Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Select your timezone:
And EW’s Entertainer of the Year is…Sandra Bullock! She is the gift that keeps on giving. First the 49-year-old Oscar winner teamed up with the uproarious Melissa McCarthy in Paul Feig’s winning buddy cop comedy The Heat. Then, as Dr. Ryan Stone in Alfonso Cuaron’s Gravity, Bullock gives an emotionally naked performance that will likely earn her an Oscar nomination. Bullock’s tremendous talent and range — to say nothing of the woman’s trademark grace and good humor in good times and bad — is what earned her the top spot on our annual list of the most exciting performers in 2013.
Bullock’s one-two punch demanded a fair amount of give and take from the actor. When she signed on to The Heat Bullock didn’t expect to be playing straight man to McCarthy’s firehose-blast of a performance. “Once I realized that that drove the film I had to step back,” she says. “Otherwise I would’ve been fighting for something that would’ve ended up on the cutting room floor. It wasn’t what I was hoping for but the end result was the success of the film and people liking us together.” While Bullock nixes any talk of The Heat 2, she says she’s keen for another project with her fast friend McCarthy. (Hollywood, get on this!)
She was a true collaborator on Gravity as well. It was her idea for instance that her character Dr. Ryan Stone was in a raw state of mourning for her dead child. (Originally, the script called for her character to have a child waiting for her back on Earth.) “What if she had absolutely nothing to fight for?” Bullock says she proposed. “She’s lost a child, there’s nothing back home, she’s a person who’s basically a machine. That was my idea and Alfonso was so open to it.” And as for squashing talk of another Gravity, Bullock appreciated Cuaron’s alternate ending idea of George Clooney falling from the sky on top of her at the end. “The last scene you just see us on top of each other, limbs everywhere,” she imagines with a laugh. “Our hands intertwine with our last breath of air and we die on top of each other clutching the Earth.”
Bullock’s one-two punch demanded a fair amount of give and take from the actor. When she signed on to The Heat Bullock didn’t expect to be playing straight man to McCarthy’s firehose-blast of a performance. “Once I realized that that drove the film I had to step back,” she says. “Otherwise I would’ve been fighting for something that would’ve ended up on the cutting room floor. It wasn’t what I was hoping for but the end result was the success of the film and people liking us together.” While Bullock nixes any talk of The Heat 2, she says she’s keen for another project with her fast friend McCarthy. (Hollywood, get on this!)
She was a true collaborator on Gravity as well. It was her idea for instance that her character Dr. Ryan Stone was in a raw state of mourning for her dead child. (Originally, the script called for her character to have a child waiting for her back on Earth.) “What if she had absolutely nothing to fight for?” Bullock says she proposed. “She’s lost a child, there’s nothing back home, she’s a person who’s basically a machine. That was my idea and Alfonso was so open to it.” And as for squashing talk of another Gravity, Bullock appreciated Cuaron’s alternate ending idea of George Clooney falling from the sky on top of her at the end. “The last scene you just see us on top of each other, limbs everywhere,” she imagines with a laugh. “Our hands intertwine with our last breath of air and we die on top of each other clutching the Earth.”
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
New Jersey began allowing Internet gambling on Tuesday in a much-watched bet that there are untapped sources of revenue on bedside iPads and cubicle desktops, and even among people checking their phones while they wait in line for coffee. Gambling analysts say it is the most significant development since casinos opened in Atlantic City over three decades ago, ultimately setting off what became a furious competition among states for a share of the take.
Eight other states have legislation pending that would allow Internet gambling. Delaware and Nevada began offering some online gambling this year. But New Jersey is considered the first true test case because it allows a full range of casino games — not just poker — and its much larger population offers the scale to see whether online gambling can meet the bold predictions for revenue and tap into a younger, more web-dependent demographic without stealing customers from struggling casinos.
Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican, who signed the legislation allowing Internet gambling this year, is counting on that gambling to generate $1 billion for the state’s casinos in its first year, bringing in $150 million in tax revenue to help balance the state budget.
Ratings agencies and gambling industry analysts said that estimate was hugely inflated; one forecaster, H2 Gambling Capital, predicted that online gambling will produce about $300 million for New Jersey casinos — or about $45 million in tax revenue.
But H2 Gambling Capital estimated that the market in the United States could be worth about $9 billion in the next five years, particularly if large states such as California that are now considering online gambling begin to allow it.
Analysts are watching to see not just whether New Jersey can make money, but also whether new technology can guarantee that bets are placed only within state lines and by people older than 21, as the legislation requires. They are also watching whether, as some fear, the online expansion will put gambling addiction a mere click away.
The official debut on Tuesday was only the beginning of what promises to be a political fight. Legislators are already pushing to allow international companies to operate in New Jersey; the current law allows Internet gambling only through a limited number of casinos.
On the other side, Sheldon Adelson, one of the largest casino operators in the world and a major Republican donor, has pledged to fight state and federal laws that would allow more Internet gambling — a stance that is bucking most of the industry.
“The Internet is the next frontier not just for gaming but for every industry,” said Geoff Freeman, the president of the American Gaming Association. “You can look at industries that have seized the potential of the Internet to leverage and grow their business. Then there are those companies like Blockbuster and Hollywood Video who tried to force people to consume their products how they wanted us to consume them, and went out of business.
“As an industry, the question is how do we get out ahead of this.”
Executives at online gambling companies argue that it exists illegally already and may as well be tapped for profit and tax revenues, and regulated to protect players.
Worldwide, online gambling is now a $33 billion market, and $3 billion of that comes from illegal bets placed in the United States, according to the gaming association.
“It’s a new era of using the technology to meet what regulators are concerned about, to protect our children and our data,” said Tobin Prior, chief executive of Ultimate Gaming, which is operating games through Trump Taj Mahal in Atlantic City.
Gambling online was largely accepted in the United States from the late 1990s until 2006, when Congress passed a law that made it illegal for gambling companies to accept bets online for “unlawful” transactions. Many companies left the market, leaving less well-regulated operators that in several cases turned out to be laundering money.
In early 2011, the Justice Department indicted the heads of three companies operating online poker in the United States. But later that year, the department issued a ruling saying that only sports bets were unlawful. States, already in a fierce competition for casino customers, moved quickly to take advantage of the new market.
The legislation signed by Mr. Christie was a lifeline to Atlantic City casinos, which have been losing customers to new casinos in New York and Pennsylvania. Under the law, online gambling companies have to operate through the casinos.
Seven casinos were approved for a “soft launch” that began last week, with a trial offered to invited guests. State gaming officials said they were surprised at how many people accepted those offers — about 10,000. Six casinos — all but the Golden Nugget — were approved for wider play starting on Tuesday..
The state and the casinos sent testers outside the state to test technology that is supposed to guarantee that bets come only from within New Jersey. None of those testers succeeded in breaking through, though casinos said some others did. Other gamblers in New Jersey tried to get onto the sites but could not. And some banks and credit card companies blocked customers from getting access.
“It’s taking a bit of time for these guys who exited in 2006 to be reassured that the players who are here now are bona fide,” said Brian Mattingley, chief executive of 888-com, which operates in all three states that offer online gambling.
David Rebuck, director of the State Division of Gaming Enforcement, said most of the bets during the trial period had been placed on computers, not mobile devices, and had been concentrated where the state expected, in cities in the northern part of the state, such as Hoboken, with its sizable population of people in their 20s and 30s. “We were inundated with people trying to get in,” he said.
[url]www-nytimes-com/2013/11/27
Eight other states have legislation pending that would allow Internet gambling. Delaware and Nevada began offering some online gambling this year. But New Jersey is considered the first true test case because it allows a full range of casino games — not just poker — and its much larger population offers the scale to see whether online gambling can meet the bold predictions for revenue and tap into a younger, more web-dependent demographic without stealing customers from struggling casinos.
Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican, who signed the legislation allowing Internet gambling this year, is counting on that gambling to generate $1 billion for the state’s casinos in its first year, bringing in $150 million in tax revenue to help balance the state budget.
Ratings agencies and gambling industry analysts said that estimate was hugely inflated; one forecaster, H2 Gambling Capital, predicted that online gambling will produce about $300 million for New Jersey casinos — or about $45 million in tax revenue.
But H2 Gambling Capital estimated that the market in the United States could be worth about $9 billion in the next five years, particularly if large states such as California that are now considering online gambling begin to allow it.
Analysts are watching to see not just whether New Jersey can make money, but also whether new technology can guarantee that bets are placed only within state lines and by people older than 21, as the legislation requires. They are also watching whether, as some fear, the online expansion will put gambling addiction a mere click away.
The official debut on Tuesday was only the beginning of what promises to be a political fight. Legislators are already pushing to allow international companies to operate in New Jersey; the current law allows Internet gambling only through a limited number of casinos.
On the other side, Sheldon Adelson, one of the largest casino operators in the world and a major Republican donor, has pledged to fight state and federal laws that would allow more Internet gambling — a stance that is bucking most of the industry.
“The Internet is the next frontier not just for gaming but for every industry,” said Geoff Freeman, the president of the American Gaming Association. “You can look at industries that have seized the potential of the Internet to leverage and grow their business. Then there are those companies like Blockbuster and Hollywood Video who tried to force people to consume their products how they wanted us to consume them, and went out of business.
“As an industry, the question is how do we get out ahead of this.”
Executives at online gambling companies argue that it exists illegally already and may as well be tapped for profit and tax revenues, and regulated to protect players.
Worldwide, online gambling is now a $33 billion market, and $3 billion of that comes from illegal bets placed in the United States, according to the gaming association.
“It’s a new era of using the technology to meet what regulators are concerned about, to protect our children and our data,” said Tobin Prior, chief executive of Ultimate Gaming, which is operating games through Trump Taj Mahal in Atlantic City.
Gambling online was largely accepted in the United States from the late 1990s until 2006, when Congress passed a law that made it illegal for gambling companies to accept bets online for “unlawful” transactions. Many companies left the market, leaving less well-regulated operators that in several cases turned out to be laundering money.
In early 2011, the Justice Department indicted the heads of three companies operating online poker in the United States. But later that year, the department issued a ruling saying that only sports bets were unlawful. States, already in a fierce competition for casino customers, moved quickly to take advantage of the new market.
The legislation signed by Mr. Christie was a lifeline to Atlantic City casinos, which have been losing customers to new casinos in New York and Pennsylvania. Under the law, online gambling companies have to operate through the casinos.
Seven casinos were approved for a “soft launch” that began last week, with a trial offered to invited guests. State gaming officials said they were surprised at how many people accepted those offers — about 10,000. Six casinos — all but the Golden Nugget — were approved for wider play starting on Tuesday..
The state and the casinos sent testers outside the state to test technology that is supposed to guarantee that bets come only from within New Jersey. None of those testers succeeded in breaking through, though casinos said some others did. Other gamblers in New Jersey tried to get onto the sites but could not. And some banks and credit card companies blocked customers from getting access.
“It’s taking a bit of time for these guys who exited in 2006 to be reassured that the players who are here now are bona fide,” said Brian Mattingley, chief executive of 888-com, which operates in all three states that offer online gambling.
David Rebuck, director of the State Division of Gaming Enforcement, said most of the bets during the trial period had been placed on computers, not mobile devices, and had been concentrated where the state expected, in cities in the northern part of the state, such as Hoboken, with its sizable population of people in their 20s and 30s. “We were inundated with people trying to get in,” he said.
[url]www-nytimes-com/2013/11/27
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
The following editorial appears on Bloomberg View: In a victory for fun, liberty and sound fiscal policy, New Jersey will Tuesday let most of its residents gamble online. All Americans should be so (dare we say it?) lucky.
New Jersey is the third state, after Delaware and Nevada, to permit online gambling within its borders, and a dozen or so others will consider doing so next year. By 2023, according to a forecast by Bloomberg Industries, annual online gambling revenue could reach $23 billion nationwide. In a just world, it would be legal nationwide, too.
Practical problems abound with a state-by-state approach. For one thing, a game such as poker requires significant pools of liquidity — also known as "a big pot" — to work well, which is a challenge in small states. Joining forces in regional gambling blocks, as some states are considering, would expand the market, but it could quickly become a mess if they all have conflicting regulations. Banks and payment processors are turning down perfectly legal gambling transactions for fear that they’d be enabling out-of-state or underage bettors.
These are symptoms of a larger incoherence. Online gambling, like everything else on the Internet, is inherently interstate commerce. That makes federal regulation more sensible.
Two bills in Congress are on the right track. One would legalize all forms of online gambling, except sports, and create an oversight office at the Treasury Department. It would also allow states to opt out. The other proposes a 4 percent federal tax on operators, and allows states to collect an additional 8 percent. Combined, they offer the outline of rational federal approach.
Of course, there will be plenty of objections. Sheldon Adelson, who made his zillion-dollar fortune separating casino-goers from their money, has recently discovered moral objections to gambling (online, anyway). He should stop whining. Casinos — like every other industry, from music to media to retail — will have to adjust to the Internet’s ruthless disruption. Casinos could capitalize on their brands, regulatory knowledge and customer-service skills to compete for online action, and they could use loyalty programs and promotions to lure their new Web-savvy patrons to the house. They can also offer benefits the Internet can’t: cash transactions, anonymity, exotic entertainment, free cocktails.
Some states may not like the idea, either. They might depend on tax revenue from casinos to shore up their budgets, for instance, or they might object on moral grounds. Neither is a good reason to oppose these laws. States will be able to raise substantial new revenue from online wagering, and traditional casinos will still be producing cash for a long time to come. If state officials find gambling sinful, they could always opt out.
At any rate, problem gambling and other harmful side effects will probably be easier to prevent online. If would-be punters are required to open an account and have their identities verified, imposing loss limits should be fairly easy from a technical perspective. (As with most things digital, convenience comes at the expense of privacy.) Compulsive gamblers might still get around such safeguards, but doing so would certainly be harder than at a casino, where you can plow through chips as long as you like. Online operators could also more easily comply with anti-money-laundering laws and prohibitions against underage gambling. Again, it wouldn’t be foolproof, but neither are real-life casinos.
Finally, a federally regulated system would help move the online gambling action away from the shady offshore shops that currently prevail and toward licensed — and taxed — domestic operators. Gamblers could be assured that their financial transactions are safe and legal, and that the games aren’t rigged. Public officials, meanwhile, would be rewarded with a windfall: Taxing online wagers could lead to as much as $41 billion in new revenue over 10 years.
People clearly like gambling. Letting them do so where they want would make them happy. Regulating it properly would keep them safe. And taxing it all will make lawmakers smile. A decent trifecta, you might say.
Bloomberg: Online gambling deserves a nationwide chance | The Salt Lake Tribune
New Jersey is the third state, after Delaware and Nevada, to permit online gambling within its borders, and a dozen or so others will consider doing so next year. By 2023, according to a forecast by Bloomberg Industries, annual online gambling revenue could reach $23 billion nationwide. In a just world, it would be legal nationwide, too.
Practical problems abound with a state-by-state approach. For one thing, a game such as poker requires significant pools of liquidity — also known as "a big pot" — to work well, which is a challenge in small states. Joining forces in regional gambling blocks, as some states are considering, would expand the market, but it could quickly become a mess if they all have conflicting regulations. Banks and payment processors are turning down perfectly legal gambling transactions for fear that they’d be enabling out-of-state or underage bettors.
These are symptoms of a larger incoherence. Online gambling, like everything else on the Internet, is inherently interstate commerce. That makes federal regulation more sensible.
Two bills in Congress are on the right track. One would legalize all forms of online gambling, except sports, and create an oversight office at the Treasury Department. It would also allow states to opt out. The other proposes a 4 percent federal tax on operators, and allows states to collect an additional 8 percent. Combined, they offer the outline of rational federal approach.
Of course, there will be plenty of objections. Sheldon Adelson, who made his zillion-dollar fortune separating casino-goers from their money, has recently discovered moral objections to gambling (online, anyway). He should stop whining. Casinos — like every other industry, from music to media to retail — will have to adjust to the Internet’s ruthless disruption. Casinos could capitalize on their brands, regulatory knowledge and customer-service skills to compete for online action, and they could use loyalty programs and promotions to lure their new Web-savvy patrons to the house. They can also offer benefits the Internet can’t: cash transactions, anonymity, exotic entertainment, free cocktails.
Some states may not like the idea, either. They might depend on tax revenue from casinos to shore up their budgets, for instance, or they might object on moral grounds. Neither is a good reason to oppose these laws. States will be able to raise substantial new revenue from online wagering, and traditional casinos will still be producing cash for a long time to come. If state officials find gambling sinful, they could always opt out.
At any rate, problem gambling and other harmful side effects will probably be easier to prevent online. If would-be punters are required to open an account and have their identities verified, imposing loss limits should be fairly easy from a technical perspective. (As with most things digital, convenience comes at the expense of privacy.) Compulsive gamblers might still get around such safeguards, but doing so would certainly be harder than at a casino, where you can plow through chips as long as you like. Online operators could also more easily comply with anti-money-laundering laws and prohibitions against underage gambling. Again, it wouldn’t be foolproof, but neither are real-life casinos.
Finally, a federally regulated system would help move the online gambling action away from the shady offshore shops that currently prevail and toward licensed — and taxed — domestic operators. Gamblers could be assured that their financial transactions are safe and legal, and that the games aren’t rigged. Public officials, meanwhile, would be rewarded with a windfall: Taxing online wagers could lead to as much as $41 billion in new revenue over 10 years.
People clearly like gambling. Letting them do so where they want would make them happy. Regulating it properly would keep them safe. And taxing it all will make lawmakers smile. A decent trifecta, you might say.
Bloomberg: Online gambling deserves a nationwide chance | The Salt Lake Tribune
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
People from all over the state logged on to computers and began playing a variety of online casino games for money Tuesday, a day that state and business officials hope will mark a sea change in the fortunes of the casino industry in New Jersey and beyond.
But many would-be bettors were left on the e-sidelines on the first day of New Jersey’s big wager on Internet gambling.
Brian Mattingley, chief executive of 888 Holdings, a Gibraltar-based gambling website operator that has an online partnership with Caesars Interactive Entertainment in Atlantic City, said Tuesday that about 60 percent of those who attempted to sign up were successful.
Of the 40 percent who could not, most either had trouble using their credit cards to set up a required deposit, or were locked out because their location within New Jersey borders could not be confirmed with certainty, said Mattingley, whose company is one of seven Internet gambling “platforms” licensed to do business in New Jersey. Other companies contacted Tuesday said they would not have figures available until today.
State officials have touted Internet gambling as a boon to the sagging fortunes of Atlantic City and a potentially large stream of revenue for the state budget.
State Sen. Ray Lesniak, D-Union, predicted that the launch of online gambling would allow the state to become a “Silicon Valley of Internet gaming” as later-arriving states look to New Jersey for technology help once the play is legalized there.
With so much at stake, both state regulators and gambling company executives preached patience. The issues that frustrated some gamblers on Tuesday were to be expected.
David Rebuck, the director of the state Division of Gaming Enforcement, said Monday that he told operators over the course of the year that the state would insist on high standards for location verification — called geofencing — “and that those standards would be mandated.”
Rebuck said that while those companies “at times probably disagreed with our approach, I am not willing to put our state at risk of easy access to out-of-staters.”
Mattingley said he doesn’t have any disagreement with Rebuck’s stance.
- See more at: Many left out of Internet gambling sign-ups - NorthJersey-com
But many would-be bettors were left on the e-sidelines on the first day of New Jersey’s big wager on Internet gambling.
Brian Mattingley, chief executive of 888 Holdings, a Gibraltar-based gambling website operator that has an online partnership with Caesars Interactive Entertainment in Atlantic City, said Tuesday that about 60 percent of those who attempted to sign up were successful.
Of the 40 percent who could not, most either had trouble using their credit cards to set up a required deposit, or were locked out because their location within New Jersey borders could not be confirmed with certainty, said Mattingley, whose company is one of seven Internet gambling “platforms” licensed to do business in New Jersey. Other companies contacted Tuesday said they would not have figures available until today.
State officials have touted Internet gambling as a boon to the sagging fortunes of Atlantic City and a potentially large stream of revenue for the state budget.
State Sen. Ray Lesniak, D-Union, predicted that the launch of online gambling would allow the state to become a “Silicon Valley of Internet gaming” as later-arriving states look to New Jersey for technology help once the play is legalized there.
With so much at stake, both state regulators and gambling company executives preached patience. The issues that frustrated some gamblers on Tuesday were to be expected.
David Rebuck, the director of the state Division of Gaming Enforcement, said Monday that he told operators over the course of the year that the state would insist on high standards for location verification — called geofencing — “and that those standards would be mandated.”
Rebuck said that while those companies “at times probably disagreed with our approach, I am not willing to put our state at risk of easy access to out-of-staters.”
Mattingley said he doesn’t have any disagreement with Rebuck’s stance.
- See more at: Many left out of Internet gambling sign-ups - NorthJersey-com
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Family Guy fans reacted in shock, dismay and anger Sunday night after Brian, the Griffins' family dog and a fan-favourite regular character, was killed off and replaced with a new pet in short order.
In the episode titled "Life of Brian," the talking dog voiced by show creator Seth MacFarlane is hit by a speeding car while crossing the road. A lengthy hospital scene shows Brian pass away surrounded by the rest of the Griffin family.
Brian has been a series staple since the show debuted in 1999. An articulate talking dog frequently at odds with his family, fans perhaps knew him best as the travelling companion of the megalomaniacal baby Stewie Griffin on numerous episodes.
Fans reacted with shock and disbelief at Brian's death. FOX's official Family Guy Twitter account posted a picture of Brian after the episode aired. The hashtags #familyguy and #RIPBrian later reached the top of the social media network's trending lists.
True to Family Guy's breakneck pacing, it introduced Vinnie, a new dog voiced by The Sopranos' Tony Sirico, in the same episode.
Family Guy executive producer Steve Callaghan told E! Online that the idea to kill off a main character "caught fire" quickly once it was pitched, and Brian seemed the least painful choice.
"It seemed more in the realm of reality that a dog would get hit by a car, than if one of the kids died," said Callaghan. "As much as we love Brian, and as much as everyone loves their pets, we felt it would be more traumatic to lose one of the kids, rather than the family pet."
Assuming the character death remains permanent – show creator MacFarlane can presumably return to the role whenever he wants – Brian Griffin joins the list of deceased cartoon pets including Seymour the dog from Futurama and at least four cats named Snowball from The Simpsons.
In the episode titled "Life of Brian," the talking dog voiced by show creator Seth MacFarlane is hit by a speeding car while crossing the road. A lengthy hospital scene shows Brian pass away surrounded by the rest of the Griffin family.
Brian has been a series staple since the show debuted in 1999. An articulate talking dog frequently at odds with his family, fans perhaps knew him best as the travelling companion of the megalomaniacal baby Stewie Griffin on numerous episodes.
Fans reacted with shock and disbelief at Brian's death. FOX's official Family Guy Twitter account posted a picture of Brian after the episode aired. The hashtags #familyguy and #RIPBrian later reached the top of the social media network's trending lists.
True to Family Guy's breakneck pacing, it introduced Vinnie, a new dog voiced by The Sopranos' Tony Sirico, in the same episode.
Family Guy executive producer Steve Callaghan told E! Online that the idea to kill off a main character "caught fire" quickly once it was pitched, and Brian seemed the least painful choice.
"It seemed more in the realm of reality that a dog would get hit by a car, than if one of the kids died," said Callaghan. "As much as we love Brian, and as much as everyone loves their pets, we felt it would be more traumatic to lose one of the kids, rather than the family pet."
Assuming the character death remains permanent – show creator MacFarlane can presumably return to the role whenever he wants – Brian Griffin joins the list of deceased cartoon pets including Seymour the dog from Futurama and at least four cats named Snowball from The Simpsons.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Online gambling, like everything else on the Internet, is inherently interstate commerce. That makes federal regulation sensible.
Two bills in Congress are on the right track. One would legalize all forms of online gambling, except sports, and create an oversight office at the U.S. Department of the Treasury. It would also allow states to opt out of permitting such wagering. The other bill proposes a 4 percent federal tax on operators and permits states to collect an additional 8 percent in taxes. Combined, the two bills offer the outline for a rational federal approach.
Of course, there will be plenty of objections. Sheldon Adelson, who made his zillion-dollar fortune separating casino-goers from their money, has recently discovered moral objections to gambling (online, anyway). He should stop whining. Casinos—like every other industry from music to media to retail—will have to adjust to the Internet’s ruthless disruption. Some states may not like the idea, either. They might depend on tax revenue from casinos to shore up their budgets, for instance, or they might object to online gambling on moral grounds. Yet states will be able to raise substantial new revenue from online wagering, and traditional casinos will still be producing cash for a long time to come. If state officials find gambling sinful, they can always opt out.
At any rate, problem gambling and other harmful side effects will probably be easier to prevent online than they have been with casinos. If would-be players are required to open an account and have their identities verified, imposing loss limits should be fairly manageable from a technical perspective. (As with most things digital, convenience comes at the expense of privacy.) Online operators could also more easily comply with laws targeting money laundering and prohibitions against underage gambling. Again, it wouldn’t be foolproof, but neither are real-life casinos.
Finally, a federally regulated system would help move online gambling toward licensed—and taxed—domestic operators. Gamblers could be assured that their financial transactions are safe and legal and that the games aren’t rigged. Public officials, meanwhile, would be rewarded with a windfall: Taxing online wagers could lead to as much as $41 billion in revenue over 10 years.
People clearly like gambling. Letting them do so where they want would make them happy. Regulating it properly would keep them safe. And taxing it will make lawmakers smile.
Bloomberg View: The Case for Legalizing Online Gambling - Businessweek
Two bills in Congress are on the right track. One would legalize all forms of online gambling, except sports, and create an oversight office at the U.S. Department of the Treasury. It would also allow states to opt out of permitting such wagering. The other bill proposes a 4 percent federal tax on operators and permits states to collect an additional 8 percent in taxes. Combined, the two bills offer the outline for a rational federal approach.
Of course, there will be plenty of objections. Sheldon Adelson, who made his zillion-dollar fortune separating casino-goers from their money, has recently discovered moral objections to gambling (online, anyway). He should stop whining. Casinos—like every other industry from music to media to retail—will have to adjust to the Internet’s ruthless disruption. Some states may not like the idea, either. They might depend on tax revenue from casinos to shore up their budgets, for instance, or they might object to online gambling on moral grounds. Yet states will be able to raise substantial new revenue from online wagering, and traditional casinos will still be producing cash for a long time to come. If state officials find gambling sinful, they can always opt out.
At any rate, problem gambling and other harmful side effects will probably be easier to prevent online than they have been with casinos. If would-be players are required to open an account and have their identities verified, imposing loss limits should be fairly manageable from a technical perspective. (As with most things digital, convenience comes at the expense of privacy.) Online operators could also more easily comply with laws targeting money laundering and prohibitions against underage gambling. Again, it wouldn’t be foolproof, but neither are real-life casinos.
Finally, a federally regulated system would help move online gambling toward licensed—and taxed—domestic operators. Gamblers could be assured that their financial transactions are safe and legal and that the games aren’t rigged. Public officials, meanwhile, would be rewarded with a windfall: Taxing online wagers could lead to as much as $41 billion in revenue over 10 years.
People clearly like gambling. Letting them do so where they want would make them happy. Regulating it properly would keep them safe. And taxing it will make lawmakers smile.
Bloomberg View: The Case for Legalizing Online Gambling - Businessweek
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Betting online isn't just a gamble for the players, it's also risky for the companies who brought internet wagering to New Jersey.
Brian Mattingley, CEO of 888, an online gaming company, says the company has been happy with the results.
Mattingley believes online betting will be popular but is unlikely to reach the $1 billion a year the state of New Jersey is counting on to make up for lost tax dollars from slumping Atlantic City casinos.
"We believe that the market will be in the region of $250 million in its infancy, growing to half a billion probably at maturity," Mattingley says.
Mattingley says his company was eager to get back into New Jersey seven years after online gambling was outlawed. "The consumer in New Jersey had the propensity to spend more than virtually any other state," he says.
Mattingley says it's too soon to tell if New Jersey is still a state of high rollers.
Online gaming companies pleased with early results of internet gambling
Brian Mattingley, CEO of 888, an online gaming company, says the company has been happy with the results.
Mattingley believes online betting will be popular but is unlikely to reach the $1 billion a year the state of New Jersey is counting on to make up for lost tax dollars from slumping Atlantic City casinos.
"We believe that the market will be in the region of $250 million in its infancy, growing to half a billion probably at maturity," Mattingley says.
Mattingley says his company was eager to get back into New Jersey seven years after online gambling was outlawed. "The consumer in New Jersey had the propensity to spend more than virtually any other state," he says.
Mattingley says it's too soon to tell if New Jersey is still a state of high rollers.
Online gaming companies pleased with early results of internet gambling
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
The directors share their thoughts around the video:
"The development of this concept came together reasonably organically - in preliminary discussions we realised that we both felt the video needed to revolve around running and/or movement. Title aside, Aidee had often been running to the song and it felt like a natural way to move to it, and to us both it seemed that Jeremy Toy's production was just begging for some choreography.
"However Anna was becoming increasingly pregnant so - logistically speaking - elaborate dance sequences had the potential to become difficult. We thought it could be interesting to "clone" her with back-up dancers and still feature her throughout, but then realised we were faced with a more fundamental decision - did we want to try and conceal the pregnancy, or did we want to embrace it? Quite clearly we opted for the latter.
"To us the song has a kind of wry humour to it, a lightness in the face of difficulties, which was an element we definitely wanted to visually capture. We also felt that the song deserved a video with a unique and immersive world, and this world emerged through the process with just a hint of surreality attached.
"But ultimately we just wanted to have fun. An enormous thanks goes out to everyone who donated their time. We hope you had fun."
CREDITS:
Directors: Aidee Walker and Alexander Gandar
Producers: Aidee Walker, Anna Coddington, Morgan Leigh Stewart, Alexander Gandar
Director of Photography: Joe Hitchcock
Director of Choreography: Thomas Sainsbury
Make-up: Verity Griffiths
Make-up Assistant: Nikki Milina
Hair: Vada Hair's Engine Room
Production Manager: Morgan Leigh Stewart
Production Assistant/Art Department: Danial Eriksen
Camera Operator: Moehau Hodges-Tai
Camera Assist: Ben Woollen
Editor: Alexander Gandar
Colourist: Mike Carpinter
Stills Photography: Danial Eriksen
Dancers: Jaime Passier-Armstrong, Liz Christall, Cassie Baker, Rebecca Dowling, Kasina Campbell, Shian Perawiti, Claire Barrett, Thomas Sainsbury, Ryan Christensen, Josh Cesan, Nathan Cesan, Satty Thammavong, Jesse Wikiriwhi, Ngawihi Seymour
Special thanks to Converse
"The development of this concept came together reasonably organically - in preliminary discussions we realised that we both felt the video needed to revolve around running and/or movement. Title aside, Aidee had often been running to the song and it felt like a natural way to move to it, and to us both it seemed that Jeremy Toy's production was just begging for some choreography.
"However Anna was becoming increasingly pregnant so - logistically speaking - elaborate dance sequences had the potential to become difficult. We thought it could be interesting to "clone" her with back-up dancers and still feature her throughout, but then realised we were faced with a more fundamental decision - did we want to try and conceal the pregnancy, or did we want to embrace it? Quite clearly we opted for the latter.
"To us the song has a kind of wry humour to it, a lightness in the face of difficulties, which was an element we definitely wanted to visually capture. We also felt that the song deserved a video with a unique and immersive world, and this world emerged through the process with just a hint of surreality attached.
"But ultimately we just wanted to have fun. An enormous thanks goes out to everyone who donated their time. We hope you had fun."
CREDITS:
Directors: Aidee Walker and Alexander Gandar
Producers: Aidee Walker, Anna Coddington, Morgan Leigh Stewart, Alexander Gandar
Director of Photography: Joe Hitchcock
Director of Choreography: Thomas Sainsbury
Make-up: Verity Griffiths
Make-up Assistant: Nikki Milina
Hair: Vada Hair's Engine Room
Production Manager: Morgan Leigh Stewart
Production Assistant/Art Department: Danial Eriksen
Camera Operator: Moehau Hodges-Tai
Camera Assist: Ben Woollen
Editor: Alexander Gandar
Colourist: Mike Carpinter
Stills Photography: Danial Eriksen
Dancers: Jaime Passier-Armstrong, Liz Christall, Cassie Baker, Rebecca Dowling, Kasina Campbell, Shian Perawiti, Claire Barrett, Thomas Sainsbury, Ryan Christensen, Josh Cesan, Nathan Cesan, Satty Thammavong, Jesse Wikiriwhi, Ngawihi Seymour
Special thanks to Converse
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Singapore's government plans to ban remote gambling, said Second Minister for Home Affairs S Iswaran on Thursday.
Speaking at a symposium on casino regulation and crime, the minister in the Prime Minister's office said remote gambling, which basically is any form of gambling that takes place over the Internet or communication device, has been gaining popularity in Singapore, alongside its associated risks.
In extending its laws on gambling that are currently in place, the government plans to block access to gambling websites, prevent payments to remote gambling operators and outlaw advertisements promoting remote gambling. Iswaran said.
"While such measures may not be foolproof, they will impede access to remote gambling platforms and send a clear signal of the regulatory stance in Singapore," he pointed out.
In the National Council for Problem Gambling's 2011 survey of gambling participation among the country's general population, just one per cent of respondents said they gambled online, he said.
Yet, the trend is gaining traction, and, based on analyst estimates, the size of the market in Singapore at more than S$376 million will grow between 6 and 7 per cent annually.
"It is ubiquitously and easily accessible through the Internet and mobile applications, especially by a younger and more tech-savvy generation," said Iswaran in his speech, noting that in a recent survey of about 1,000 online users, close to 30 per cent of respondents had gambled remotely at least once in the past year.
Additionally, argues Iswaran, the nature of games like poker and other casino-type games played online lend themselves to repetitive play and addictive behaviour. Online gamblers have poorer self-control, too, and are more likely to gamble more frequently, for a longer period and with more money than planned, he added.
Online gambling could also become a source or be used for other illegal activities and syndicated crime, said Iswaran, who called on heightened international collaboration between regulators and enforcement agencies of various countries.
"These trends in remote gambling illustrate the dynamic nature of the gaming industry, which will continue to evolve and present new challenges for regulators and law enforcers," he said.
Singapore set to block online gambling sites
Speaking at a symposium on casino regulation and crime, the minister in the Prime Minister's office said remote gambling, which basically is any form of gambling that takes place over the Internet or communication device, has been gaining popularity in Singapore, alongside its associated risks.
In extending its laws on gambling that are currently in place, the government plans to block access to gambling websites, prevent payments to remote gambling operators and outlaw advertisements promoting remote gambling. Iswaran said.
"While such measures may not be foolproof, they will impede access to remote gambling platforms and send a clear signal of the regulatory stance in Singapore," he pointed out.
In the National Council for Problem Gambling's 2011 survey of gambling participation among the country's general population, just one per cent of respondents said they gambled online, he said.
Yet, the trend is gaining traction, and, based on analyst estimates, the size of the market in Singapore at more than S$376 million will grow between 6 and 7 per cent annually.
"It is ubiquitously and easily accessible through the Internet and mobile applications, especially by a younger and more tech-savvy generation," said Iswaran in his speech, noting that in a recent survey of about 1,000 online users, close to 30 per cent of respondents had gambled remotely at least once in the past year.
Additionally, argues Iswaran, the nature of games like poker and other casino-type games played online lend themselves to repetitive play and addictive behaviour. Online gamblers have poorer self-control, too, and are more likely to gamble more frequently, for a longer period and with more money than planned, he added.
Online gambling could also become a source or be used for other illegal activities and syndicated crime, said Iswaran, who called on heightened international collaboration between regulators and enforcement agencies of various countries.
"These trends in remote gambling illustrate the dynamic nature of the gaming industry, which will continue to evolve and present new challenges for regulators and law enforcers," he said.
Singapore set to block online gambling sites
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
You'll have to excuse the small inside joke. "It's here" was how The Press of Atlantic City's lead story began on May 27, 1978 - the day after the city's first legal casino opened at Resorts International Hotel Casino.
And, we have to say, this week's rollout of Internet gambling had a little of the same gold-rush feel to it.
This could be huge - for Atlantic City and the state.
Or not. Skeptics worry that Internet gambling will hurt the 12 casino hotels in Atlantic City, as gamblers stay home and place bets from their kitchens rather than visit the resort.
But the answer to that question won't be clear for some time. And right now, we aren't the only ones who are a bit excited by Internet gambling in New Jersey.
"It's a victory for fun, liberty and sound fiscal policy," said an editorial appearing on Bloomberg View, which called on Congress to legalize Internet gambling nationwide.
The Star-Ledger said Tuesday's kick off of online gambling, after a five-day test period, "may be the most important day Atlantic City's casinos have seen since the first time a dealer uttered the word 'blackjack' more than three decades ago."
Under the Internet gambling law approved late last February, online gaming companies must partner with an Atlantic City casino hotel, and the necessary computer servers must be housed in Atlantic City. Six casinos operating 13 gambling websites received the initial go-ahead to take online bets from people over 21 who are physically in New Jersey. Approximately 10,000 people had registered to play.
There were some glitches. Major banks and credit-card companies, wary of federal law, are refusing to handle online gambling transactions. But that is expected to change.
And geolocation and identity-verification systems blocked some players who should have been allowed to play. But that's the right glitch to have. The software can be tweaked, and it would have been far more serious if an an underage, out-of-state player had been allowed to wager online.
Overall, the birth of this new brand-new industry has been impressive. Many doubted that the state would have the regulations in place and the Internet gambling companies operating in a mere nine months - but it did. The state Division of Gaming Enforcement, under Director David Rebuck, did a great job here, acting responsibly and quickly.
Nevada and Delaware also offer online gambling. But with a population of 9 million, New Jersey is the largest legal market so far for Internet betting. The state expects online betting to generate $1.2 billion for the gambling industry and $160 million in taxes in its first year. Skeptics - there's no shortage of them regarding Internet gambling - see that as incredibly optimistic. But so was a November start date.
Yes, questions remain, and online gambling is no sure bet. But it's here, it seems to be working, and, well, there's at least a shot that this may indeed be a new day for Atlantic City.
Here's hoping.
Internet gambling / Here's hoping - pressofAtlanticCity-com: Editorials
And, we have to say, this week's rollout of Internet gambling had a little of the same gold-rush feel to it.
This could be huge - for Atlantic City and the state.
Or not. Skeptics worry that Internet gambling will hurt the 12 casino hotels in Atlantic City, as gamblers stay home and place bets from their kitchens rather than visit the resort.
But the answer to that question won't be clear for some time. And right now, we aren't the only ones who are a bit excited by Internet gambling in New Jersey.
"It's a victory for fun, liberty and sound fiscal policy," said an editorial appearing on Bloomberg View, which called on Congress to legalize Internet gambling nationwide.
The Star-Ledger said Tuesday's kick off of online gambling, after a five-day test period, "may be the most important day Atlantic City's casinos have seen since the first time a dealer uttered the word 'blackjack' more than three decades ago."
Under the Internet gambling law approved late last February, online gaming companies must partner with an Atlantic City casino hotel, and the necessary computer servers must be housed in Atlantic City. Six casinos operating 13 gambling websites received the initial go-ahead to take online bets from people over 21 who are physically in New Jersey. Approximately 10,000 people had registered to play.
There were some glitches. Major banks and credit-card companies, wary of federal law, are refusing to handle online gambling transactions. But that is expected to change.
And geolocation and identity-verification systems blocked some players who should have been allowed to play. But that's the right glitch to have. The software can be tweaked, and it would have been far more serious if an an underage, out-of-state player had been allowed to wager online.
Overall, the birth of this new brand-new industry has been impressive. Many doubted that the state would have the regulations in place and the Internet gambling companies operating in a mere nine months - but it did. The state Division of Gaming Enforcement, under Director David Rebuck, did a great job here, acting responsibly and quickly.
Nevada and Delaware also offer online gambling. But with a population of 9 million, New Jersey is the largest legal market so far for Internet betting. The state expects online betting to generate $1.2 billion for the gambling industry and $160 million in taxes in its first year. Skeptics - there's no shortage of them regarding Internet gambling - see that as incredibly optimistic. But so was a November start date.
Yes, questions remain, and online gambling is no sure bet. But it's here, it seems to be working, and, well, there's at least a shot that this may indeed be a new day for Atlantic City.
Here's hoping.
Internet gambling / Here's hoping - pressofAtlanticCity-com: Editorials
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
The UK Parliament this week narrowly rejected a measure that would more effectively seek to help online gamblers deal with their addictions.
The so called 'one stop shop' measure, more often known as 'self exclusion' was listed as an amendment to the Gambling Bill going through Parliament at the present time. However, during its report stage, the measure was defeated by 283 votes to 223.
'One stop shop' measures are those used by problem gamblers to ensure that they do not spend more money in gambling establishments when they have made a commitment not to do so.
ADVERTISEMENT
This works by the gambler telling one establishment not to accept him and that establishment in turn telling all the others to do the same. While this is a solution that is very effective in the physical world, in the digital world it is less often employed.
Nola Leach, Chief Executive of Christian Action Research and Education, who was invited to take part in the debate said: "Accessing gambling on the internet is incredibly easy.
"We want to help online problem gamblers to protect themselves from being drawn into compulsive playing online by establishing a national self-exclusion mechanism for online gambling.
"The current system means that to protect themselves a problem gambler has to opt-out of every single gambling website individually, an almost impossible task.
"The one-stop shop instead means that someone can make one decision to bar themselves from all gambling websites in one go."
The measure failed to gain ground among MPs largely because of the difficulties involved in implementation. The conclusions of Dr Sally Gainsbury, author of 'Internet Gambling: Current Research Findings and Implications', were cited during the debate, specifically her view that a significant limitation of self-exclusion is "the lack of collaboration between different online gambling sites and venues, so that excluded individuals may find it easy to gamble at another site or venue".
MPs noted that such a system would only work on UK-based websites, limiting the effectiveness of national legislation to control the access of online gamblers.
Jim Shannon, the Northern Ireland Assembly MP for Strangford said: "The problem gambler could self-exclude from five online gambling sites that he can access from his or her bedroom, but could still have access to hundreds of other sites from that bedroom.
"It would be physically impossible for the online gambler to self-exclude from all online gambling opportunities that are accessible to him in his bedroom."
UK Parliament rejects online gambling addiction measure | Christian News on Christian Today
The so called 'one stop shop' measure, more often known as 'self exclusion' was listed as an amendment to the Gambling Bill going through Parliament at the present time. However, during its report stage, the measure was defeated by 283 votes to 223.
'One stop shop' measures are those used by problem gamblers to ensure that they do not spend more money in gambling establishments when they have made a commitment not to do so.
ADVERTISEMENT
This works by the gambler telling one establishment not to accept him and that establishment in turn telling all the others to do the same. While this is a solution that is very effective in the physical world, in the digital world it is less often employed.
Nola Leach, Chief Executive of Christian Action Research and Education, who was invited to take part in the debate said: "Accessing gambling on the internet is incredibly easy.
"We want to help online problem gamblers to protect themselves from being drawn into compulsive playing online by establishing a national self-exclusion mechanism for online gambling.
"The current system means that to protect themselves a problem gambler has to opt-out of every single gambling website individually, an almost impossible task.
"The one-stop shop instead means that someone can make one decision to bar themselves from all gambling websites in one go."
The measure failed to gain ground among MPs largely because of the difficulties involved in implementation. The conclusions of Dr Sally Gainsbury, author of 'Internet Gambling: Current Research Findings and Implications', were cited during the debate, specifically her view that a significant limitation of self-exclusion is "the lack of collaboration between different online gambling sites and venues, so that excluded individuals may find it easy to gamble at another site or venue".
MPs noted that such a system would only work on UK-based websites, limiting the effectiveness of national legislation to control the access of online gamblers.
Jim Shannon, the Northern Ireland Assembly MP for Strangford said: "The problem gambler could self-exclude from five online gambling sites that he can access from his or her bedroom, but could still have access to hundreds of other sites from that bedroom.
"It would be physically impossible for the online gambler to self-exclude from all online gambling opportunities that are accessible to him in his bedroom."
UK Parliament rejects online gambling addiction measure | Christian News on Christian Today
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
By now, you’ve probably seen the TV commercials.
In one, a poker player breaks into a casino version of a touchdown dance after winning a hand, a sure-fire way to raise the anger of fellow players. But playing on the Internet from the privacy of his home, the commercial suggests, would allow him to celebrate victory anyway he wants, even in his underwear. In another, a player laments his collection of “tells,” those uncontrollable tics that are the casual poker player’s worst enemy. (An expert has told him he has more than 60 tells, he says.) In the privacy of his home, he doesn’t have to worry about those tells, however — a sucker in a casino game can be a big winner online, the commercial implies.
Why would any amateur want to gamble in a casino, the commercials (advertising the World Series of Poker’s online poker site owned by Caesars Entertainment) seem to ask, when all you need to do is fire up the computer and log on to avoid the hassles of heading to the real thing.
No wonder many of the gaming companies in Nevada that aren’t jumping onto the online gaming bandwagon are nervous these days. The casino owners are pointing out their own weaknesses to potential customers.
The casino business in Nevada already has undergone significant changes as the gaming spread throughout the nation. Just this month, voters in New York State authorized casinos as a tool to reinvigorate the decaying Catskill resorts.
Where casinos once were able to use cheap rooms, restaurants and headliner shows as loss leaders thanks to the high profits provided by slot machines and table games, today every facet of a hotel-casino’s operations is expected to add to the bottom line. If online games catch on — and early signs are that they will — they could well cut into the number of people who visit the state’s brick-and-mortar casinos and force owners to concentrate even more on non-gamblers and the attractions needed to keep their resorts in the black.
So far that’s a minor concern in Nevada, which only allows Websites to offer online poker, a game with a relatively limited participant base. Only two companies have been approved for Internet gaming by the Nevada Gaming Control Board so far. (The second is Ultimate Poker, owned by Stations Casinos. Ultimate Poker has been operating since April, but the GCB won’t release revenue figures until there are three online-poker companies.)
New Jersey’s online gaming law, which went into effect on Monday, is a bit more expansive. Ultimate Casino, also owned by Stations, offers the entire gaming gamut — virtual slots, poker machines, poker and table games. Unless there’s a technological meltdown (a la the federal government’s health care Website), that’s likely to be the future of online games, especially if Nevada and New Jersey join in a compact to offer games across state lines, as allowed under state law, or Congress approves a national Internet gambling law.
It’s one more complication for a business that seemed so simple when Nevada had the casino industry all to itself, and those days are never coming back. Casino owners have their work cut out for themselves.
Online gambling could kill Vegas - Chicago Sun-Times
In one, a poker player breaks into a casino version of a touchdown dance after winning a hand, a sure-fire way to raise the anger of fellow players. But playing on the Internet from the privacy of his home, the commercial suggests, would allow him to celebrate victory anyway he wants, even in his underwear. In another, a player laments his collection of “tells,” those uncontrollable tics that are the casual poker player’s worst enemy. (An expert has told him he has more than 60 tells, he says.) In the privacy of his home, he doesn’t have to worry about those tells, however — a sucker in a casino game can be a big winner online, the commercial implies.
Why would any amateur want to gamble in a casino, the commercials (advertising the World Series of Poker’s online poker site owned by Caesars Entertainment) seem to ask, when all you need to do is fire up the computer and log on to avoid the hassles of heading to the real thing.
No wonder many of the gaming companies in Nevada that aren’t jumping onto the online gaming bandwagon are nervous these days. The casino owners are pointing out their own weaknesses to potential customers.
The casino business in Nevada already has undergone significant changes as the gaming spread throughout the nation. Just this month, voters in New York State authorized casinos as a tool to reinvigorate the decaying Catskill resorts.
Where casinos once were able to use cheap rooms, restaurants and headliner shows as loss leaders thanks to the high profits provided by slot machines and table games, today every facet of a hotel-casino’s operations is expected to add to the bottom line. If online games catch on — and early signs are that they will — they could well cut into the number of people who visit the state’s brick-and-mortar casinos and force owners to concentrate even more on non-gamblers and the attractions needed to keep their resorts in the black.
So far that’s a minor concern in Nevada, which only allows Websites to offer online poker, a game with a relatively limited participant base. Only two companies have been approved for Internet gaming by the Nevada Gaming Control Board so far. (The second is Ultimate Poker, owned by Stations Casinos. Ultimate Poker has been operating since April, but the GCB won’t release revenue figures until there are three online-poker companies.)
New Jersey’s online gaming law, which went into effect on Monday, is a bit more expansive. Ultimate Casino, also owned by Stations, offers the entire gaming gamut — virtual slots, poker machines, poker and table games. Unless there’s a technological meltdown (a la the federal government’s health care Website), that’s likely to be the future of online games, especially if Nevada and New Jersey join in a compact to offer games across state lines, as allowed under state law, or Congress approves a national Internet gambling law.
It’s one more complication for a business that seemed so simple when Nevada had the casino industry all to itself, and those days are never coming back. Casino owners have their work cut out for themselves.
Online gambling could kill Vegas - Chicago Sun-Times
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Many of us have heard the 'horror stories' of getting involved in online gambling, but very few films or television shows actually address this issue, however, new film Runner Runner has tackled the problem head on. Throughout the course of the film, the audience follow the story of Richie Furst, a Princeton graduate played by Justin Timberlake, having found himself short of money to pay his tuition fees, Richie uses his online skills to navigate the virtual casino world and make himself some money. After all his hard work, and when he's nearing the need of collecting, Furst is cheated out of his money by the illegitimate gambling tycoon, Ivan Block, played by Ben Affleck. Having realised exactly what's happened to him, Furst travels to Costa Rica to confront Block, though soon becomes embroiled in an ethically dangerous plot which sees him team up with the tycoon, while trying to get one over on him.
Although it sounds good on paper, the film does seem to fall short of the gritty, hard hitting crime thriller it could have been – there's little going on throughout the entire film that actually makes it a movie to remember, the plot is predictable, and the characters feel flat. The lack of substance is what makes the film average at best, with the likes of Timberlake and Affleck only helping to keep the film going thanks to their appearance, it challenges nothing, and doesn't really offer anything new to this tried and tested genre. Nevertheless, although the background of illegitimate online gambling is wasted in the film, Runner Runner has still managed to trigger enough interest that the AGA, American Gambling Association, have utilised the film to demonstrate just how necessary it is for US players to have security and rigid legislation in place to ensure they don't get caught out like Furst.
Of course, for UK players, there is the Gambling Act from 2005 that ensures that all online casinos are legitimate, and keep all players safe, with special attention paid to vulnerable and underage users who could be exploited. This, coupled with the respected name of | Online Casino , is just a few of the reasons why the US want to catch us up, and keep their online gambling sector safe.
Runner Runner and Online Gambling | Flickering Myth
Although it sounds good on paper, the film does seem to fall short of the gritty, hard hitting crime thriller it could have been – there's little going on throughout the entire film that actually makes it a movie to remember, the plot is predictable, and the characters feel flat. The lack of substance is what makes the film average at best, with the likes of Timberlake and Affleck only helping to keep the film going thanks to their appearance, it challenges nothing, and doesn't really offer anything new to this tried and tested genre. Nevertheless, although the background of illegitimate online gambling is wasted in the film, Runner Runner has still managed to trigger enough interest that the AGA, American Gambling Association, have utilised the film to demonstrate just how necessary it is for US players to have security and rigid legislation in place to ensure they don't get caught out like Furst.
Of course, for UK players, there is the Gambling Act from 2005 that ensures that all online casinos are legitimate, and keep all players safe, with special attention paid to vulnerable and underage users who could be exploited. This, coupled with the respected name of | Online Casino , is just a few of the reasons why the US want to catch us up, and keep their online gambling sector safe.
Runner Runner and Online Gambling | Flickering Myth
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
HE IS grouchy, says a man who knows Frank Gehry well, when I ask him what to expect of my meeting with the architect. Grouchy, but sweet. I bear those words in mind as I am introduced to Gehry in the office of his Los Angeles studio, and explain in a superpolite way my role as arts writer.
"So you know nothing about architecture?" he responds in a tone that does not, in all honesty, exude sweetness. "I’ve picked up a few nuggets along the way," I say.
"You are not going to call me a f***ing ‘star******chitect’? I hate that." Objection received loud and clear, I reply.
Gehry, 84, is an architect of no little repute, whose achievements can safely be described as stellar. But his feelings over that seemingly harmless little word encapsulate a broader, and pointed, debate over his position in the pantheon of contemporary architects.
Gehry’s spectacular buildings — the most famous being the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao and the Disney Concert Hall in Los Angeles — are said by his critics to overwhelm the environment in which they appear. His signature style — call it "metallic-sensual" for short — is, they say, repetitive and disrespectful of local context. He designs buildings by scrunching up pieces of paper.
He enjoys his celebrity, and his patrons enjoy the association with what has become one of the world’s leading cultural brands. Need a new museum? Call Frank Owen Gehry on the Starchitect Hotline. Colour supplement coverage and urban regeneration guaranteed, cultural credibility cemented.
All of those criticisms have always struck me as misguided, or malicious, or just plain daft.
I have loved his architecture, ever since I was assigned to cover the opening of the Guggenheim Museum in the autumn of 1997.
Mention of the Guggenheim has a mellowing effect. "Somebody told me, a political type, that that building helped to change the political climate in the Basque country," says Gehry. "They wanted me to do the same for their country!" he says with a little laugh. (He won’t reveal which country.)
He also had no idea that the "Bilbao effect" would become a global template for regeneration-through-culture.
"I remember all these meetings, where people would talk about their hopes for a commercial uplift," he recalls. "But it didn’t register as a possibility with me. I thought that these guys believed in the tooth fairy if they thought a building could do that."
Gehry reels off the results of the tooth fairy’s intervention: hundreds of millions of euros of economic activity in the city, 80% of it related to the museum, which attracts about 1-million visitors a year. "Then there is the social impact. Before the building, kids graduated from high school and left. Now there is a high enrolment in architecture schools." A pause for comic effect. "I’m not sure that’s a great thing to have happened!"
LA has the Disney Concert Hall, which, now home to the LA Philharmonic Orchestra, celebrated its 10th anniversary last month.
Together with the orchestra’s musical director Gustavo Dudamel, the Disney Concert Hall is playing a key role in establishing a more serious cultural identity for LA.
An avid music lover, Gehry takes a personal interest in the Disney. "I go to it often — it is the one building in my life, other than my house, that I use, and I do a lot of work there, almost as part of the family."
So taken is Gehry with Dudamel, leading light of Venezuela’s radical music education programme El Sistema, that he is designing a concert hall for the conductor’s home town of Barquisimeto. "It is so democratic, so socialist," says Gehry of seeing El Sistema first-hand. The concert hall commission is, he says, "kind of a dream project".
Does that make it a more difficult project to work on?
"I am pretty rigorous. I don’t know if that is commonly known. There is this kind of notion around that I just make a form and jam everything into it. That’s far from the truth. For me the payoff is always working with people, and making them happy. I feel like I’ve accomplished something. Maybe I was born to please!"
Does he see himself as a brand?
"No. People try to say that about me but I don’t think it is true. I don’t think I have repeated myself. I use metals, but in different buildings. You can’t escape your signature."
Gehry was born in Toronto as Frank Goldberg to Polish Jewish parents (he changed his name in the mid-1950s in response to antisemitism), and he continues to refer to his religious heritage when discussing his work. "I grew up in a Talmudic household, and the Talmud starts with the question, ‘Why?’ It is a built-in formula for curiosity, and curiosity is the lifeblood of creativity. If you are not curious, you can’t do anything."
Nevertheless, his architecture is controversial, I say. Is there a part of him that enjoys the friction and the polemicising?
"No! I enjoy the interaction with the client. I am interpreting for them all the criteria that they give me."
Among the projects he has in the pipeline are another Guggenheim Museum in Abu Dhabi; a memorial for the former US president Dwight D Eisenhower in Washington DC; a just-announced series of apartment buildings in London’s Battersea Power Station; and a new campus for Facebook in Silicon Valley.
Gehry takes me for a walk around his studio to discuss the works in progress. The atmosphere is studious, with an air of experiment: there are seemingly unrelated pictures and drawings attached to each work station.
The Eisenhower project is the one that is giving him the most headaches, with the former president’s family lining up against Gehry for emphasising the modesty of Eisenhower’s origins.
"It’s complicated," says Gehry. "It involves government, a historic figure who is no longer here and his family, who may or may not be serving his best interests. I think it is an honest portrayal.
"The people who oppose me want to deify him, but that wasn’t his personality
"So you know nothing about architecture?" he responds in a tone that does not, in all honesty, exude sweetness. "I’ve picked up a few nuggets along the way," I say.
"You are not going to call me a f***ing ‘star******chitect’? I hate that." Objection received loud and clear, I reply.
Gehry, 84, is an architect of no little repute, whose achievements can safely be described as stellar. But his feelings over that seemingly harmless little word encapsulate a broader, and pointed, debate over his position in the pantheon of contemporary architects.
Gehry’s spectacular buildings — the most famous being the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao and the Disney Concert Hall in Los Angeles — are said by his critics to overwhelm the environment in which they appear. His signature style — call it "metallic-sensual" for short — is, they say, repetitive and disrespectful of local context. He designs buildings by scrunching up pieces of paper.
He enjoys his celebrity, and his patrons enjoy the association with what has become one of the world’s leading cultural brands. Need a new museum? Call Frank Owen Gehry on the Starchitect Hotline. Colour supplement coverage and urban regeneration guaranteed, cultural credibility cemented.
All of those criticisms have always struck me as misguided, or malicious, or just plain daft.
I have loved his architecture, ever since I was assigned to cover the opening of the Guggenheim Museum in the autumn of 1997.
Mention of the Guggenheim has a mellowing effect. "Somebody told me, a political type, that that building helped to change the political climate in the Basque country," says Gehry. "They wanted me to do the same for their country!" he says with a little laugh. (He won’t reveal which country.)
He also had no idea that the "Bilbao effect" would become a global template for regeneration-through-culture.
"I remember all these meetings, where people would talk about their hopes for a commercial uplift," he recalls. "But it didn’t register as a possibility with me. I thought that these guys believed in the tooth fairy if they thought a building could do that."
Gehry reels off the results of the tooth fairy’s intervention: hundreds of millions of euros of economic activity in the city, 80% of it related to the museum, which attracts about 1-million visitors a year. "Then there is the social impact. Before the building, kids graduated from high school and left. Now there is a high enrolment in architecture schools." A pause for comic effect. "I’m not sure that’s a great thing to have happened!"
LA has the Disney Concert Hall, which, now home to the LA Philharmonic Orchestra, celebrated its 10th anniversary last month.
Together with the orchestra’s musical director Gustavo Dudamel, the Disney Concert Hall is playing a key role in establishing a more serious cultural identity for LA.
An avid music lover, Gehry takes a personal interest in the Disney. "I go to it often — it is the one building in my life, other than my house, that I use, and I do a lot of work there, almost as part of the family."
So taken is Gehry with Dudamel, leading light of Venezuela’s radical music education programme El Sistema, that he is designing a concert hall for the conductor’s home town of Barquisimeto. "It is so democratic, so socialist," says Gehry of seeing El Sistema first-hand. The concert hall commission is, he says, "kind of a dream project".
Does that make it a more difficult project to work on?
"I am pretty rigorous. I don’t know if that is commonly known. There is this kind of notion around that I just make a form and jam everything into it. That’s far from the truth. For me the payoff is always working with people, and making them happy. I feel like I’ve accomplished something. Maybe I was born to please!"
Does he see himself as a brand?
"No. People try to say that about me but I don’t think it is true. I don’t think I have repeated myself. I use metals, but in different buildings. You can’t escape your signature."
Gehry was born in Toronto as Frank Goldberg to Polish Jewish parents (he changed his name in the mid-1950s in response to antisemitism), and he continues to refer to his religious heritage when discussing his work. "I grew up in a Talmudic household, and the Talmud starts with the question, ‘Why?’ It is a built-in formula for curiosity, and curiosity is the lifeblood of creativity. If you are not curious, you can’t do anything."
Nevertheless, his architecture is controversial, I say. Is there a part of him that enjoys the friction and the polemicising?
"No! I enjoy the interaction with the client. I am interpreting for them all the criteria that they give me."
Among the projects he has in the pipeline are another Guggenheim Museum in Abu Dhabi; a memorial for the former US president Dwight D Eisenhower in Washington DC; a just-announced series of apartment buildings in London’s Battersea Power Station; and a new campus for Facebook in Silicon Valley.
Gehry takes me for a walk around his studio to discuss the works in progress. The atmosphere is studious, with an air of experiment: there are seemingly unrelated pictures and drawings attached to each work station.
The Eisenhower project is the one that is giving him the most headaches, with the former president’s family lining up against Gehry for emphasising the modesty of Eisenhower’s origins.
"It’s complicated," says Gehry. "It involves government, a historic figure who is no longer here and his family, who may or may not be serving his best interests. I think it is an honest portrayal.
"The people who oppose me want to deify him, but that wasn’t his personality
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
While the moral debate continues to rage on, the fact is that online gambling is gaining traction in the United States.
This week, New Jersey joined Nevada and Delaware as the only states with legalized online gambling, and is certainly the biggest in terms of population.
While one additional state is not earth-shattering, it could really begin to turn the tide in the gambling universe if it proves to be a success.
If the New Jersey experience goes well, more states will likely start to legalize online gambling even though many political leaders claim to be focused on their moral compass, with their biggest concern being addiction problems.
However, that hasn't stopped them from allowing the public to legally drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes or buy scratch-off lottery tickets, so my guess is that it ultimately won't stymie the nationwide legalization of online gambling, especially when considering the expected revenue.
If the shift to online gambling eventually moves forward, will that spell the end to Atlantic City, Las Vegas and other physical casino buildings and resorts? I have my doubts. Many people don't go to Vegas just to get their gambling fix. They go for the ambiance with friends and family, or sometimes it's for business, events and seminars.
Ultimately, the casinos will likely be the biggest winners. For now, online gambling Web sites have to operate through casinos. That may or may not change in the future, but it's a good sign for the casinos that have been slowly bleeding out.
Revenue at Atlantic City is off some 40% from its peak in 2006, meaning the successful move to online gambling is all the more important.
The biggest dilemma it faces is the tough regulation, with concerns over age restrictions and addiction issues. Aside from balancing out the revenue streams with the obvious problem that gambling can ruin some people's lives, politicians have to decide whether it's fair for a majority of the population to be held back from something because a minority of people can't control it.
Casinos Will Win the Online Gaming Battle - TheStreet
This week, New Jersey joined Nevada and Delaware as the only states with legalized online gambling, and is certainly the biggest in terms of population.
While one additional state is not earth-shattering, it could really begin to turn the tide in the gambling universe if it proves to be a success.
If the New Jersey experience goes well, more states will likely start to legalize online gambling even though many political leaders claim to be focused on their moral compass, with their biggest concern being addiction problems.
However, that hasn't stopped them from allowing the public to legally drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes or buy scratch-off lottery tickets, so my guess is that it ultimately won't stymie the nationwide legalization of online gambling, especially when considering the expected revenue.
If the shift to online gambling eventually moves forward, will that spell the end to Atlantic City, Las Vegas and other physical casino buildings and resorts? I have my doubts. Many people don't go to Vegas just to get their gambling fix. They go for the ambiance with friends and family, or sometimes it's for business, events and seminars.
Ultimately, the casinos will likely be the biggest winners. For now, online gambling Web sites have to operate through casinos. That may or may not change in the future, but it's a good sign for the casinos that have been slowly bleeding out.
Revenue at Atlantic City is off some 40% from its peak in 2006, meaning the successful move to online gambling is all the more important.
The biggest dilemma it faces is the tough regulation, with concerns over age restrictions and addiction issues. Aside from balancing out the revenue streams with the obvious problem that gambling can ruin some people's lives, politicians have to decide whether it's fair for a majority of the population to be held back from something because a minority of people can't control it.
Casinos Will Win the Online Gaming Battle - TheStreet
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Gaming stocks have been hot in 2013 thanks in large part to the boom in gambling by mainland Chinese in Macau. The Market Vectors Gaming ETF (BJK)BJK is up 39%, well ahead of the S&P 500's 27% year-to-date gain. A new catalyst for the group and BJK could be newly legalized online gambling in New Jersey.
According to a report published at Seeking Alpha, most of the larger casino companies including Boyd Gaming (BYD_)BYD, MGM Resorts International (MGM_)MGM and Caesars Entertainment (CZP)CZP all have online gaming divisions and stand to benefit from legalization in New Jersey and likely other states in the future. Only three states allow online gaming.
A report from Morgan Stanley (MS_)MS cited in that same article estimates that revenue from online gaming in 2014 could be $670 million, growing to possibly $9.3 billion by 2020.
The Market Vectors Gaming ETF, of course, captures the space and should benefit from online growth. It is a global fund with the U.S. having the largest country weighting at 29%, followed by China at 25% and the UK at 14%.
BJK has 46 holdings, the largest of which are Sands China and Las Vegas Sands (LVS_)LVS, both with slightly more than 8% weightings.
Slot machine leader IGT (IGT_)IGT, which has a 2.6% weighting in BJK, recently purchased Double Down Interactive so it can capitalize on online trends.
Clearly the industry is optimistic for online's prospects. On the negative side of the ledger, USA Today had a lengthy editorial calling for the U.S. Congress to shut online gambling down for social and ethical reasons.
Place Your Bets on Online Gaming - TheStreet
According to a report published at Seeking Alpha, most of the larger casino companies including Boyd Gaming (BYD_)BYD, MGM Resorts International (MGM_)MGM and Caesars Entertainment (CZP)CZP all have online gaming divisions and stand to benefit from legalization in New Jersey and likely other states in the future. Only three states allow online gaming.
A report from Morgan Stanley (MS_)MS cited in that same article estimates that revenue from online gaming in 2014 could be $670 million, growing to possibly $9.3 billion by 2020.
The Market Vectors Gaming ETF, of course, captures the space and should benefit from online growth. It is a global fund with the U.S. having the largest country weighting at 29%, followed by China at 25% and the UK at 14%.
BJK has 46 holdings, the largest of which are Sands China and Las Vegas Sands (LVS_)LVS, both with slightly more than 8% weightings.
Slot machine leader IGT (IGT_)IGT, which has a 2.6% weighting in BJK, recently purchased Double Down Interactive so it can capitalize on online trends.
Clearly the industry is optimistic for online's prospects. On the negative side of the ledger, USA Today had a lengthy editorial calling for the U.S. Congress to shut online gambling down for social and ethical reasons.
Place Your Bets on Online Gaming - TheStreet
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
The online gambling industry has become a major money maker for many different sectors including advertizing and what is known as affiliate marketing. As internet wagering matures in various jurisdictions things have changed in the way marketing is done. Back when the industry was in its infancy it was relatively easy to set up a situation where a one man band could muster a great deal of attention and earn a decent living.
Affiliate marketing is based on performance and when an industry becomes saturated the rewards are diluted. The market has grown in complexity, resulting in the emergence of a secondary tier of players, including affiliate management agencies, super-affiliates and specialized third party vendors.
The scene in the United Kingdom and Europe has become one where only niche marketing efforts are proving successful. Ian Sims a respected online slots affiliate in the U.K. said, “More than ever I believe it is important to pick a niche that you know well and can talk about knowledgably,” Sims continued, “I think also the days of trying to target a generic subject (ie: gambling, horse racing, sports betting) are gone unless you can build – or already have – a strong brand. I also believe that SEO is virtually dead and anything a webmaster can do to manipulate a search engine ranking is simply a short-term strategy”.
Chief Executive Officer of KAX Media, which runs two U.K. oriented affiliate websites, Charles Gillespie, commented on current situation, It’s a game for experienced professionals with deep pockets and even then there are no more windfall profits.”
The online gambling industry is morphing into a mobile market which has become a new opportunity for affiliate marketers that see that the future is in smart phones and tablet gambling. Today success is measured by the amount of added value the customer receives. Survival in the affiliate marketing industry requires an iron clad strategy that includes added value and social networking.
Saturated Online Gambling Changing Affiliate Strategy
Affiliate marketing is based on performance and when an industry becomes saturated the rewards are diluted. The market has grown in complexity, resulting in the emergence of a secondary tier of players, including affiliate management agencies, super-affiliates and specialized third party vendors.
The scene in the United Kingdom and Europe has become one where only niche marketing efforts are proving successful. Ian Sims a respected online slots affiliate in the U.K. said, “More than ever I believe it is important to pick a niche that you know well and can talk about knowledgably,” Sims continued, “I think also the days of trying to target a generic subject (ie: gambling, horse racing, sports betting) are gone unless you can build – or already have – a strong brand. I also believe that SEO is virtually dead and anything a webmaster can do to manipulate a search engine ranking is simply a short-term strategy”.
Chief Executive Officer of KAX Media, which runs two U.K. oriented affiliate websites, Charles Gillespie, commented on current situation, It’s a game for experienced professionals with deep pockets and even then there are no more windfall profits.”
The online gambling industry is morphing into a mobile market which has become a new opportunity for affiliate marketers that see that the future is in smart phones and tablet gambling. Today success is measured by the amount of added value the customer receives. Survival in the affiliate marketing industry requires an iron clad strategy that includes added value and social networking.
Saturated Online Gambling Changing Affiliate Strategy
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
With the test case for online casino games up and running in New Jersey, it seems customers are enjoying the new offerings.
During the first five days of the test, a total of 17,000 locals in the Garden State placed an online bet according to director of the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement David Rebuck, speaking to the Associated Press.
Brian Mattingley, chief executive officer of 888, explained that online gambling is much safer than its land equivalent. As operators keep their customers' records, they can make sure they are using their money wisely.
Mr Mattingley explained: "If someone looks like they’re blowing a lot of money without thinking about it, we can check on that."ADNFCR-16001162-ID-801666690-ADNFCR
Fri, 11/29/2013 - 09:18 - New Jersey online gambling gets a good turnout | 777-com
During the first five days of the test, a total of 17,000 locals in the Garden State placed an online bet according to director of the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement David Rebuck, speaking to the Associated Press.
Brian Mattingley, chief executive officer of 888, explained that online gambling is much safer than its land equivalent. As operators keep their customers' records, they can make sure they are using their money wisely.
Mr Mattingley explained: "If someone looks like they’re blowing a lot of money without thinking about it, we can check on that."ADNFCR-16001162-ID-801666690-ADNFCR
Fri, 11/29/2013 - 09:18 - New Jersey online gambling gets a good turnout | 777-com
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
Robbie Williams has admitted he likes to smoke cannabis every now and then.
The 34-year-old father of one doesn't drink alcohol but says he smokes small amounts of pot to help him relax, according to The Daily Mail.
The award-winning singer reportedly told the Mirror: "The last time I got high was two days ago."
But Williams says he's much less reckless since the birth of his one-year-old daughter Theodora.
In 1995 Robbie Williams quit the pop band Take That following his drug addiction.
Since then, he's had several stints in rehab.
In 2007, he was treated for his addiction to several prescription pills and the energy drink Lucozade.
The 34-year-old father of one doesn't drink alcohol but says he smokes small amounts of pot to help him relax, according to The Daily Mail.
The award-winning singer reportedly told the Mirror: "The last time I got high was two days ago."
But Williams says he's much less reckless since the birth of his one-year-old daughter Theodora.
In 1995 Robbie Williams quit the pop band Take That following his drug addiction.
Since then, he's had several stints in rehab.
In 2007, he was treated for his addiction to several prescription pills and the energy drink Lucozade.
Join:
2006/12/07
Messages:
29893
.jpg?v=1.014689161)
.png?v=1.014689161)
House Gaming Committee Chairman Richard Bennett, R-Long Beach, told the Sun Herald that hearings and discussions on Internet gambling are planned during Mississippi’s 2014 legislative session.
However, he predicted no action, saying he’d rather let Nevada, New Jersey and Delaware — the three states where Internet gambling is legal — work things out.
“I don’t believe we’re going to have anything come out on it this session,” Bennett said. “It’s just too early right now,” he said.
But Bennett said he doesn’t plan to wait for long. And when lawmakers do act, Bennett said he wants to license only companies that own casinos in Mississippi to provide Internet gambling.
State Rep. Bobby Moak, a Bogue Chitto Democrat and longtime gambling legislation point man, introduced Internet gambling legislation the past two years and says he plans to try again in 2014.
“You have to take some risk,” he said.
Moak said Internet gambling will give the casinos and state treasury a boost.
Some websites claim online wagering is already legal in Mississippi because state legislation doesn’t specifically ban it. But Allen Godfrey, executive director of the state Gaming Commission, said those claims are wrong.
“Internet gambling is not a legal thing in Mississippi,” he said.
Internet gambling in New Jersey isn’t restricted to residents, but a gambler must be in the state to wager and must be a club member of a New Jersey casino.
Although New Jersey is ready to go with Internet gambling, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, PayPal and some of the other large companies won’t allow wagers on credit cards.
E. Eugene Johnson, senior vice president of market research and online studies for Spectrum Gaming Group in New Jersey, said banks that stopped taking credit card bets in 2006, when the federal government outlawed Internet gambling, have decided not to take them now.
In 2011, the Justice Department issued a letter saying online gambling is legal when it is allowed at the state level, but Johnson said state-by-state issues bump up against federal regulations on a number of points.
Mississippi keeping an eye on Internet gambling » The Commercial Appeal