Gambling City Forums


Best Gambling Forums, recommended Online Casinos, best Casino Bonuses & Promotions. Cash Back from Gambling City
Join the thriving community

Jackpot Capital Casino - EXCLUSIVE BONUS - 150% to $300 on 1st Deposit
Uptown Aces on Gambling City - $10 No Deposit Required
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Graeme  
#1 Posted : Sunday, May 23, 2010 10:02:18 AM(UTC)
Guest

Joined: 4/30/2010(UTC)
Posts: 264

It's common to hear prominent members of the Online Gambling Industry calling for Regulation. They are deluded that, once regulated, they will be able to operate their business without hindrance.

Regulation is simply a process by which Bureaucrats prevent businesses from doing what they would normally have done. Mild regulations can normally be tolerated like the human body can tolerate mild doses of arsenic. As regulations become more severe they make it increasingly prohibitive to operate. Arsenic remains poison and kills after a certain dosage. Regulation remains prohibition and stifles business at a certain level.

Instead of Regulation, the Online Casinos need Freedom. Freedom to compete and to provide the level of services each feels necessary to run a profitable business. They are best left to the sanction of the market which severely punishes sub-standard service or dubious practices. The Net abounds with forums, blacklists, recommendations and warning. This is by far a more effective antidote to malpractice than the various arbitrary levels of prohibition imposed and enforced by the decree of the authorities.

Graeme Levin
CEO
TheGamblingPortals.com

 

Down 'n' Dirty  
#2 Posted : Monday, May 24, 2010 10:52:45 AM(UTC)
Guest

Joined: 4/30/2010(UTC)
Posts: 264

Graeme wrote:

They are best left to the sanction of the market which severely punishes sub-standard service or dubious practices. The Net abounds with forums, blacklists, recommendations and warning. This is by far a more effective antidote to malpractice than the various arbitrary levels of prohibition imposed and enforced by the decree of the authorities.

Graeme Levin
CEO
TheGamblingPortals.com

 

I disagree.  This would be true if on line casinos were located in places where, if you are cheated by one, you could seek recourse through the courts.  However, they are often in small, remote, nations far from where their players live.

They are well aware that someone living in France, for example, is not about to go to Costa Rica to sue them for the $5,000 they refuse to pay for some invented reason.  They tend to be their own judges and, not surprisingly, usually decide the cases in their own favor.

Yes, bad publicity is something which they would prefer to avoid and sites like Gambling Grumbles serve an important function by getting some casinos to live up to their obligations.  Others, however, don't seem to care what is said about them.  They prefer to rake in the profits and when their reputations get so bad that most players avoid them, they simply close down the website and open another under a different name -- and proceed to begin cheating all over again.

The player who has not collected his winnings (or even had his deposit stolen by them!) gets very little satisfaction in knowing that the casino was eventually forced to go out of business, especially when it may re-open tomorrow under a new brand name.

Edited by user Monday, May 24, 2010 10:53:34 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Graeme  
#3 Posted : Saturday, May 29, 2010 10:25:37 AM(UTC)
Guest

Joined: 4/30/2010(UTC)
Posts: 264
Dirty, you are absolutely correct in what you say.

However I was making the point that government statutory intervention by way of prohibition is fundamentally flawed and is wrong. No amount of licensing or regulation will prevent the abuses you describe. One effect would be to raise the cost of operating and hence lower the casino's ability to offer service and to compete more vigorously on bonuses (which is a way to improve the player's odds).

If left to the market, organisations will spring up spontaneously to police the rogues and prevent them from trading. You mention Gambling Grumbles as one. There are many other watchdogs and mediators. The market will spawn all manner of arbitrators. The oprator's reputations will be tarnished through forums of all kinds and astute commentators will detect and publicise their new activities.

You make a good point that the sullied reputation of the operator doesn't compensate the player who has already has had his money stolen. Players do become more aware of playing only at trusted and recommended casinos. And they should learn to test new casinos with small deposits. There does seem scope for some form of insurance service being set up for gamblers by an enterprising entrepreneur.

I'm saying the market affords better protection than the bureacrats.

Genie  
#4 Posted : Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:11:54 AM(UTC)
Genie

Joined: 5/24/2010(UTC)
Posts: 9
"As regulations become more severe they make it increasingly prohibitive to operate.
Graeme Levin,
CEO,
The Gambling Portals"

I agree. When Australia decided to regulate and licence online gambling, the regulations and taxes were PROHOIBITIVE and no additional online operator was attracted as far as I know.
SteveRusso  
#5 Posted : Wednesday, June 09, 2010 6:26:37 AM(UTC)
SteveRusso

Joined: 5/18/2010(UTC)
Posts: 49
Unwittingly, those who are arguing against regulation are actually limiting competition -- not encouraging it as they believe.

Right now, I have only one possibility and that is to play at a casino which has minimal regulation (or none at all). If I am cheated by an online casino, I have no legal recourse.

What, however, would be the case if the Nevada, New Jersey, and Mississippi gambling commissions were all to establish their own rules and license on line casinos just as they do land casinos?

Firstly, I would have my choice of which state's rules I prefer to work with. Perhaps New Jersey requires too much in the form of identification before I am allowed to sign up. Nevada may require little ID but have a higher tax rate. Mississippi may demand a 48 hour "cooling off" period after I make a deposit before I can play.

Secondly, I could decide that I don't like any of these regulations and continue to play at casinos in Costa Rica or Barbados and hope that I never have a problem with them, knowing that my legal possibilities are slight.

The choice will be up to me. Those who oppose regulation want to deprive me of the ability to have this choice.
Graeme  
#6 Posted : Wednesday, June 30, 2010 5:32:44 PM(UTC)
Guest

Joined: 4/30/2010(UTC)
Posts: 264
Steve says,
Quote:
"Firstly, I would have my choice of which state's rules I prefer to work with. Perhaps New Jersey requires too much in the form of identification before I am allowed to sign up. Nevada may require little ID but have a higher tax rate. Mississippi may demand a 48 hour "cooling off" period after I make a deposit before I can play. "


Steve, you can get that variety without Governments or States interfering.
Every single casino can and does have it's own regulations. So you have a vast variety.
Statutory Regulation simply limits this choice by imposing blanket terms for all.

Graeme
denmartin  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, January 03, 2012 1:36:38 AM(UTC)
denmartin

Joined: 1/3/2012(UTC)
Posts: 4
thanks
for share the information...
I'm agree with you...
Albertcolen  
#8 Posted : Saturday, February 15, 2014 9:21:10 AM(UTC)
Albertcolen

Joined: 2/13/2014(UTC)
Posts: 22
Thank you so much for providing details
Graeme  
#9 Posted : Saturday, February 15, 2014 9:38:23 AM(UTC)
Guest

Joined: 4/30/2010(UTC)
Posts: 264
Hi Albert
Nice to see you on the Forum. What do you think about regulation?

BTW, please watch www.gamblingcity.com for a spectacular cash back deal.
Graeme
Albertcolen  
#10 Posted : Saturday, March 01, 2014 12:01:53 PM(UTC)
Albertcolen

Joined: 2/13/2014(UTC)
Posts: 22
Graeme wrote:
Hi Albert
Nice to see you on the Forum. What do you think about regulation?

BTW, please watch www.gamblingcity.com for a spectacular cash back deal.
Graeme






Good share. Thank you for this.
kevin  
#11 Posted : Sunday, October 02, 2016 11:00:25 PM(UTC)
kevin

Joined: 12/24/2015(UTC)
Posts: 4
I ask this why even bother with seals of trust and a gambling commission if the market is the regulator as it already has been proven to me, these bodies are only there for show. We got to ask ourselves who do these organizations work for the players or the casinos that pay them to operate? as it seems there only purpose is to give legitimacy to a casino that has no consequence to any action against it players if the casino pays them enough.

I have a 30 page case i made against royal Vegas if i were ever able to get them in court i would have a win. as I can prove all the allegations.


If anyone is interested let me know and I'll email it.
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

123Bingo Online EXCLUSIVE BONUS - $50 No Deposit
Cyber Bingo - EXCLUSIVE BONUS - $50 No Deposit Required