Hit Us Up
Drop us a line, make a suggestion.. you know the drill.
Copyright © 2013 Low Limit Poker Radio.
So let's be brief, we all know about what happened during black Friday, when the DoJ shut them down. Yes we got paid, but was that an act of faith, or a big PR stunt to get back into the markets that ultimately won't let them, or can they?
Statment from NJDGE:
"The Division of Gaming Enforcement has determined that the application of Rational Services Limited (PokerStars) casino service industry licensure (CSIE) will be held in a suspended status for a period of two years.
The Division, within that period, may consider a request for relief to reactivate the application if significantly changed circumstances are demonstrated at which time the Division’s investigation of PokerStars and its affiliated entities and associated individuals will be resumed to assess suitability.
The Division’s determination is based primarily on the unresolved federal indictment against Isai Scheinberg for the alleged violation of federal gambling statutes, namely, the Illegal Gambling Business Act and the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), and the involvement of certain PokerStars executives with Internet gaming operations in the United State following the enactment of UIGEA."
What this means now...
Statement from Pechenga (Joint Tribal Statement):
"Recent news reports indicate that online poker operator, PokerStars, is in partnership negotiations with a California tribe and two or more card clubs to offer online poker in California. Although we presently have slightly differing views on a legislative framework for Intrastate Internet Poker in California, our tribal governments are united in our steadfast opposition to the easing of regulatory standards that would accommodate bad actors whose past behavior and tainted brands and assets would erode the integrity of Intrastate Internet poker under consideration.
In 2011, three major online poker operators – Absolute Poker, Full Tilt Poker, and PokerStars - had their websites seized and shut down by federal authorities on allegations that, from at least November 2006 through March 2011, those operators and their identified owners and executive officers violated the UIGEA and the Illegal Gambling Business Act, and conspired to commit money laundering and bank and wire fraud. Each of those firms continued to accept bets from US players after December 31, 2006, the effective date of the federal Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). Criminal indictments were also handed down against some of the owners and senior officers.
For the last quarter-century our tribal governments have worked constructively with the State to protect and strengthen the reputation of the California gaming industry by ensuring the honesty, good character, and integrity of licensees, employees, owners, and vendors. To now weaken California’s suitability standards would undermine our collective goal of creating a legislative framework that protects consumers from nefarious operators.
As we prepare to enter the next chapter of gaming in California, we urge the State Legislature to maintain the highest standard of suitability in order to prevent unscrupulous entities and brands from any involvement in legislatively authorized internet poker opportunities."
So with the precedent set by NJ what can PokerStars do? Well first off I do believe that a few things need to be done.
From NY Bill:
"WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 2006, ISSUES CONCERNING THE SCOPE AND INTERPRETATION OF STATE LAW, INCLUDING THE IMPORTANCE OF THE LOCATION OF THE WAGER, WAGERING ACTIVITY AND WEBSITE, WERE CLARIFIED. THOSE PERSONS THAT PROVIDED GOODS OR SERVICES RELATED TO INTERNET GAMBLING INVOLVING NEW YORK CITIZENS PRIOR TO THE ENACTMENT OF THAT STATUTE, INCLUDING, AT THE TIME, POKER, WHICH WAS UNTIL THE ADOPTION OF THIS ACT UNLAWFUL, BUT EXITED IN AN EXPEDITIOUS FASHION AFTER ITS ENACTMENT SHOULD BE REGARDED DIFFERENTLY FROM THOSE THAT CONTINUED TO FLOUT U.S. FEDERAL AND NEW YORK LAW THEREAFTER FOR PURPOSES OF SUITABILITY FOR LICENSING UNDER THIS ARTICLE. GRANTING THOSE PERSONS LICENSING PRIVILEGES OR ALLOWING THE USE OF THE ASSETS OF SUCH PERSONS IN CONNECTION WITH INTERACTIVE GAMING IN THIS STATE, IF THOSE ASSETS WERE USED UNLAWFULLY, WOULD REWARD UNLAWFUL GAMING ACTIVITY, WOULD PERMIT MANIFESTLY UNSUITABLE PERSONS TO PROFIT FROM THEIR UNLAWFUL GAMING ACTIVITY AND WOULD CREATE UNFAIR COMPETITION WITH LICENSEES THAT RESPECTED FEDERAL AND STATE LAW."
With New York's addition to calling those who unlawfully collected wagers during UIGEA and violated NY State Law. This sounds like PokerStars have struck out again.
Step #1: Scheinberg and Tate
To my knowledge, neither one of these two have faced the criminal charges that were brought between the two of them.
Now Scheinberg did step down as the CEO of PokerStars for a part of the civil suit against them, when they did get Full Tilt Poker name, equipment, and all other assets that lead to the remission process currently underway.
Step #2 Get back into the NJ market
If step 1 is completed then there should be no issues minus the "other company executives" that were mentioned above. So only NJ and PokerStars know what this means. Honestly is could be the CEO's of the LLC's of PokerStars, it could be other payment processors, or a multitude of other things.
Honestly this might be the only market available to them since the bad actors clause isn't there.
Step #3 Start tossing money into state legislators
If they could lobby a nearby state, say Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arizona, or any other state close to passing laws they might break into the markets.
A few things they'd have to do.
A) Make sure a pact is allowed
B) Make sure a bad actors clause isn't in there
C) ROW player pool included
Currently the prognosis for the gorilla of the world is getting bleaker by the second. If you look recently, Russia has enacted ISP banning of PokerStars. The only hope, Crimea, is going to be a poker zone to "bolster the local economy." This sounds like the precursor to a Russian UIGEA. If you look at the regulated markets that PokerStars is in, they aren't looking to great. Even if you look recently, PokerStars Pros have been shed as well.
So the question is posed... What is next PokerStars, what is next?