The Association has devoted a page on its website – http://www.egba.eu/en/about/mythbusting – to some of the more common misinformation about the industry, and the real situation, along with links to relevant and supporting independent studies.

The following examples will give InfoPowa readers a taste of the rebuttals:

• There is a significant amount of money laundering taking place online.

No. Independent studies and surveys show that in a regulated sector the risks and amounts associated with online gaming are modest in comparison to other sectors. This is due to the high traceability and transparency of online gaming transactions, as well as the customer identification controls that make money laundering unattractive.

See 2007 report by the German Financial Investigation Unit

See 2008 study by Europe Economics for the European Parliament

See 2009 study by Professor Levi, Professor of Criminology at Cardiff University

Several recent studies by governments and universities – such as research by the highly regarded Division on Addictions, Cambridge Health Alliance, a Harvard Medical School teaching affiliate (see Harvad study link below)- have not produced any evidence to support this allegation. On the contrary, comparisons between a regulated and competitive market (UK – see link below) and a monopoly system (Norway – see link below; Sweden – see link below) show the figures have remained stable over the last decade (around 1% problem gamers) despite the development of online gaming.

EGBA’s members are not complacent, however, and have adopted a responsible approach to gaming (see link below to EGBA Standards) in order to protect vulnerable customers and to help ensure that games of chance remain pure entertainment.

• State monopoly sites are much more responsible than other EU licensed online sites and protect consumers better.

No. A 2008 benchmarking study revealed that 67% of the responsible gaming standards implemented by EGBA members matched or exceeded those applied by ten of Europe’s largest monopolies. The study, carried out by eCOGRA (see link below), was the first ever fact-based and comparative assessment. This clearly shows that it is the private sector that is leading in the important field of responsible gaming practices (see link below to EGBA study).

Link for eCOGRA study

Link to EGBA study

• Online gaming companies encourage children to gamble online.

Underage gambling is strictly prohibited. The online environment provides age verification opportunities that are not available in the offline environment (see below study of Belgian consumer organisation CRIOC). All online customers must provide information including their name and age on registration. This information is then verified using third party verification services.

Protecting minors is a challenge for all stakeholders (parents, public authorities and of course operators). All EGBA members strictly enforce measures aimed at preventing any form of underage gaming. This includes:

-Prominently displaying a ‘no under 18’ sign

-Ensuring that advertising is not targeted towards underage individuals

-Providing a link to a recognised filtering programme to enable parents to prevent minors from accessing our websites.

See CRIOC study

• Gamblers get a better return on state monopoly sites.

Quite the opposite, the average pay-out ratio (percentage of stakes paid back to players) on a state-owned site is significantly lower than that of the competitive private sector. In France, ratios for state operators FDJ and PMU currently stand at 75 and 78% respectively, while it stands at around 93% for online private operators.

Payback ratios are clearly a competitive differentiator and important for new market entrants to ensure they can offer more attractive games to customers.

• Online gaming companies are located ‘off-shore’ and don’t pay any taxes.

Members of the EGBA are all located, licensed and pay taxes within the EU. EGBA member companies make a valuable economic contribution in the EU Member States where they are licensed, including: investment in local economic activity, employment taxes, social contributions, corporate taxes as well as gaming and betting taxes and levies.

The European Gambling Policy Conference will gather key policy makers, national regulators and stakeholders for a full and frank discussion on the best way forward to achieve a market for online gambling services that is appropriately regulated.

The conference will also explore topical challenges facing the online and offline gambling industries including fraud and criminal activity, issues surrounding integrity, consumer protection, and problems and solutions surrounding the positive and negative social impacts of gambling.

Forum Europe says the gambling industry as a whole is fast becoming an integral part of pan-European culture due to its “omnipresent nature and ease of accessibility.”

The overall gross gaming revenue of the European Union accounted for approximately €82 billion in 2008; of this, the GGR from online gambling exceeded €6 billion and this is expected to double in size by 2013, the organisation claims.

The conference will include panel sessions focusing on the following issues:

• The Green Paper on online gambling: Is Europe on the right track?

• Gambling, Good Causes and Sports Integrity – Are the current rules appropriate for the 21st Century?

• Has the right balance been reached between consumer choice and protection?

Full details at: http://www.eu-ems.com/summary.asp?event_id=57&page_id=361&/

The 2011 WSOP is now over two weeks old and 19 bracelets have been awarded, with players from the US, the UK, Canada, and Russia all striking gold with victories at the WSOP. Turnout has continued to be strong with some huge paydays for winners, topped by Allen Bari’s win in Event #4 that was worth $874,116.

After plenty of drama to kick off the WSOP action (including Phil Ivey’s bombshell announcement about sitting out the WSOP and suing Full Tilt as well as a confrontation between Full Tilt pro John Juanda and James Bord) things have settled down, with players getting into the groove of playing big events each and every day from early June well into July.

Fears that the US government’s crackdown on online casino and poker sites might hurt turnout for WSOP events has so far been unfounded, as nearly every event held so far as met or exceeded last year’s numbers.

As far as the big early winners, young British phenom Jake Cody won his first WSOP bracelet to go with his EPT and WPT titles, and John Juanda scored one for the big name pros when he won Event #16 (and denied Phil Hellmuth his 12th WSOP bracelet in the process when he defeated Hellmuth in heads-up play).

It’s been a good start for the UK, with three Brits so far taking down bracelets, which puts them well on pace to break their best showing ever in 2010 when they won five bracelets to put British poker firmly back on the poker map. The US typically dominates the bracelet count easy year and so far 2011 is no exception.

Below you’ll find all the winners for bracelets awarded so far at the 2011 WSOP, with 19 of the 58 total tournaments concluded:

Earlier this week his co-accused, Canadian David Parchomchuk, engaged prominent US lawyer Jeff Ifrah to present his defence that he was merely a supplier of software, and not the owner of the gambling companies targeted in the federal investigation.

VIP Slots Casino

Millionaire Casino

Online Vegas Casino

Go Casino

English Harbour Casino

Crazy Slots Casino

Grand Vegas Casino

Caribbean Gold Casino

Silver Dollar Casino

Slots Galore Casino

Super Slots Casino

For now, the online casinos will still allow existing members to play, but will not accept any new customers. The expectation is that eventually they will close for good, possibly to later reopen under a different name (and avoid the U.S. market).

Those online casinos are part of several different casino groups, but they do have something in common. They all use Vegas Technology software. For that reason, there is speculation that the order to stop accepting customers came from Vegas Tech.

Any Americans who have accounts with those casinos would be wise to withdraw their money as soon as they can. If you have trouble doing so, due to wagering requirements or some other issue, contact customer service and explain the problem. With those casinos joining the crowd of companies avoiding the United States, it is quickly becoming slim pickings for American online gamblers. It is likely that this will have a cascading effect, with casino after casino, group after group, and software after software bowing out of the market. Of course, some may want to stick around to take advantage of decreased competition, but they would do so at a risk. The best hope the American people have is that legislation comes through to clarify the law or regulate the industry.

Tags: Black Friday, casino closing, Vegas Technology

If the bill becomes law, Nevada would set up an intrastate online poker regulatory framework. The regulators would come up with the necessary rules, develop licensing procedures and more. Then they would wait. The bill requires federal approval for Nevada to actually start regulating the industry, even though it would be an intrastate industry.

So there are three options. The first is that the feds say “yeah, you’re cool. Go ahead.” Nevada could then start regulating intrastate online poker. The second option is that the federal government does nothing but eventually regulates the industry at a national level. In that case, since the feds have approved the industry, Nevada could also move forward. In the third scenario, the federal government does not approve of the bill and does not regulate online poker, so the law is worthless.

There is no federal law against online poker in the United States, but the U.S. Department of Justice is of the “opinion” that it is banned. Funny how that works. Though Nevada’s bill is decidedly weak and I joked before that because they made it spineless, I no longer care, in truth it does some good. It may not be much, but the bill is better than nothing, because it’s a state showing approval of online poker.

The bill next will go to the state Senate. Most insiders expect it to easily pass there as well and later be signed by the governor. After that, it’s a waiting game with the federal government.

Tags: gambling regulation, Nevada gambling, online poker

The company will pay $14.25 million for Brandywine, which operates in the states of Nevada and Delaware. Sports betting is legal under federal law in only four US states – Nevada, Delaware, Montana and Oregon.

The British company will also provide a $1.4 million convertible loan as part of the deal.

Nevada has the largest market of the four sports betting states, with an estimated turnover of $2.7 billion in 2010, a company statement revealed this week.

Brandywine recorded revenues of $7.7 million in 2010.

The deal follows the acquisition of American Wagering Inc (AWI) and Club Cal Neva Satellite Race and Sportsbook Division for a total of $39 million last week.

Ralph Topping, chief executive officer of William Hill, said: “Brandywine is a good strategic fit for AWI’s and Cal Neva’s sportsbook operations and will give William Hill a leading position in the US land-based sports betting market.”

The acquisitions of Brandywine, AWI and Cal Neva’s sportsbook division are all expected to complete in 2012, after finalising the licensing process.

The warning from the FBI laughingly points out that being involved in an “illegal gambling business” is a federal crime. That’s true, but being involved in any type of illegal business is a crime. Online poker, however, is not a crime in and of itself.

Initially, some thought that the so-called seizures were a hoax by some hacker, but soon thereafter, the Department of Justice issued a press release concerning a recently unsealed indictment. The press release states that eleven people have been indicted, including the founders of the three largest online poker sites doing business in the U.S., Full Tilt Poker, PokerStars and Absolute Poker.

In addition to the indictments, the United States filed a “civil money laundering and in rem forfeiture complaint against the poker companies, their assets, and the assets of several payment processors.” In other words, the government wants to seize the assets of the poker companies and anyone who processed payments for them. The Justice Department also issued restraining orders against more than 75 bank accounts that were used by the poker rooms and the payment processors. They also confiscated five domain names.

There are nine charges that the defendants are facing, including conspiracy to violate UIGEA, operation of an illegal gambling business, conspiracy to commit bank fraud and wire fraud, and money laundering conspiracy.

In short, the government is saying that the poker website operators and payment processors conspired to trick banks into processing payments for online gambling. They allegedly tricked the banks by laundering the money through fake Internet businesses. In other cases, the allegedly bribed the banks in order to gain their cooperation.

All of this comes shortly after Australian entrepreneur/slimeball Daniel Tzvetkoff was released from jail on bail after a secret meeting with prosecutors. Tzvetkoff founded Intabill, an online payment processor that worked closely with the very poker websites currently under indictment. After he supposedly ripped them off, the companies sued him. Unable to recoup their money, they alerted the FBI to his presence in the United States, which resulted in him being arrested and charged with various money laundering and fraud crimes.

As a man with inside knowledge into the payment processes of these poker sites, he had a lot of leverage. With him now released on bail, having previously been denied bail due to being a flight risk, and these eleven people being indicted, it seems that Tzvetkoff cooperated and turned over these “bigger fish” to the authorities.

Tags: Department of Justice, online poker, PokerStars, seized domain names

The hand came at 7:17PM GMT on Friday 4 March.  The winner of the hand, who has yet to be identified, now has the choice between two “billionaire experiences” as their prize.  The winner can select either a trip to Monaco to watch the Grand Prix auto race from a private yacht, or a vacation at the Turtle Island tropical resort in Fiji.

Mark Leighton, the Casino Manager of Bodog.com, said that the site’s billionth blackjack hand represents a “very special milestone” for both Bodog in particular and the online gaming industry in general.  Leighton also cited “the loyalty of our players” for the site’s longevity in the ever-changing online casino industry.

According to Google Alerts, Bodog is the biggest brand in online gaming.  In addition to the virtual blackjack tables, the Bodog online casino also has several other popular games, including slots, video poker, craps and roulette. 

Bodog also has online poker, online bingo and online sports betting sites under its corporate umbrella.  2006 World Series of Poker Main Event Champion Jamie Gold was a member of the “Team Bodog” group of professional poker players who endorsed the site.

While the gambling debates have taken place, another vice has also been front and center. Canadian provinces are going after tobacco companies as part of their efforts to slow the use of tobacco in their jurisdictions.

Alberta will soon launch a lawsuit that could become one of the biggest of its kind in Canadian history. The lawsuit is seeking to recover billions of dollars from the tobacco industry for health care costs. Tobacco companies have been on the hit list of many countries in recent years.

“We are confident this action is the right thing to do,” said Justice Minister Alison Redford. “Some of the most costly illnesses to treat, such as cancer and heart disease, are caused by smoking. The litigation we plan to commence will seek to share this burden with the manufacturers of this product.”

The lawsuit is being met with criticism from those within the tobacco industry. There have been rumblings about the fact that these governments such as Alberta are profiting from tobacco sales through taxes. The industry also feels it is hypocritical to go after tobacco when gambling is openly accepted.

“I’m a smoker, so it may be biased, but how can the government claim that tobacco is the main reason for health care costs?” said Paul Timon. “What about the people who are addicted to gambling and need to get treatment?”

British Columbia, Ontario, and New Brunswick have started the push to recover funds from the tobacco companies. British Columbia launched their first online casino, PlayNow, this past summer. It is unlikely the gambling issue will have any bearing on the outcome of the tobacco lawsuits.