Five Years From Now (The Serious Version)

[Simmo!]

Copied From Original Thread - As the original thread (http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...years-now.html) has gone humerous, I'd also be interested in serious opinions in this thread if you fancy sharing


This whole last week has made a lot of people think. There have been conspiracy theories, positive takes and negative takes on the whole charade, but now the dust is starting to settle, I thought it might be interesting to have a thread that we can revisit in 3 or 5 years (or longer!) from now, with how people "foresaw" the future of online gambling.

Here's my thoughts to get the ball rolling. As you'd expect from me, it's a positive outlook, some might even say "rose-tinted" - lol. But hey, I'm not going to apologise for being an optimist and in 5 years time, if needs be, I'll stand up and be counted

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. The current "Unlawful blah" Act will largely be viewed eventually as ineffective on it's own until HR4411 passes. In fact if anything, it will work as much FOR the industry as against it in so much as it has woken everyone up, and lots of future planning will be going on to minimise the impact of future legislation here and around the world. Software companies that are PLC will have lost clients to non-PLC providers which could turn out to be beneficial to the industry and the effects on online gambling will be seen to have been minimal. US companies will have lost $millions in advertising revenue from the industry.

2. HR4411 got signed in as law and ISPs started to block access to gambling sites which caused panic, consternation and uproar for some time. However, a successfull legal challenge largely halted progress. European ISP's started offering satellite services to US residents and alternative offshore payment processors sprung up, which despite some high-profile cases bought by the DoJ, made the law too hard and costly to police. It was brushed into the background having only partly achieved it's aim. Anonymizers moved into the gambling industry and implemented third party credit processors. Antigua and Costa Rica allowed US citizens to open offshore bank accounts with minimum fuss.

3. Casino operators, having seen the downside to being, or licensing from, a publically traded company, become reluctant to go public as it puts control of the operation (and company value) largely in the hands of people who don't know enough about the industry. I think we'll see less public offerings in the sector in the coming years now.

4. The US will have introduced limited regulation into the industry to water down HR4411 and to try and capitalise on the $billions of revenue and to assist the B&M's. It won't be seen so much as an "about turn" as a willingless to accept online gambling cannot be totally prohibited and has advantages to the US treasury.

5. The B&M casinos will have started to come online, feeling that the legislation has paved the way for a smoother passage with less competition. However, they will be reliant on using existing online infrastructure, marketing ideas and 3rd party gaming companies to compete with the offshore companies and indeed, themselves.

6. A lot of the casinos will have diversified into new markets and while the US will continue to account for a large share, it will no longer be the make-or-break share that it had been in the past.

7. The "hub" of online gaming will be the UK due to pro-gambling laws and a willingness to embrace and regulate. Britain's ties with the US will have some sway in determining US gambling policy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cheers

Simmo!

[Westland Bowl]

2. HR4411 got signed in as law and ISPs started to block access to gambling sites which caused panic, consternation and uproar for some time......Anonymizers moved into the gambling industry......

It was earlier this year that some people experienced what could have been a "test" of the effectiveness of ISP blocking of certain sites. It used to be thought that it would be very hard or very cumbersome for ISPs to block certain websites but China proved that it is quite possible. The "test" seemed to have shown some success (in a bad way). I guess Anonymizers based in non-US countries probably would rise in useage.

[Simmo!]

Hmmm....been thinking about this. What price a "deal" between someone like Cryptologic and IGT/Wagerworks? Wagerworks (IGT owned) are not US-facing. Cryptologic won't surely want to give up the US market. IGT will surely be involved with the B&M's coming online. Cryptologic have a strong online infrastructure. I wonder....?