Is This The Future of Online Gambling?

We have filed a patent that is getting a lot of talk here in Canada.


Simply put it allows Lottery Corporations to run online gaming with a simple patented process:

1. Players purchase tickets at the lottery retailers, printed at the terminals.
2. Printed tickets have an activation code printed on the ticket.
3. Players go online to a corporation run site.
4. Players join online gaming by using activation code.
5. Winners return with ticket to retailers for validation and to receive winnings.

There is a survey and a place to leave comments online at Lottoip.com, but I’d just like to open it up here to people throughout the world and get some feedback about things in their part of the world. Here in North America, people are saying that in 5 years, this will be online gaming as we know it. There is something very attractive about never putting any personal information online, and to play and receive your winnings instantly.


You can take the survey and read all the highlights of the patent at Lottoip.com.


Anyone have any thoughts?


Thanks,
Scott

I find that very interesting for sure. It does seem to be a secure way of doing things but how would they then know who the person was that made the purchase if the account was hacked and someone were to cash out their earnings? If they could build a secure method around that idea it would probably be quite successful.

Thanks Dollazz,


Your ticket is printed when you purchase it right at the lottery terminal. This is the account. You cannot redeem your winnings without the actual ticket in hand, just like a lottery ticket. So no one can steal your account or money, unless they actually physically stole your actual ticket.


Thanks,
Scott

what happens if u misplace your ticket then what? your screwed!!!!!

There are many more advantages than disadvantages. Just like buying a Powerball ticket or any lottery ticket in the world, you must have your ticket. Least no identity theft can occur with your personal information, because your haven't given any, and we see this as a bigger problem I guess.

The other advantages are:

Allows Lottery Corporations to run online gaming with a simple patented process:

1. Players purchase tickets at the lottery retailers, printed at the terminals.
2. Printed tickets have an activation code printed on the ticket.
3. Players go online to a corporation run site.
4. Players join online gaming by using activation code.
5. Winners return with ticket to retailers for validation and to receive winnings.

Lottery Corporation Benefits & Highlights

• Corporations are able to control and regulate their own games within each jurisdiction, setting their own rules, betting limits, games offered and profits margins
• Higher profits for corporations, which in turn are charitably redistributed (Education and Heath Care)
• Corporations do not compete with each other in any way
• Ease in which corporations can implement the process, everything is already in place
• Tickets may only be purchased by players of age, identification required
• Corporations cater to new clientele, expanding their customer base to higher income brackets

Governments Benefits & Highlights

• Places boundaries on Internet gambling that currently do not exist
• Governments make taxes off online gaming
• No cross over in money spent between jurisdictions, so taxes are not lost to other jurisdictions
• Players' losses and Players' winnings do not leave jurisdiction, so all money is continuously redistributed
• Laws don’t need to change, although some jurisdictions may amend current laws

Retailers Benefits & Highlights

• Retailers make profits from ticket sales and percentage of winning tickets they redeem

Players Benefits & Highlights

• Ease to purchase a ticket, almost anywhere, in seconds
• Ease to participate in online gaming
• Players play without divulging any personal information online
• Skeptical players who have never played online for money will now participate
• Players may play for Cash, no credit cards required or wiring money, transaction fees, time constraints, headaches
• Winners may collect instantly, no long delays in receiving winnings
• Allows players not geographically near land base casinos to participate in gambling

Online Casinos & Poker Rooms Highlights

• No fear games aren’t run fairly now, thanks to the corporations' good names
• Online casinos and poker rooms could not compete and would become only a part of history, “The way it was once done” when the Internet first started
• Practically eliminates online casinos and poker rooms as we now know them, making the term “Offshore” almost non-existent

Sounds like a bureaucratic nightmare. Shudder. Made up to make sure we all pay taxes. Leave us alone. I like the current system.

This is kind of scary.

It wouldn't be like our Canadian Government to up the old rake at their now monopolized (under your scenario) online poker sites to obscene levels would it?

I'm thinking they just might.


Edit to add:
This sure would make money laundering a heck of a lot easier.
Wanna fund a terrorist group? Virtually untraceable, assuming we go with the assumptions you have given about funding and withdrawaling money.

Thanks Fish,

To redeem a ticket, you must still win by playing. Winners of over $1,000 would still have to show identification by redeeming their winnings at the lottery corporation offices. Money laundering does not factor in any more than all other forms of gaming they offer now.

Under this method of play, new players will be able to partake in gaming who currently don't trust the current system, as can be seen by thousands of posts in these forums. It also allows for the 80% of people who currently don't have credit cards or accounts like PayPal to locally participate in gaming.

Of course the current poker places like Poker Stars would still be an option, so it is not a monopoly, it is just that the Poker Stars of the world, they just have to compete harder for players from North America.

Thanks,
Scott

Edit to add a reply to "Still have to win"
IF the game is legit, the winning poker players will still win.
Anybody who plays blackjack, slots etc will still lose.


I believe it was these 2 bullets that sounded different than what you posted in the above quote

My issues are these:
-At what point does the gov't -outlaw online gaming unless it is through their site?
-Will the pokersites take this laying down? (Party might, but Stars, Tilt, as well as the other networks will most likely fire back, reduced rake, more bonuses etc etc.) Does the gov't poker site compete? or is legislation issued to make things more difficult to deposit/withdrawal from other online gaming sites?
-At what point after most of the other online gaming sites have gone the way of the dinosaur, assuming you are correct, does the gov't run pokersite raise the rake do 10% up to $10 a pot in even the micro games?
If you say the likelihood of this happening is low, then you are kiddng only yourself.
-Will the gov't run pokersites ban or limit winning players like they did against winning proline players?

A positive to add so as to not sound completely biased:
There will be a TONNE of new fish at the start of this....

Back to negative:
Then when the marketing dies down, the games will become worse and worse and become a replica of wpex.com minus the 75-100% rakeback.

Exactly. This is a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. Pointless.

Edit: Correction, not pointless, as the point is to make some politicians' friends some money. F'ing stupid idea all around.

Seems to me that this would be a collusion team's dream come true. Everything else in your proposal sounds excellent though. So how would the corporation running this and/or the poker rooms be able to circumnavigate the collusion factor?

Actually it's not. The systems in which the lotteries in the US and Canada are run on are already in place. Adding this option to those terminals is the equivalent of the MUSL creating a new game called Super Powerball and having a button added to the terminal to print the ticket.

As long as the OP could figure out how collusion could be dismissed (due to the annonymous nature of the ticket purchase) then he/his partners have a very effective idea in place.

Thanks smd173,

Of course this system has been thought out for over two full years. At one point that did come up so the system was devised to prevent this from happening. Our solutions are not the way each corporation will handle their own games, that is still left up to them, we just offer solutions.

Currently in online poker rooms, say Poker Stars as an example, you can join any table you want to play at. This could lead to the same player playing two accounts on side by side computers or a team working together. They have great security to prevent this kind of stuff, my example here is only to say this is what people will and have tried in the past and will again in the future.

Our solution is that when you join a game, the "System" automatically places you on a table for the price range you have chosen. This is not sequential, but random based on openings, so you have no choice where you end up. Sure you can leave and come back in, but the system flags information based on your account "Activation Number" and we do have security options that run very deep that we can do from this point. So with thousands of tables in play, the odds of any person getting two seats on the same table, well, it will take him quite a long time.

We also understood however, that people may want to play with their friends. So you can create a table and invite or have people join, even password protected. Least with this option, players understand these tables were created, so they understand the further risks involved. This is great if you have 10 friends from across a large area and want to have a poker night. They may buy tickets from their local retailers and join, all playing at the same table. You don't have to worry about your friends paying you, for if you win, your winnings are on your ticket and you can bring this back to the retailer to redeem your winnings.

I hope I answered your question and please keep them coming.

Thanks,
Scott

This is not a good way of looking at things since some people will inevitably want table selection and will not like this system.

Thanks Flint,

I guess maybe I was not totally clear. Our solution was, "if" this was a potential problem, and we don't see it as one in any way, but that assigned seating could be implemented all or in part. The "in-part" method would allow both an assigned seating section and/or a table selection section, with the player making the choice where they want to play. The player will know they have options and will decide themselves what tables they want to play at.

After saying that, we know in theory that the corporations could just print you a ticket that you could then use in any poker rooms that accepted it, say Poker Stars. So a person in Canada or the US could walk down to the locate corner store, pay cash for a ticket, go home and play. Taht simple. If they win, go back to the corner store, redeem your ticket and get your money. The corporations don't have to have a site different for any current site where you open an account, or for that matter they don't even have to run the site as you can see.

The options are unlimited.

Thanks,
Scott

I think it's obvious this system is being designed with the government and the companies who will profit in mind. The customers are are an unfortunate necessity of the lucrative new market, and will be "tolerated" at best.

I guess this is akin to the difference between ProLine-type sports betting, and old-fashioned sports bookies. Anyone know the vig ProLine charges these days? And just how much competition currently exists within that market at the moment? I'm guessing this system would mean doubling the current rake system, at best. Afterall, the stores have to take a cut, as well as the regulatory agency, as well as the company actually running the servers. Not to mention vastly limiting the choice of poker sites for the consumer. (you'd be lucky to have 2 companies to choose from)

If this systems is as bad as it sounds (and it could be a great deal worse), as a Canadian voter/taxpayer I would fight against this in any legal means possible.

Thanks for the Posts,


Just to clarify some stuff. A rake is not taken by the operator. Players pay a one-time fee, like a service charge, an admission and if it makes things easy, we’ll this one time call it a rake. We have heard this will be between 10% at the low end to 20% at the high. So if you bought a $100 ticket to play with, you would end up with $80 to $90 to play with. So if you were given $90 on your ticket, that is the last time you EVER pay, associated with that ticket.


Let’s COMPARE:


“PokerStars receives compensation for hosting poker rake page.” (From Poker Stars Site)


Let’s assume 10 player’s start out at a table at Poker Stars. They each start with $100 = $1,000 in play. Each hour the table plays 40 hands and the average pot is $30. The average rake is $1.50 per pot or $60 per hour.
Hours Played


1st Hour = $60 Rake = $6.00 per player and Leaves $940 in Play
2nd Hour = $60 Rake or $120 in Total = Average $12.00 per player and Leaves $880 in Play
3rd Hour = $60 Rake or $180 in Total = Average $18.00 per player and Leaves $820 in Play
4th Hour = $60 Rake or $240 in Total = Average $24.00 per player and Leaves $760 in Play
5th Hour = $60 Rake or $300 in Total = Average $30.00 per player and Leaves $700 in Play


And so forth...


In our system each of the 10 players only has $90 for 10% of their $100 was taken when they purchased their ticket. So now the table only has $900 to start play and there is never any more charges from here on out.


Hours Played
1st Hour = $0 Rake Leaves $900 in Play
2nd Hour = $0 Rake Leaves $900 in Play
3rd Hour = $0 Rake Leaves $900 in Play
4th Hour = $0 Rake Leaves $900 in Play
5th Hour = $0 Rake Leaves $900 in Play


And so forth...


Tournaments work the same way. Once you have your ticket, you are not charged to go in any Sit & Go’s, Tournaments, or play at any table or anything you want to do for that matter. So if 1,000 people join a $10 tournament, it is $10 + $0 and the pot is $10,000 and no player paid even a penny more.


The better you are, the longer you play and in the long run, things are actually less expensive for the average player’s enjoyment.


Keep the questions coming!


Thanks,
Scott

I am a US resident, but I should watch this since the US could adopt a system similar if it works. Granted the US would screw it up waaay worse even if Canada had it working perfectly.


I liked this idea...


Since it would allow you to play at current sites. The problem then becomes adding this...

to this...

Since this is what would happen if you combined to the two. Both parties would want their "rake".

Hey K_Kahne_Fan (http://www.cardschat.com/members/k_kahne_fan/),

Thanks for the question.

What you refer to are two different options the operators could allow. Likely the ONLY option allowed will be to play at the lottery corporations site.

The second option is the player can bring his ticket to "other" places where it is accepted, but if he brings it to a place other then the lottery corporation’s site, he may have to play in a rake game. These are things we are working on. Each lottery jurisdiction will decide what they want to allow.

We are working with some of the largest gaming companies in the US to bring this to their market, which it was designed for in the first place and where it will make its debut. So you will see it and in the not too far distant future. Things are moving so very fast right now.

I am glad you like it.
Scott

Depending on which Country it hits first, there may very well be a black market for these tickets. If someone could be mailed a ticket overseas and go in and clean up these "fish" and win $X/XX/XXXg on these fish, it would be well worth a plane flight back to said Country to cash in their ticket.

Thanks K_Kahne_Fan,

We don't anticipate a black market demand as you state it, but we do know the first States to get it will create such a demand, players will be travelling a few hours to acquire tickets if their State does not offer the game yet.

We also already know that millions of new poker players in North America who have never played for money online will now do so.

Thanks,
Scott

Which is why the "sharks" may be looking for tickets to eat the "fish". American or not.

Just in case you missed this.
Please respond OP.

Sorry Fish,


You Ask: At what point does the gov't -outlaw online gaming unless it is through their site?


Answer: Well the truth is they haven’t really yet and likely never would. They have made much of the movement of money a pain in the butt but they know they could never drain the ocean with just a cup, which is exactly what they’d have to do to “Outlaw” online gaming. So if you can’t beat them, join them! By offering games easiest for their own players to play, they actually could lighten up on the current restrictions and still, because of the ease in participating and the trust factors, dominate their own markets.



You Ask: Will the pokersites take this laying down? (Party might, but Stars, Tilt, as well as the other networks will most likely fire back, reduced rake, more bonuses etc etc.) Does the gov't poker site compete? or is legislation issued to make things more difficult to deposit/withdrawal from other online gaming sites?


Answer: I likely explained this in the “No Rake” post previous and as well as the first answer in this post. We feel the laws would loosen for numerous reasons, but the governments would not worry for they’d own the “only game in town” so to speak. Seeing as the rest are "offshore". Would the other sites fight back, of course they would. Realistically they would lose tens of millions per year, if not hundreds of millions, so expect a damn huge fight! The best they could do would be to lower their rakes, making current poker players the biggest winners in the end. So competition is a good thing for everyone. As can be seen by the “No Rake Post” in the 19th hour if you carry that through, Poker Stars has 100% of all the player’s money just from Rakes. Lowering it, or feeling they have to lower it to compete, is clearly a great thing for players who play there. Also remember, in that 19th hour, in that example, not one extra penny was taken in our method for we don’t take a rake.



You Ask: At what point after most of the other online gaming sites have gone the way of the dinosaur, assuming you are correct, does the gov't run pokersite raise the rake do 10% up to $10 a pot in even the micro games? If you say the likelihood of this happening is low, then you are kidding only yourself.


Answer: Assuming we are correct and governments throughout the world offer their own games, the smaller, less trusted or shady poker sites would be the first to go. If the top 10 mega sites were left that would be great, for it would keep the governments from getting too greedy and taking a little more then they likely should. At this point the best Rakes would be offered by the biggest poker sites. Everyone left would win for there would be fewer places to play on the “big scale”. To say the governments would not want to take more with less competition, you are right; we’d only be kidding ourselves to think differently. Hopefully they stay realistic to the players, but that is not our call. They ultimately will do it their own way even though we will “Recommend” what we see as the best way.



You Ask: Will the gov't run pokersites ban or limit winning players like they did against winning proline players?


Answer: I am not exactly familiar with the ban you refer too with Pro-line. for those that don't know Pro-line if the lottery run sports betting in Ontario, Canada. BC offers the same thing called Sports Action or Oddset. We know they limit the amount of a payout in Ontario on any ticket for Pro-line to $600,000 and limit the amount you may bet on a single ticket to $100. I don’t see how Pro-line can "Ban" people from playing when you have 5 million people in the GTA, 12,000 lottery terminals across the province, 8 million people in the province tells me over half of those lottery terminals are in the GTA area. How can they prevent a person from playing? As long as tickets were kept to payouts under $1,000 it seems impossible. I also know of the goofs they made in soccer, allowing bets after the results were final, but these are different things altogether. We do not anticipate anyone limiting how much a player can win.



You Ask: Then when the marketing dies down, the games will become worse and worse and become a replica of wpex.com minus the 75-100% rakeback.


Answer: Can it get any worst than the 5% rakes that are already in place? When the poker sites are the biggest winners at the end of the night, there needs to be another solution. Just so happens that our method ensures that everyone at least has a chance to win.

Thanks for the questions. Keep them coming.
Scott