New Version for California Online Poker

curtinsea

curtinsea

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 28, 2010
Total posts
495
Awards
1
Chips
2
dj11 says:
April 25, 2016 at 3:16 pm

While we all want to think there could be $60 mil left over once OLP is anchored in Ca. we really have no idea that it will make enough to cover the $60. If it can’t who gets stuck with the bill? Players. In the form of rake or tourney fees so big that no one partakes of the game online.

Come on Tribes and Casino’s you can work this out to make everyone happy. Just consider that if 7-11 wanted in (by law), what would you do?

Try considering the problem from the players POV. Players want accountability, consumer protections, and variety, a consistent set of rules for the games, and some recourse when things don’t go according the Hoyle.

The HRA’s biggest argument for being involved might be their history with moving money via betting. Well, check cashing businesses do that on a bigger scale. Gonna let then get in too?

I give thumbs down to this version.

So the $60 Million is going to come out of the state's tax receipts, assuming it even takes in that much. Based on good information, $60 million is likely the most in taxes CA will ever see in a year, with all of it going to the tracks.

There will be additional 'fees' the sites will have to pay, to cover the costs of regulation.

There was an amendment added to the bill last week in advance of the hearing on the 27th (I think) that insists that a criteria for suitability is established before online poker can go live. This is an attempt to appease Pechanga on the 'bad actors' issue, perhaps it even will.

All that said, I don't see any reason at all why Pechanga would agree to creating an online poker market in which only pokerstars, and to a lessor extent its partners, can make any money. Not one.

And as this bill will (eventually, maybe) need 2/3's of the legislature to approve, I think Pechanga is in a position to stop it from happening.

As long as Pokerstars insists on operating as competition rather than as a supplier, there is no reason at all for tribes to support online poker legislation, anywhere.

This is my firm belief
 
dj11

dj11

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Total posts
23,189
Awards
9
Chips
0
Well then it's settled.;) This is NOT the bill we need in Ca.

I have no idea on where Gov Brown stands on the issue. My guess is being the savvy pol he is, he would prefer others to figure this out. But if he were to do something like get into talks with the Governors of Nevada, and NJ, and De, and Penn, maybe even NY and OK, all at once, even without an agenda, I imagine funny things would happen (probably everywhere but at that meeting). If I understand things correctly, the Gov of Ca. could enter into a pact with NV to provide OLP from Nev to the peeps in Ca. Pretty sure that would wake up the Tribes.

I will probably vocally oppose this as long as the HRA seeks involvement by not doing anything. I would support offering the HRA an opportunity to try and make a go of providing their brand on an OLP site, but I think the promotions that the casinos, and the tribes can offer will mostly nullify anything I can think of that the HRA could do.
 
Last edited:
dj11

dj11

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Total posts
23,189
Awards
9
Chips
0
Well then it's settled.;) This is NOT the bill we need in Ca.


I will probably vocally oppose this as long as the HRA seeks involvement by not doing anything. I would support offering the HRA an opportunity to try and make a go of providing their brand on an OLP site, but I think the promotions that the casinos, and the tribes can offer will mostly nullify anything I can think of that the HRA could do.

http://www.pokernewsdaily.com/norma...orarily-shut-down-new-ownership-sought-28365/

In another thread I mentioned that the City of Gardena gets about $10 mil/year from the 2 card clubs combined, and they are by far the smallest card clubs in the LA Basin.

If that number is even close to reality, then I can see there could be room, statewide, for that $60 mil number.

Before I go vocally opposing the bill base solely on that $60 mil number, I would need to see some analysis, including how the HRA plans on using that money.
 
Top