poker Online is a member of the THP Texas Holdem Online Poker strategy network.
Posted Mon Apr 09, 2007 11:36 am GMT by vyni
WTO update as reported by egr while I was away (article was published March 30th).
| Quote: | The World Trade Organisation (WTO) has ruled in favour of egaming jurisdiction Antigua and Barbuda (Antigua) in its dispute with the US over internet gambling.
The WTO had already found in favour of Antigua in April 2005, saying US rules against remote gambling were discriminatory and it has now rejected the US appeal against that decision, saying the US had “done nothing to comply with the original ruling”.
Antigua’s statement said the US had stated that it only had to clarify its legal position on horse racing following the WTO’s 2005 decision but today’s ruling in fact showed it had failed to do anything of the kind. At the same time, a “flourishing remote account wagering industry” existed in the US, despite US claims that it all remote gambling had been prohibited throughout the country. The WTO panel also noted that US law does not prohibit remote gaming that occurs solely within the borders of a particular state - an exemption which was confirmed in the UIGEA.
Errol Cort, Minister of Finance and the Economy for Antigua, said: “It vindicates all that we have been saying for years about the discriminatory trade practices of the US in this area, and we look forward to the US opening its markets on a fair and balanced basis as the WTO agreements and the international community require.”
Although the US may appeal this latest finding back to the appeals body of the WTO, Mark Mendel, head of Antigua’s legal team, believes that the chances of reversal are remote. “The panel’s logic is impeccable and the law and facts are just as much in our favour as they could possibly be. The United States on one hand prohibits competition in remote gambling from Antigua while on the other promoting and protecting a massive domestic industry. If the WTO agreements apply under any scenario, they apply here.”
However, Anthony Cabot, partner at Las Vegas law firm Lewis and Roca, added a note of caution: “It means very little. Antigua is simply too small a trading partner with the US. If there is any potential in the ruling, it does at least give a roadmap to follow for any bigger trading partner with the US.” |
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:00 pm GMT by Fat Tony
The ruling is exactly what I thought it would be, but it's not going to affect the the way things are one bit. The United States is notorious for flat out ignoring trade panel rulings that it doesn't agree with. (softwood lumber anyone?)
Posted Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:42 pm GMT by khaosanroad
If I read that correctly, an online poker room could set up shop in a particular state as long as the players are all residents of that state.
hmmm...... Harrah's has to know this already.
Posted Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:04 pm GMT by UrAteUp
| khaosanroad wrote: | If I read that correctly, an online poker room could set up shop in a particular state as long as the players are all residents of that state.
hmmm...... Harrah's has to know this already. |
Harrahs wants you in their B&M casino. How else can they also make money from their drink sales, food sales and other material goods? They don't want you going to your own fridge for a beer when they can charge you $3 for one in their casino. And there is more to it then just a beer and a brat. They highly benefit by you playing live as oppossed to anything they could setup online.
Posted Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:17 pm GMT by arras
| UrAteUp wrote: | | khaosanroad wrote: | If I read that correctly, an online poker room could set up shop in a particular state as long as the players are all residents of that state.
hmmm...... Harrah's has to know this already. |
Harrahs wants you in their B&M casino. How else can they also make money from their drink sales, food sales and other material goods? They don't want you going to your own fridge for a beer when they can charge you $3 for one in their casino. And there is more to it then just a beer and a brat. They highly benefit by you playing live as oppossed to anything they could setup online. |
why wouldn't they want both? rake is rake.
Posted Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:48 pm GMT by exit music
More players online = less players live
Posted Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:58 pm GMT by supafrey
| UrAteUp wrote: | | khaosanroad wrote: | If I read that correctly, an online poker room could set up shop in a particular state as long as the players are all residents of that state.
hmmm...... Harrah's has to know this already. |
Harrahs wants you in their B&M casino. How else can they also make money from their drink sales, food sales and other material goods? They don't want you going to your own fridge for a beer when they can charge you $3 for one in their casino. And there is more to it then just a beer and a brat. They highly benefit by you playing live as oppossed to anything they could setup online. |
This paragraph is literally 100% wrong. It's like painful.
When was the last time you paid for food or booze in American casinos at competitive rates?
Posted Tue Apr 10, 2007 10:36 pm GMT by khaosanroad
| UrAteUp wrote: | | khaosanroad wrote: | If I read that correctly, an online poker room could set up shop in a particular state as long as the players are all residents of that state.
hmmm...... Harrah's has to know this already. |
Harrahs wants you in their B&M casino. How else can they also make money from their drink sales, food sales and other material goods? They don't want you going to your own fridge for a beer when they can charge you $3 for one in their casino. And there is more to it then just a beer and a brat. They highly benefit by you playing live as oppossed to anything they could setup online. |
They would make more money from online poker than live poker. Also they could free up some floor space for the more profitable slots and casino games.
Posted Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:24 pm GMT by arras
| supafrey wrote: | | UrAteUp wrote: | | khaosanroad wrote: | If I read that correctly, an online poker room could set up shop in a particular state as long as the players are all residents of that state.
hmmm...... Harrah's has to know this already. |
Harrahs wants you in their B&M casino. How else can they also make money from their drink sales, food sales and other material goods? They don't want you going to your own fridge for a beer when they can charge you $3 for one in their casino. And there is more to it then just a beer and a brat. They highly benefit by you playing live as oppossed to anything they could setup online. |
This paragraph is literally 100% wrong. It's like painful.
When was the last time you paid for food or booze in American casinos at competitive rates? |
I didn't think it was just biloxi and vegas that gave free drinks and comped meals.
Posted Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:40 pm GMT by Ensano
| UrAteUp wrote: | | khaosanroad wrote: | If I read that correctly, an online poker room could set up shop in a particular state as long as the players are all residents of that state.
hmmm...... Harrah's has to know this already. |
Harrahs wants you in their B&M casino. How else can they also make money from their drink sales, food sales and other material goods? They don't want you going to your own fridge for a beer when they can charge you $3 for one in their casino. And there is more to it then just a beer and a brat. They highly benefit by you playing live as oppossed to anything they could setup online. |
but they wouldn't have to pay as many dealers... no need to pay someone to run a bigger poker room...
going online offers a much larger market to the casino... many people won't make the drive to a casino, even if it's just 30 min... whereas after supper lots of people like to kick their feet up and donk some money away online..
do you think poker would be what it is today if it wasn't for online poker?
there's no way a casino card room (card room only) makes even close to what a online gaming site could bring in... even if it was just within that state...
Posted Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:43 pm GMT by TheSalche
If you take a look at where they could hot an online poker site, I'll use California and New York as examples, there's already huge B&M card rooms there, doesn't seem to be much profit in online. Only state that could really use it would be here in Illinois (11 million people, chicago = 3rd biggest city yet no well known card rooms around).
Posted Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:35 pm GMT by Ensano
while I agree with what you're saying I still think it's wrong to look at it as an either or type situation...
there's a huge untapped potential of people who don't want to go to cardrooms or casinos... even if it was a 15 min drive... but they would gladly play online...
also, I don't know how it is in every card room, but rama's lowest stakes is 1/2NL and 2/5 limit...
what about all the micro stakes players?... surely there's people that just can't afford to play such high games but are just itching for a way to gamble 10$ here, 20$ there... online provides them with 24hr access to that...
|
|
|
Latest poker forum activity
|