The Beginning of the Death of Online Poker in the US

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

I always been curious as to what the % of its revenues that casinos actually make from poker. It can't be that high.

Probably not too high, but it's probably like sports betting...a way to get a gambler in the casino. I know that on a trip to the Indian casino to go play poker, I've been known to play blackjack even though I had no intention of doing that when I left home.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

I always been curious as to what the % of its revenues that casinos actually make from poker. It can't be that high.

For bricks-and-mortar sites, it gets pretty easy to see the house take once they switch over from raking pots to taking time. One casino I visit rakes in their limit games up to 6/12, but takes time (a flat payment from each player every 30 minute dealer shift) from 10/20 and up (helps keep the dealer from slowing down the action, it's a good system overall). In the 10/20 game, they take $5 per player, in the 20/40 it's $7 per.

So, if I play 20/40 (the highest limit game that is going pretty much all the time) for 10 hours, the house is pulling $140 from me for that time, not much mystery to it. If that's a typical day's play, then there's no wonder why the house isn't looking to give away $300 hotel rooms to poker players all that liberally. That casino cards you hours, and gives back $2 an hour in comps for your higher stakes play, and $1 an hour for lower stakes.

Casinos make a lot less, on a per square foot basis, from poker than the high money generators (principally slots). But it's a "class" offering, and just having poker elevates the perception that the casino is a high level outfit, so there's auxiliary money to be made there, in room purchases, meal sales, and secondary gambling take. Lots of non-poker players, whether they realize it or not, like to play slots or whatever in a casino that seems like a classy, high-level joint.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

I always been curious as to what the % of its revenues that casinos actually make from poker. It can't be that high.

But that's a very narrow view of the situation that doesn't mirror reality. Many of the players in the poker room are gamblers by trade or retired people. I can't even begin to quantify the number of people that get up by a couple hundred at a poker table and then comment that they are 'off to the blackjack table' or 'off to the slots'. Craps is another big favorite of poker room regulars. There's a good percentage of professional poker players who do the same thing. The casino makes money in the end. Poker is just another way to suck those players into the casino.

[Lathum]

Well this may be bad.

Attempted to deposit with Echeck on Stars today and got an echecks are unavailable message. Posted about it on 2+2 and apparently FTP is also having the same issue.

Not much about it so far but this may not be good. At least I took most of my money out a short while back.

Just hope it's a glitch.

[Radii]

Without having read anything else at all about the issue this time around, my understanding is that Stars and FTP both have to change e-check processors many times a year to keep that service available. If they were using the same one it would make sense that they both died at the same time and might be nothing out of the ordinary other than frustration at the whole bullshit system.

Hopefully that's all it is at least

[kcchief19]

Yeah, I got a message last time I went to reload on PS that my transaction was declined and needed to contact my financial institution. I tried again and was told I had a transaction pending and could not enter a new transaction. An hour later, the original transaction suddenly went through and posted.

[Lathum]

I think it is something more sinister.

People are also having problems with check not being honored by banks.

refer to sender check.bounced..wtf - Two Plus Two Poker Forum

[RainMaker]

Wells Fargo and Bank of America have always had issues with gambling. Stick with the smaller ones that are run out of grocery stores like TCF or a regional bank that just doesn't give a shit.

[Radii]

So far that seems like the normal panic when a processor dies out. I'm not saying its not a more serious issue, but that doesn't worry me any just yet.

[RainMaker]

Online banks like ING are actually pretty good with those checks too. Since many are overseas they aren't as big of pussies about you playing some holdem online.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Radii

So far that seems like the normal panic when a processor dies out. I'm not saying its not a more serious issue, but that doesn't worry me any just yet.

May be more serious

eCheck Option Disapears from Two Major US Poker Rooms. | Online Poker News

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Lathum

May be more serious

eCheck Option Disapears from Two Major US Poker Rooms. | Online Poker News

that doesn't tell us anything we don't already know. Tying the UIGEA to this without any new info seems pretty irresponsible on their part. Again, I'm not saying it couldn't be something more, but the simplest answer is still the most likely at this point. The sites have to change check processors multiple times a year. Until I hear something detailed or see a serious change, that seems the most likely thing to have happened here.

[Radii]

dola, based on the 2+2 threads on the topic, it would appear that Ultimate Bet e-check processing is still working just fine, to further make UIGEA fears look like blind panic IMO.

[digamma]

I just got a paper check from poker stars yesterday. I'll try to deposit it tomorrow and will let you know what happens.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by digamma

I just got a paper check from poker stars yesterday. I'll try to deposit it tomorrow and will let you know what happens.

You may want to contact them before you do, people are having issues.

refer to sender check.bounced..wtf - Two Plus Two Poker Forum

[Lathum]

Still unable to deposit with echeck. People are also having checks bounced. apparently the US attorney generals office in NY shut down the Full Tilt and Pokerstars processor. Looks like it may be a while before they can change processors.

Poker eChecks Problem Limited to Full Tilt, PokerStars | Gambling911.com

[RainMaker]

NY AG is a hypocritical douchebag. Same with all the other scumbag politicians out there who push this issue.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Lathum

You may want to contact them before you do, people are having issues.

refer to sender check.bounced..wtf - Two Plus Two Poker Forum

Poker Stars sent me an e-mail telling me not to deposit and that they would provide an update by Monday June 8. Seems consistent with everything radii has said.

[k0ruptr]

this is getting interesting...

[Lathum]

RE: Fed Crackdown on Online Poker Money Transfers More details on WTF’s going on | Pokerati | Texas Hold'em and Las Vegas Poker Blog

[panerd]

Not to make this political but I thought the Obama administration was going to be very pragmatic on issues like this and drugs seeing as they have a major financial crisis and very shaky foreign issues. Seems like they are alienating a lot of their voters over an issue they really shouldn't be wasting time (and money) on.

[RainMaker]

Really disappointing. It's amazing to me that with all the shit that financial people pulled over the last few years, they want to go after poker sites. I don't hear the DOJ filing charges against these financial big whigs but God forbid someone want to play some fucking holdem online in his downtime.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by panerd

Not to make this political but I thought the Obama administration was going to be very pragmatic on issues like this and drugs seeing as they have a major financial crisis and very shaky foreign issues. Seems like they are alienating a lot of their voters over an issue they really shouldn't be wasting time (and money) on.

From reading the two plus two forums it seems they purposely went after the processor on a Friday during the WSOP so nothing could be done until monday.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by panerd

Not to make this political but I thought the Obama administration was going to be very pragmatic on issues like this and drugs seeing as they have a major financial crisis and very shaky foreign issues. Seems like they are alienating a lot of their voters over an issue they really shouldn't be wasting time (and money) on.

I don't think anyone cares enough one way or another to blow a lot of political capital on this outside of Barney Frank. Barney Frank is crusading for online poker which is great but there's just not nearly enough support in the rest of congress to actually push something through to repeal the UIGEA.


I should point out this is my very very high level far away view/understanding of things, I am not one of those that reads the 2+2 legal forum every day or spend all my time at the PPA website. Any time I do that its just depressing, so I follow from a distance, which may well mean there are some things I'm not aware of at work here. I would love to be wrong for sure.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by panerd

Seems like they are alienating a lot of their voters over an issue they really shouldn't be wasting time (and money) on.

I'm not at all sure the large majority of voters give a rat's ass about this one way or the other to be honest.

That's neither attacking nor defending Obama / his administration / whoever decided to do this, mostly just trying to put the number of people with online poker winnings to cash out in some perspective. Those seem to be pretty sharply overrepresented at FOFC vs the general population.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'm not at all sure the large majority of voters give a rat's ass about this one way or the other to be honest.

That's neither attacking nor defending Obama / his administration / whoever decided to do this, mostly just trying to put the number of people with online poker winnings to cash out in some perspective. Those seem to be pretty sharply overrepresented at FOFC vs the general population.

I agree. Gamblers are still a small part of the population. I've always felt it was stupid to ban something that would bring in massive tax revenues that people will do anyways, but stupidity is the name of the game in politics.

The only thing I could see a backlash is in people who just want government out of their lives. Perhaps they don't care about gambling, but the hypocritical banning of it is another "nanny state" idea going through. But ultimately, the people in this country who want to control what people can do probably outnumber those that just wish everyone would leave each other alone.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I agree. Gamblers are still a small part of the population. I've always felt it was stupid to ban something that would bring in massive tax revenues that people will do anyways, but stupidity is the name of the game in politics.

So which is it? Either gamblers are a small part of the population, or they'd bring in massive tax revenues.

Or is that one of those "if it were legal, EVERYBODY would do it and the government would get lots of monies" things?

[stevew]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Really disappointing. It's amazing to me that with all the shit that financial people pulled over the last few years, they want to go after poker sites. I don't hear the DOJ filing charges against these financial big whigs but God forbid someone want to play some fucking holdem online in his downtime.

The dude who might have actually shut down the financial shit liked hookers too much.

Sad.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

So which is it? Either gamblers are a small part of the population, or they'd bring in massive tax revenues.

Or is that one of those "if it were legal, EVERYBODY would do it and the government would get lots of monies" things?

You don't need massive parts of the population to bring in large sums of tax revenues. If even a small percent of the population gambled regularly in the U.S. through an online casino, it would amount to hundreds of millions and potentially billions. Casinos and lottos bring in hundreds of millions for various states.

Lets also not forget the foreign players who feel safer playing in a U.S. regulated online casino vs one setup in St. Kitts.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Radii

I should point out this is my very very high level far away view/understanding of things, I am not one of those that reads the 2+2 legal forum every day or spend all my time at the PPA website. Any time I do that its just depressing, so I follow from a distance, which may well mean there are some things I'm not aware of at work here. I would love to be wrong for sure.

I'm the same way.

I spend one afternoon reading that those threads and I am convinced my bank account will be seized and the feds will bust down my door.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

So which is it? Either gamblers are a small part of the population, or they'd bring in massive tax revenues.

Or is that one of those "if it were legal, EVERYBODY would do it and the government would get lots of monies" things?

Even a small minority can bring in tons of revenue.

Rake me for example. I play on a pretty regular basis and in the last 3 years have roughly 40K in tournamnet winnings. If the feds taxed even 10% thats 4K from me.

Obviously this is a very crude example, but my point is this is a multi-billion dollar industry.

[Lathum]

would be funny in a sick way if this was true


Warning - Two Plus Two Poker Forum

[Radii]

The sky is falling crowd on 2+2 internet forums is AWESOME for entertainment.

[kcchief19]

So the real question is still was this just a shot across the bow or the beginning of a serious move against online casinos?

If it's the former, no big deal. We've seen these before and after a while the poker sites and players all get used to a new norm and it's business as usual until the next shot.

If it's the beginning of a move against online casinos, what's the deal? It does seem like bad timing to go after poker sites when there are more pressing problems right now. Then again, just last month Harrah's announced they are setting up an online gaming operation with eyes on Europe and Canada. Let's be realistic -- if Congress and/or the Administration ever wants to move to legalize online gaming, the first step will be to first the sites that have operated outside the law and are outside US jurisdictions. That will open the doors to Harrah's and U.S. gaming operations.

I still think a move to decriminalize online gaming (or at least remove some of the barriers) is a matter of when not if. The UIGEA passage showed how easy it is to bury anything in a bill at the last minute. If someone wants to make it happen, it will happen.

[RainMaker]

It's just astounding that they would even consider tackling this. I mean we went through one of the biggest financial frauds in history. We had people lying, scheming, and commiting fraud everywhere. Insider trader, lying to shareholders, and more. Yet none of these people are being persued or indicted. The worst we get is some civil charges against some like Mozillo at Countrywide. It's quite clear who owns our government.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Radii

The sky is falling crowd on 2+2 internet forums is AWESOME for entertainment.

Probably.

But I'd say there's a better chance of them being right than there is of it being left untouched by the government either.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

But I'd say there's a better chance of them being right than there is of it being left untouched by the government either.

The sky is falling crowd assumes that any time someone has a check returned, any time anyone posts anything at all about an e-check taking an extra day, any time an account gets closed or questioned anywhere, that all of a sudden online poker is about to be BANNED any day now.

I'm well aware that the money I have in online poker is at risk. I can't even quantify that risk really. And yeah, sometimes bad shit does happen, the UIGEA got passed, Neteller got shut down, ePassporte went next, and it fucking blows. But in between those things happening are 10,000 posts about how someone had a delay that they didn't expect and online poker is totally fucked.

The next "super bad thing" could be happening, but so what? Its not like I can do anything about it. Being informed and aware of the risk and of what's going on is one thing. Freaking the fuck out about it is wholly another. And in this type of industry, seeing people freak out on a daily basis is bad for the game. As far as I'm concerned, any time your average joe who wants to have some beer and play some poker one night googles online poker and finds a 2+2 thread about the sky falling and decides against depositing, those fuckwads have cost everyone money.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Radii

The next "super bad thing" could be happening, but so what? Its not like I can do anything about it. Being informed and aware of the risk and of what's going on is one thing. Freaking the fuck out about it is wholly another. And in this type of industry, seeing people freak out on a daily basis is bad for the game. As far as I'm concerned, any time your average joe wants to have some beer and play some poker one night googles online poker and finds a 2+2 thread about the sky falling and decides against depositing, those fuckwads have cost everyone money.

I'll readily grant that I don't know the finer points of how regular players do thing, so for the moment at least let's just treat this as an opportunity for me to learn. My online poker playing never cracked $100 worth of deposits that I nursed for longer than my skill set would have made likely (I like to think so anyway) and just treated that the same as I treat money spent in Vegas, as an entertainment charge. But I gather that isn't the case for a lot of players.

So how does that work exactly? I mean, when you hit a big night does that money get withdrawn from the site & put back into your personal bank account or do people leave significant amounts of cash on deposit with Stars or whomever? By significant, let's say at least $1,000, just to pick a figure although everybody's version of significant will be different.

I gather the latter is the case, that money stays on account pretty regularly for regular players that are beyond my own $0.10 fish level. Is there any sort of reliable estimate of just how much U.S. cash in sitting at risk of being seized/frozen/whatever?

[Lathum]

JIMG

Big time players easily keep over 100K in their accounts. As for me I try not to keep to much because the day may come when I can't get it out. If I have a good win, say over $500 I will usually withdraw, but you can keep as much as you want in your account

[-apoc-]

The money stays in your poker account until you choose to withdraw it through either a paper check or eCheck or bankwire ect. Alot of people have very significant amounts of money in their poker accounts far more than $1000.

As far as what could be seized by the US government it would be very little since the money is all kept in foreign banks aside from what is sent to the US processors that do the cashouts for US customers. Also these poker sites are legitimate businesses in the countries they operate in so convincing foreign banks to freeze the funds isnt very likely at all especially since these companies have lawsuits pending against the US government.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Big time players easily keep over 100K in their accounts. As for me I try not to keep to much because the day may come when I can't get it out. If I have a good win, say over $500 I will usually withdraw, but you can keep as much as you want in your account

Okay, that matches what I imagined close enough I think.

Which kind of brings me to what I was thinking re: those fuckwads have cost everyone money.

Seems to me that what they cost might well be less than what those fuckwads who can't afford it lose when the sky lands on their heads. And I really do believe that's pretty much inevitable.

I can understand why people making money from online poker don't like it & I probably don't blame 'em, but from the outside looking in I think that if you're right about the impact then it's probably a good thing overall.

Not picking a fight or anything, just thinking out loud a little after your reading your post, throwing another point of view into the mix for the hell of it.

For the record, I think it ought to be legalized with some fairly mild regulations/restrictions and no taxation beyond what happens with any other gambling winnings, so it's not like I'm coming from an anti-poker standpoint or anything of that sort.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

My online poker playing never cracked $100 worth of deposits that I nursed for longer than my skill set would have made likely (I like to think so anyway) and just treated that the same as I treat money spent in Vegas, as an entertainment charge. But I gather that isn't the case for a lot of players.

That's definitely the case for most, whether they want to admit it or not. An insanely high % of players are lifetime losers. I don't remember the figures but its a number so high you'd wonder how the well doesn't dry up. And hell, I admit I'm a loser since the UIGEA passed and the games got a ton harder. I've just pulled out enough in the "golden era" or whatever that there's no way I can become a lifetime loser at this point.

So how does that work exactly? I mean, when you hit a big night does that money get withdrawn from the site & put back into your personal bank account or do people leave significant amounts of cash on deposit with Stars or whomever? By significant, let's say at least $1,000, just to pick a figure although everybody's version of significant will be different.

At this moment I have more than $1000 on each of two different sites and don't even give it a second thought, and I'm a borderline micro-stakes player. I suspect many people at FOFC have more online that I do and also don't really think anything of it. Back pre-UIGEA, it was as easy as using Neteller(which was similar/as easy as paypal basically) to move money around. I probably made 25-40 poker related transactions a month, though that was rarely to my bank, I was moving money back and forth between 10+ poker sites that all offered bonuses at various times. Post-UIGEA, moving money is a massive pain in the ass, so I try not to do it very often. I only play on two sites and try to keep money on both of them so that I never have to worry about that kind of thing. I only take money out if I'm going to use it for other purposes, ie I am permanently pulling out profit. I'm definitely not moving it back to my bank so that its safer w/ the idea that I might move it back into a poker site at a later date if I need it.

I think this is common among most low-small-mid stakes players. A "Mid stakes" player would be someone who probably has $10,000+ on multiple sites and doesn't think much of it. High stakes is a whole different world that I don't know anything about. But I would assume that a guy like Tom Dwan('durrrr', who was the star of this last season of high stakes poker) has at minimum $500,000 and possibly well over a million on full tilt right now. But he is probably worth WAY more than that and I would also suspect those guys only have what they need in online poker sites and keep the rest in their bank(s).

Is there any sort of reliable estimate of just how much U.S. cash in sitting at risk of being seized/frozen/whatever?

No idea/no guess at all. One of the blog entries lathum linked was that 5500 players were impacted for an amount totaling around $14 million in this current problem. Its 1am on a Sunday night right now and Stars boasts 89,000 people online, Full Tilt 55,000 online. There's no way to make any guesses based on those numbers, except for "a really fucking large amount"

[Radii]

dola,

http://www.highstakesdb.com/1085-a-s...-last-24h.aspx

Again this is the insane ridiculous nosebleed stakes world, but i'm going to revise my guess and say that a guy like Dwan is likely to have $2 million or more online at any one time, and if he had $10 million online it wouldn't surprise me.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Which kind of brings me to what I was thinking re: those fuckwads have cost everyone money.

Yeah really this is just a small theory thing. Most likely average joe is depositing $100 and is going to screw around with it and its not that big a deal. But when you're talking about a world when 90% or more of the players lose, you want every $100 you can coming into that world.

Someone doing some research and deciding not to deposit b/c they aren't comfortable with the questionable situation around everything regarding the UIGEA is one thing. Someone not depositing b/c he sees people he assumes to know what they're talking about panicking 3 times a week makes me mad.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Radii

There's no way to make any guesses based on those numbers, except for "a really fucking large amount"

Which has a good bit to do with why I don't mind a little bit of doom & glooming taking some bloom off the rose for some people (seems likely that those least able to afford taking a hit would be the ones most apt to be scared away by that kind of thing).

It's likely to be a shitload of money, a good bit of which comes from people who can't really afford the loss, and I'm kind of tired of bailing people out of jams at the moment. And even if its indirectly, not like a bailout but just through the normal "safety nets" & such, I'd begrudge the taxpayer assistance. If the doomsayers cut that amount down, God bless 'em is kind of how I feel about that.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

It's likely to be a shitload of money, a good bit of which comes from people who can't really afford the loss, and I'm kind of tired of bailing people out of jams at the moment. And even if its indirectly, not like a bailout but just through the normal "safety nets" & such, I'd begrudge the taxpayer assistance.

I'm confused what you mean by that, or where any of this money could have potentially anything to do with taxpayer assistance or bailouts of any kind.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Which has a good bit to do with why I don't mind a little bit of doom & glooming taking some bloom off the rose for some people (seems likely that those least able to afford taking a hit would be the ones most apt to be scared away by that kind of thing).

It's likely to be a shitload of money, a good bit of which comes from people who can't really afford the loss, and I'm kind of tired of bailing people out of jams at the moment. And even if its indirectly, not like a bailout but just through the normal "safety nets" & such, I'd begrudge the taxpayer assistance. If the doomsayers cut that amount down, God bless 'em is kind of how I feel about that.

fuck those people,

I play poker to take their money. The harder it is to deposit the harder it is to get people who have no clue what they are doing (fish) onto the sites.

I help pay for school by taking idiots money, and this sort of stuff limits the amount of idiots.

If all you have is a bunch of skilled people playing all they are doing is passing around chips and contrinuting to the rake.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Radii

I'm confused what you mean by that, or where any of this money could have potentially anything to do with taxpayer assistance or bailouts of any kind.

Basically, the less money that goes into online poker right now, in its current waiting-to-collapse state, I'm very okay with that. At the most, I'd sort of like to see it settle into a subsistence state, until the other shoe falls. Otherwise at some point there's money going to be taken out of circulation when it's seized or effectively permanently frozen & there's going to be people out bucket fulls of money who can't afford to take the hit.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Lathum

fuck those people

In theory, we'll both share in covering their asses when the balloon goes up (for the ones in over their heads).

I'm okay with you not having a problem with that since it's less than you made off them, that makes sense to me & I get it. But it should also make sense that since I didn't make that off them, I'd rather they keep it in their pocket until the government gets around to doing whatever instead of eventually reaching into to mine (however indirectly as I said earlier). I'm very content with the major players swapping money back & forth amongst themselves while not adding any more cash/any more people to lose their asses into the forthcoming pile.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Basically, the less money that goes into online poker right now, in its current waiting-to-collapse state, I'm very okay with that. At the most, I'd sort of like to see it settle into a subsistence state, until the other shoe falls. Otherwise at some point there's money going to be taken out of circulation when it's seized or effectively permanently frozen & there's going to be people out bucket fulls of money who can't afford to take the hit.

Very doubtful that money gets seized. It's in overseas banks and many top stakes players in the US set up bank accounts in other countries so really they wont have an issue