Listen up 32Red!! The U.S. players want you to open the doors to us again!

tim5ny

Non-Gambler
Joined
Jun 8, 2003
Since knuckle-head Bush and his cronies brought this online gambling ban nonsense into play, my online playing came to an instant halt. Sure, I could play Intertops or most RTG's, but not with the same confidence and peace of mind that I had with 32Red. I've never liked RTG software, so it's very easy to resist there, and Intertops has a long waiting period for the first cash-in if you're lucky enough to win something... and if I were to hit something big, I think that they would use the fact that I live in New York as a reason to withhold payment. I just don't trust any other casino anymore after seeing what the VIP group is doing as of late. Since it is still NOT illegal for Americans to gamble online, then I would wish that 32Red would rethink this decision and reopen the door to us again. The big bad American government can't do squat to you anyway I would presume. There will always be legal alternatives for transferring money, and besides that, the illegal aspect of the whole thing falls on us Americans. You're not subject to our laws. I have 2 land casinos within a 20 minute drive from me, and I can assure you that the payouts on bonus slots is so lame that you can't even believe it. Oh yeah, the newest casino just opened 2 months ago without anything but a warm welcome from the state government. You wanna know why? Cuz the state gets a percentage of the take. This is a crock of shit. 32Red!...Open the damn doors again!
 

rabiddog

Dormant Account
Joined
Nov 26, 2006
Location
dogpound USA
I'll second that. I only played at 32Red for a couple months, if that long. But that was long enough to know I really liked the casino and its integrety. I miss them. :notworthy
 

REOdeathwagon

Dormant account
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Location
arizona
Please 32Red....Pretty Please......We promise to play nice.
 

goldeninternetc

Dormant account
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Location
holland
I double that! I like to play at 32Red. I wonder if there is a way around..

I guess it wil be up to the management of the casino and software right?
 

Ed Ware

Dormant account
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Location
Gibraltar
If only...

Thanks all for your kind words.

Unfortunately, as you know this matter is out of our hands due to the passing of the UIEGA in October. As we are all acutely aware, the arguments have been made on several occasions by various parties but all to no avail.

It's a shame for all concerned, especially the players who may suffer personally through these new laws in the US. We are truly sorry we can't continue to deliver the type of service that appears to be appreciated to our American players. Perhaps one day when the legal situation changes for the better....

In the meantime, play well and play safe.

Best wishes

Ed.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Legal

Thanks all for your kind words.

Unfortunately, as you know this matter is out of our hands due to the passing of the UIEGA in October. As we are all acutely aware, the arguments have been made on several occasions by various parties but all to no avail.

It's a shame for all concerned, especially the players who may suffer personally through these new laws in the US. We are truly sorry we can't continue to deliver the type of service that appears to be appreciated to our American players. Perhaps one day when the legal situation changes for the better....

In the meantime, play well and play safe.

Best wishes

Ed.

I think the point these are making is that the legal situation has NOT changed. All that has happened is that a legal framework has been wrapped around a voluntary scheme that US banks and other institutions have been running for some time.
Not too long ago, 32Red were manipulating the rules to circumvent the ruling by Western Union that they would not allow the transfer of funds to any gaming company.
Other than those dozen or so states with their own state laws outlawing online gaming, the rest still rely on making it hard for players to deposit, and leaving players to find their own way around.
Currently, this legislation is accepted as being a stop-gap until a proper law can be put through with specific federal bans on online gaming. This is the stage at which the white flag should have been brought out, not yet!
Currently, there are MANY other countries with laws that restrict or even ban online gaming, but we don't see too many casinos paying much attention to this. Two such countries spring to mind, France and Italy. Italy went as far as trying to require ISP's to block their Italian customers from any part of the internet that would allow them to gamble online. Casinos promised they would NOT cave in, but would find ways around it as they did not concern themselves with the laws of a country in which they themselves were not resident.

I don't recall Bush being elected president of the Internet, perhaps I was asleep!
 

Pinababy69

RIP Lisa
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Location
Toronto, Ontario - Canada
Maybe some of you are forgetting that 32Red has shareholders to answer to, and to keep happy? Just a thought.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Shares

Maybe some of you are forgetting that 32Red has shareholders to answer to, and to keep happy? Just a thought.

Shareholders, for the most part, are concerned with their investments growing. Many companies, not all, that pulled out of the US market have not shown much in the way of value for shareholders for doing so.
32Red will survive as it was never particularly big in the US to start with, but others who lost significant amounts of money are, in some cases, being sued by shareholders for the unexpected losses after they publically stated earlier in the year that they would stand by the status quo despite the fact that Frist and Co had made their intentions clear.

With shareholders, one way would be to submit a motion to the AGM as to whether trading in the US market met the approval of the majority of investors. If such a vote went against allowing US players, it will be a decision that the playing community will have to accept, as it is ultimately the shareholders whose money is at stake. If the US escalates matters further, or manages a test case that goes against a casino, as opposed to a sportsbook, then players can understand that "resistance is futile" for the present, and all involved can resort to campaigning.
 

Pinababy69

RIP Lisa
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Location
Toronto, Ontario - Canada
If the US escalates matters further, or manages a test case that goes against a casino, as opposed to a sportsbook, then players can understand that "resistance is futile" for the present, and all involved can resort to campaigning.

Good point VWM....I think alot of people are waiting to see if anyone is going to be the "sacrificial lamb".

And don't forget that even if 32Red were to re-open play to the U.S., they still wouldn't be allowed to accept wagers from the banned 11 states as per Microgaming.
 

Simmo!

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
Joined
May 29, 2004
Location
England
There's more to this UIGEA than meets the eye. I recently went to open up a company bank account in the UK and I have been asked to provide a letter stating that I do not receive money from gamblers based in the USA (the red-tape dictionary at NatWest doesn't define the term affiliate :rolleyes: ).

And that's just me. Imagine what they are saying to the PLC's like 32Red! It's not in their hands unfortunately. One small backward step for Americans, one giant leap for blue muppets :p
 

Pinababy69

RIP Lisa
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Location
Toronto, Ontario - Canada
And that's just me. Imagine what they are saying to the PLC's like 32Red! It's not in their hands unfortunately. One small backward step for Americans, one giant leap for blue muppets :p

That's pretty much the point I was trying to make Simmo....muchos gracias!!

Muppets of the world...unite....stand and be counted....yadda, yadda, yadda. ;)
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Blackmail

There's more to this UIGEA than meets the eye. I recently went to open up a company bank account in the UK and I have been asked to provide a letter stating that I do not receive money from gamblers based in the USA (the red-tape dictionary at NatWest doesn't define the term affiliate :rolleyes: ).

And that's just me. Imagine what they are saying to the PLC's like 32Red! It's not in their hands unfortunately. One small backward step for Americans, one giant leap for blue muppets :p

Well, this is blackmail and bullying!
No wonder 32Red have a problem, they can't say "Stuff it" to their corporate bank as that really WILL be a problem. However, I don't recall electing Bush as MY PM, so why are BRITISH banks having to obey an AMERICAN law that has not yet even been fleshed out with any detail.
Receiving money from a US player is NOT illegal bar those 11 states unless the wagers are on sports.

Maybe there is grounds for a test case here, unless the UK have specifically passed leglislation that requires UK companies to comply with the Safe Ports Act 2006 (after all, that's what it is!)
 

jetset

RIP Brian
Joined
Feb 22, 2001
Location
Earth
Perhaps it is a corporate decision by UK banks (or particular UK banks) and not one driven by law.
 

GrandMaster

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Location
UK
It must be a corporate decision. Natwest (now part of the Royal Bank of Scotland) is a big international bank with operations in the US, so they have to worry about compliance with US law. I don't think a small bank or a building society would worry about the UIGEA.
 

1819

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 25, 2006
Location
ny,nj,fla
Since knuckle-head Bush and his cronies brought this online gambling ban nonsense into play, my online playing came to an instant halt. Sure, I could play Intertops or most RTG's, but not with the same confidence and peace of mind that I had with 32Red. I've never liked RTG software, so it's very easy to resist there, and Intertops has a long waiting period for the first cash-in if you're lucky enough to win something... and if I were to hit something big, I think that they would use the fact that I live in New York as a reason to withhold payment. I just don't trust any other casino anymore after seeing what the VIP group is doing as of late. Since it is still NOT illegal for Americans to gamble online, then I would wish that 32Red would rethink this decision and reopen the door to us again. The big bad American government can't do squat to you anyway I would presume. There will always be legal alternatives for transferring money, and besides that, the illegal aspect of the whole thing falls on us Americans. You're not subject to our laws. I have 2 land casinos within a 20 minute drive from me, and I can assure you that the payouts on bonus slots is so lame that you can't even believe it. Oh yeah, the newest casino just opened 2 months ago without anything but a warm welcome from the state government. You wanna know why? Cuz the state gets a percentage of the take. This is a crock of shit. 32Red!...Open the damn doors again!

Dear Sir

Thank you for your e-mail and your interest in Intertops.com. Please se our
rules and regulation 9. 8.

9.8 Moreover, no account applications or wagering activity will be accepted
from residents of THE NETHERLANDS and from the following US states:
Michigan, Illinois, Louisiana, Oregon, Wisconsin, Washington, Indiana,
Nevada, South Dakota, New Jersey.


If you are resident of NY you are more than welcome to play on our side.

For any further questions, don't hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely

Ulrike

this is from intertops today.
 

Rusty

Banned User - repetitive flaming
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Location
Manchester UK
Personally as a Brit I am totally confused as to what the law is over there regarding online gambling.
As far as I can make out, any cases thus far have been brought against individuals using old legislation and not against companies.
Is this correct?
Is it illegal for you to place a bet online or is it illegal to accept a bet or is it both and what constitutes a bet in this instance?
:confused:

It is surprising how different the attitude of the British Goverment is on this and it will be interesting to see how things work out when the gaming act 2005 comes into force in sept 2007.
The hypocrasy of this Goverment to talk up an individuals civil rights, while systematically turning England into a Big Brother State, in an attempt to vindicate its decision to legalise online gambling is staggering.
They are simply muscling in on a lucrative market and want their cut and to dress it up as anything else shows just how cynical and contemptuous of its citizens this Goverment is.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top