Please Keep All "Gambling Bill" Related Questions & Comments Here!

[In action girl]

Wow. I didn't even know such things existed. So these are sites which facilitate individuals betting against each other? How is the money exchanged? Seems like you would still run into the same sort of problems funding any accounts as banks would still have to deny as they are related to gambling..??

[Special K 22]

IAG, there are a few sites out there that do this. In order to keep action on all games, the exchanges either put up offers themselves, or hire someone else to do it. Offers are still put up by individuals, but in reality for the most part you are still betting with a bookie. I usually match offers and rarely put up one myself as the juice is usually excellent anyways. I've never had a problem getting paid and it's really not much different than using a traditional online sportsbook. It still is a gambling site so you're right in that it would still probably be blocked from making transactions with US banks, however, it may be easier to mask as being a true gambling site. I don't know, maybe make these sites like an ebay trading legal things as well as booking. Guess that's kind of stretching it as they would still be marked as a place that facilitated gambling. I guess really though the whole future is just ways to get around traditional depositing and not the sites themselves. Sending you a PM.

[Louie]

Specail K,

There is nothing different between exchanges and sportsbooks. They are both considered betting sites and a regulated by the same people. There are plenty of sportsbooks that will remain working and active. You can still deposit using E-check with everyone of the sponsor books at this site. Again, privately owned sportsbooks are running as usual. People are overplaying this bill right now.

[Special K 22]

I agree, Louie, that most privatly owned sportsbooks are running as normal. I can think of one though that has changed policies, but it is not a site you recommend anyways. At first I thought this whole thing was being completely overplayed, but I think it may be being underplayed as well. That doesn't mean I think this is the end of internet gambling or anything close to that. My current stance is that although it will be hard for the federal government to enforce, if companies decide to willingly go along with it then it's still the same as if it's being effectively enforced. I agree with what you've been saying about using privatly owned sportsbooks/poker rooms as being the way to go as they have less pressure to comply with laws other than those of their licensing country. You're right that exchanges are basically the same as sportsbooks in that they both facilitate gambling, so it was faulty logic on my point to bring them up as an alernative. I don't think these private books, for the most part, will cease taking money deposited from a US customers. However, I think in the coming months it will become increasingly difficult to deposit, and maybe even withdraw from your accounts. Not due to the sportsbooks but due to the financial orginizations funneling the transactions. FirePay hasn't completely stopped taking US customers, but they won't deposit or accept withdrawals from a gambling site from a US customer. Neteller may follow suite, although they seem to be trying to delay it as much as possible. I've heard mixed things about Western Union in terms of some people having no problem at all using them for gambling transactions and other people having a hell of a time using them. I'm not sure what there official stance is as I don't use them. Although the law on paper attempts to block all transactions with an online gambling site (except those it has deemed legitimate like state lotteries) I don't feel any of us will be unable to withdraw from our online gambling sites, just that things may get more complicated in the future. Individual banks may make it more difficult depending on who you use. Sorry if I came across as an alarmist or something.

[lauro]

after reading all the posts it sounds to me that its not a "new" law, its just something to enforce an already existing law. and from what i've read its only affecting u.s. based accounts/companies. all the sites jumping ship are premature and stupid. seems like maybe gamers are pulling funds and the sites that are paying are trying to cut losses and get out,i think that when all is said and done...when your money goes to an offshore account i.e. neteller the law dies right there...where it goes from there they cant stop or have no power to try to stop. unless your into terrorists all will be fine.

[In action girl]

The whole problem is Lauro (or theoretically) is getting your money TO the offshore account. The US banks are prohibited from allowing the transactions to neteller and those type of companies.. The transactions have to be coded as related to gambling and the buck stops with your local bank (or again theoretically) The banks of course, don't want to have that pressure on them to identify these transactions but that is where the enforcement is to be. I have had my bank deny transactions as related to gambling... some may have them sneak thru...the other option is to fund your account with money orders or the like to circumvent the banking system altogether.

[Louie]

Lauro, you are close but the law is directed at ALL online sportsbooks. But it all lays on the level of enforcement just as the wire act did. IAG, if you are going to keep repeating yourself then I will have to as well. I want everyone to understand that my stance and interpretation of the bill has not changed. I was able to deposit via Credit Card to Diamond just over a week ago. Checking account deposits are very hard to enforce as offshore books are constantly changing the names of companies that the funds are being sent to. I have had no problem depositing via online check to Bodog, Sports Interaction, or BetUS in the past month. Still plenty of trustworthy sportsbooks with deposit options available.