Showing posts with label online gambling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label online gambling. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

WinPoker Becomes First Major Gambling Operator To Adopt Bitcoin

By Jon Matonis
Forbes
Wednesday, March 13, 2013

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2013/03/13/winpoker-becomes-first-major-gambling-operator-to-adopt-bitcoin/

WinPoker in Curaçao announced that it will now begin accepting bitcoin as a deposit and withdrawal method to their WinPoker accounts which are on the iPoker network.

Consisting of over 30 different brands, including large European bookmakers like Paddy Power, Bet365, Betfair and William Hill, iPoker is the largest network of online poker rooms operating internationally. According to Pokerfuse, iPoker sits behind only the independent rooms PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker and PartyPoker in terms of cash game action.

The attraction of bitcoin to the online gaming community is obvious. Funds clearance is near immediate and the transactions are irreversible. Payment processing fees are a fraction of what they are compared to other payment methods.

James Lewis, Head of Poker Games for WinPoker, says, “We can take very small or very large deposits quickly, with little or no risk of fraud. As a result, players can access our games from areas of poor financial infrastructure, or can play exciting high stakes games quickly without waiting for a bank wire transfer to be processed.”

WinPoker has structured the process so that players choosing to utilize the bitcoin payment method do not also assume currency risk along with the inherent risk of casino gambling. Therefore, all bitcoin deposits convert into the user’s account currency (USD, EUR, or GBP) at the current market rate without currency conversion fees and then funds are credited to the player account within minutes. When processing a withdrawal, funds are converted back into bitcoin is credited to players’ bitcoin e‐wallets. No currency conversion fees are charged at any point in the process.

Although bitcoin has optional anonymity properties that would protect the identity and country of the player, those properties are not leveraged by WinPoker. As a licensed and regulated gaming operator, WinPoker must adhere to the regulations of the jurisdiction that they operate within. Lucas explains:
"Due to regulatory requirements, and to prevent fraud, collusion, money laundering, and ensure a safe and honest gaming environment for our players, we are required to adhere to strict KYC and AML policy. Players are required to produce documents to verify their identity, address, and source of funds where relevant, before they are able to withdraw any funds."
Of course player identification would be required when a real-money, licensed casino mingles bitcoin with other online payment methods that include legal tender.

The jurisdiction-less SealsWithClubs, which competes in the poker space as a bitcoin-only site, is not concerned about the news from WinPoker. “The bitcoin poker space will explode in 2013, so it’s something that is totally expected when I see other online poker rooms and casinos transitioning to bitcoin,” says Bryan Micon of SealsWithClubs.

Micon adds, “In this particular case, it doesn’t excite me all that much because first off no U.S. players are allowed and secondly WinPoker is only using bitcoin as a deposit option, not as a currency to gamble for.” When bitcoin is the currency of record and unit of account for gaming, it is less likely that funds could be frozen or confiscated through the actions of one of the casino operator’s bank accounts.

Another significant but less noticed advantage of using bitcoin ‘tokens’ directly as the gaming unit is that before a game can be declared gambling for regulatory purposes, there has to be real money involved. In the case of bitcoin, a strong case can be made that, even with secondary markets, certain virtual currencies lack the legal elements of material value and property.

When I asked Micon about future regulation of his play money bitcoin poker room, he said “I’m confident there will be other U.S.-facing, bitcoin-accepting poker sites in the near future and SealsWithClubs is growing extremely fast. As for licensing and regulation, it is something we are always exploring.”

Monday, January 28, 2013

Bitcoin Casinos Release 2012 Earnings

By Jon Matonis
Forbes
Tuesday, January 22, 2013

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2013/01/22/bitcoin-casinos-release-2012-earnings/

It is earnings season on Wall Street and it is reporting season for some of the leading bitcoin casino operators. Three significant Bitcoin-related gambling sites have reported their earnings and statistics for calendar year 2012. Some of the data is fairly revealing giving us a fascinating glimpse into the worldwide growth of bitcoin and gambling.

First up is the venerable SatoshiDice, which is the leading bitcoin gambling site in terms of amount wagered. Responsible for more than 50% of daily network volume on the Bitcoin blockchain, SatoshiDice reported first year earnings from wagering at an impressive ฿33,310. During the year, players bet a total of ฿1,787,470 in 2,349,882 individual bets at an average monthly growth rate of 78%. Earnings were calculated from eight months of data covering May to December, 2012.

With servers based in Ireland and promoted by Erik Voorhees, SatoshiDice is considered a blockchain-based betting game and it is self-described as the "most popular Bitcoin game in the world." Similar to random number generation, the site uses a method to produce a number between 0 and 65,535 which is then wagered on by making a bitcoin transaction to one of the static addresses representing different payouts. The odds are calculated to give the house an edge of 1.90% with full transparency because all dice rolls and earnings statistics are verifiable using the blockchain.

Operating expenses were minimal in 2012 and the company also paid monthly bitcoin dividends to 'public' shareholders which represent 10% of the total 100,000,000 outstanding shares. To invest in the operator and bet on the house, SatoshiDice shares are traded on the MPEx bitcoin stock exchange under ticker symbol S.DICE (see August 19th, 2012 Prospectus). At the current exchange rate of $17.00 per BTC, SatoshiDice is a company valued at $8.9 million.

Voorhees emphasizes that until the site's legal status is clear, all balances and accounting will be maintained in play-money bitcoin, because "it’s better to keep it completely separate from real life." For all of the venture capitalists out there, here is how SatoshiDice started. Where is the next big one?

Provably-fair bitZino, covered previously in this column, offers blackjack, video poker, roulette, and craps in a bitcoin-only environment. When roulette was launched it quickly rose to become the top bitZino game, leveling off now to become equal with blackjack in terms of hands played. In an email to Forbes, BitZino reported first year earnings from wagering of ฿10,137. During the year, players bet a total of ฿664,192 in 3.2 million individual bets. Earnings were calculated from seven months of data covering June to December, 2012.

Since inception, unique user count went from 3,086 in June to 8,737 in December, which represents a period growth rate of 183% or average monthly growth rate of 30.5%. Earnings during that same time went from ฿326 in June to ฿3,240 in December, which represents a period growth rate of 894% or average monthly growth rate of 149%. Owner Larry Taad expects a 500% increase in these user count and earnings numbers for 2013.

Interesting trends noticed by bitZino include near daily cash-outs from players on the site which simply would not be possible with other payment methods and an astounding payment processing fee of just 0.0031%.

Seals With Clubs is an innovative and friendly bitcoin poker site launched in August 2011 by a small team of former online poker players. Choosing to remain anonymous, they happily accept players worldwide and all cash-ins and cash-outs are denominated in bitcoin so no bank accounts are required and even your email address is optional. Poker Mavens by Briggs Softworks provides the gaming software for the site. Seals affiliate manager and site pro is the enthusiastic Bryan Micon, who said "with the upcoming release of our Android app we hope to explode the BTC poker space in 2013."

Seals confirmed that the company has paid out ฿110,587 over 7,972 transactions in the 16 months since their opening. They have over 10,600 player accounts with 5,697 of those logging in since October 1st, 2012. Typically, their busiest game time is 7-11pm EST and 972 types of Sit'N Go tournaments are also available. Players can open custom ring games and December brought in 1,000 unique players to at least one raked hand.

With game servers based in Iceland, Seals With Clubs is dealing about 10,000 hands of poker per day and raking only about 4,000 of them. If it is a tournament hand, no flop dealt, or below ฿0.04, then there is no rake. The current rake is 2.5% with a cap of ฿0.10 per hand which is slightly less than half of what other poker sites would charge.

Conservatively assuming that only 5% of the raked hands get to the maximum rake, then Seals With Clubs would be earning at least ฿20 per day on 4,000 raked hands dealt (or ฿600 per month on average). The operator does not make details available down to that level so we have no way of knowing with certainty. However, they do give a generous share of their rake back to high volume players and to others indirectly via freerolls and other promotions.

With privacy, efficiency, growth, payment irreversibility, and cost savings as demonstrated by the above, it's only a matter of time before the mainstream casino operators of Gibraltar and Malta realize the benefits of a gaming economy that leverages the ideal digital casino chip.

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Prediction Market 'Bets Of Bitcoin' Available To U.S. Customers

By Jon Matonis
Forbes
Thursday, December 6, 2012

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2012/12/06/prediction-market-bets-of-bitcoin-available-to-u-s-customers/

Launched in August 2011, Bets of Bitcoin is an anonymously-operated prediction market using the cryptographic money bitcoin. Users from anywhere in the world can place bets on the yes or no outcome of future real world events, such as will gold surpass $1,800 per ounce by December 31, 2012 or will the existence of extraterrestrials by confirmed officially by the U.S. government before the end of the year.

The openness and accessibility of the betting site has become more important now that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has taken legal action against non-anonymous Dublin-based Intrade for unlawfully soliciting and permitting U.S. customers to buy and sell options predicting whether specific future events would occur. Ridiculed as useless and obsolete, the CFTC appears to have raised the bar on doublespeak as they persecute markets with actual integrity and simultaneously reinforce the corruption in the so-called 'officially-sanctioned' markets.

Intrade bowed to pressure from regulators on November 26th and announced that it was closing its doors to U.S. bettors. In a stunning justification of global policing power and indicating a particular annoyance with prediction markets, David Meister, the Director of the CFTC’s Division of Enforcement, explained why even foreign operators can and will be regulated:
"It is against the law to solicit U.S. persons to buy and sell commodity options, even if they are called ‘prediction’ contracts, unless they are listed for trading and traded on a CFTC-registered exchange or unless legally exempt. The requirement for on-exchange trading is important for a number of reasons, including that it enables the CFTC to police market activity and protect market integrity. Today’s action should make it clear that we will intervene in the ‘prediction’ markets, wherever they may be based, when their U.S. activities violate the Commodity Exchange Act or the CFTC’s regulations."
Prediction markets like Bets of Bitcoin and Intrade have been popular for betting on the outcome of political elections, winners of Hollywood Oscars, winners of sporting events, and even scientific breakthroughs. According to Wikipedia, certain kinds of prediction markets may also create controversial incentives.

Other real-money prediction markets operate in Gibraltar, New Zealand, and the United States. There is also an innovative binary options broker based in Cyprus that was denied U.S. regulation when sought.

Regardless, regulation by CFTC or any U.S. regulatory body should not even be the objective of prediction market sites. Without anyone being victimized, regulating the ability of individuals to play games or trade on predicting future events violates free speech. Prediction markets have become a valuable research tool and "one big thing these markets can do is allow researchers to test the hypothesis of the 'wisdom of crowds'," says Rajiv Sethi, a professor of economics at Barnard College.

The binary option and derivatives trading site Nadex was recently turned down for regulation when it attempted to include political event contracts in its already-regulated range of markets for financial contracts.

Instead of seeking regulatory approval, Bets of Bitcoin focuses on financial privacy and anonymity so that it's irrelevant where the customers are geographically located. Anyone can create a bet statement and new bets are vetted by moderators to eliminate unwanted bets or bets whose outcome can't be easily determined or is easily manipulated.

Granted, Bets of Bitcoin differs from Intrade in several other ways, most notably in the way that the instruments are constructed. Intrade offers a full trading platform so you can get in and out of positions even before the expiration date whereas Bets of Bitcoin offers an allocated payout of losing bets based on weighted time of entry and shares commission with the bet creator. Liquidity is of course better on Intrade since it has been around much longer. The largest bet currently listed on Bets of Bitcoin involves a total of ฿258.55 (equivalent to $3,490.43) on whether the price of gold will or will not exceed $1,800/oz by December 31, 2012.

Online gambling is still illegal in the United States through federal laws and many state laws, but operating with "play money" like Bitcoin rather than "real money" could enable relationships with U.S. players to be cultivated. Due to regulations in the U.S. that restrict what U.S. residents can do with their cards, Intrade would not permit the use of U.S.-based credit or debit cards. However they did require customers to agree that it is legal for them to participate in the prediction marketplace.

Intrade says that non-U.S. customers will continue to have access to the company's real-money prediction markets and they promise that "in the near future we'll announce plans for a new exchange model that will allow legal participation from all jurisdictions - including the U.S."

Why wait? In the meantime, test your predictive skills at Bets of Bitcoin and turn your wisdom into bitcoins.

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

BitZino And The Dawn Of ‘Provably Fair’ Casino Gaming

By Jon Matonis
Forbes
Friday, August 31, 2012

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2012/08/31/bitzino-and-the-dawn-of-provably-fair-casino-gaming/

Have you ever wondered how easy it would be for online casino operators to cheat? After all, they're magically shuffling cards online and you can't even see the complete deck.

Formally launching on June 9th of this year, bitZino has designed a method to prove that its shuffles are fair and bitZino is not your typical online gambling portal. The first difference you realize is that gaming is conducted only in the digital currency bitcoin. The other primary difference is that bitZino displays a 'Provably Fair' button which allows you to independently and immediately verify the authenticity of a shuffle.

Now, the fact that they use bitcoin as the gaming currency has nothing to do with the cryptographic techniques of 'provably' fair' card shuffling but it does add a nice touch. BitZino is differentiating itself on two amazing levels and this is sure to cause the mega online casinos some heartburn down the road.

At the first level, bitcoin operates as the ideal digital casino chip providing privacy, immediacy, and irreversibility -- in essence, everything you'd expect from a physical Vegas casino chip. In addition to advantages for the online gaming experience, bitcoin doesn't respect national borders and there's no third-party processor that has to aggregate casino cash flow. Bitcoin assists in jurisdiction-less poker, because if they can't go after the crime, they go after the money trail.

At the second level, bitZino has boldly encroached upon an area that has been dominated by the third-party auditing associations. Lowering the barrier to entry, there is no more need for the auditing, certification, and standards organizations like eCOGRA (eCommerce and Online Gaming Regulation and Assurance) and APCW (Association of Players, Casinos, and Webmasters).

BitZino claims their games aren't just fair, they're 'provably fair' and the verifiable proof is available directly to you as a player. If not for the education issue, this news would stun the established online casinos of Gibraltar and Malta. I cannot imagine a gaming operator that doesn't adopt provably fair systems to remain competitive in the future.

Basically, bitZino is deploying a cryptographic hash function (SHA256 algorithm) to create a fingerprint of an already shuffled deck. Since the SHA256 hashing algorithm is one-way and there's no way a player can use that hash to figure out what the shuffle of the deck actually is, the casino can let players look at the hash before the game starts.

Then, the deck is reshuffled using the Fisher-Yates shuffle algorithm with the random numbers generated from the Mersenne twister algorithm that was seeded with a hash of the combined server seed and client seed. According to bitZino, "The second round of shuffling only serves to ensure that neither the server nor client could possibly know the final deck before the game starts." Finally, the initial shuffle and the server seed are provided to the player for verification. [BitZino is aware that some older browsers are not as secure as modern browsers deploying window.crypto and also that a client-side script to generate the client seed would drastically improve the quality of the overall system.]

The bitcoin community provides an excellent user base of cryptographically-aware players which increases the practical understanding of 'provably fair' systems that don't require a third-party authority. Larry Taad, owner and lead developer of bitZino, explains in an interview:
"One of the largest hurdles to creating a good provably fair system is explaining to users exactly what it is. When developing our provably fair system at bitZino, we put a lot of effort into making sure we were able to accurately portray to our users how it all works.
Because the larger market doesn't yet understand provably fair systems, it doesn't yet demand them. So the big players aren't likely to implement them. However, if history is any indication, the market will come around. Look at the rate of adoption of HTTPS websites. Users in the 90's didn't demand secure websites when shopping, now they absolutely do."
When asked about other types of casino games like craps and roulette, Larry said that any single-player game can be made provably fair by merely utilizing a source of randomness that is unknown to the house at the time the outcome of the game is determined.

For multi-player games, it becomes more complicated due to the fact that the house could plant a player that has full knowledge of the state of the game. Mental poker techniques can address some of these issues but with significant computational overhead which is why bitZino is working on ways to improve mental poker techniques. He added that "bitZino currently offers single-player video poker and single-player blackjack that are provably fair, but that multi-player games will be offered in the future."

As I write this article, they have officially added provably fair roulette. I really like this online casino -- expect a lot of good things from bitZino!

For further reading:
"bitZino touts ‘provably fair’ games, but can bitcoin-only casinos succeed?", Steven Stradbrooke, September 3, 2012
"Payment expert dubs Bitcoin a perfect fit for online gambling", Jamie Hinks, April 2, 2012
"Bitcoins Give Rise to Crypto Casinos", Bitcoin Blogger, August 28, 2011

Thursday, August 16, 2012

My Answer To A VC’s Bitcoin Question

By Jon Matonis
Forbes
Saturday, August 11, 2012

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2012/08/11/my-answer-to-a-vcs-bitcoin-question/

Fred Wilson is a venture capitalist and principal of Union Square Ventures. On his popular blog, he recently solicited feedback (for the second time) on the bitcoin cryptocurrency. I was tempted to reply directly on the blog, but with over 400 comments posted already I did not want to be lost in the scroll.

My reply is directed first at Fred for sparking the discussion but also to those many other investors pondering bitcoin deals. Throughout, I will refer to bitcoin investments as investment in bitcoin-related deals as opposed to a direct investment in the currency itself which an entirely different business proposition.

Let's get some basics out of the way. First of all, an investment in a bitcoin entity will be a gut-wrenching, difficult investment to make if a particular VC has an inherent fundamental belief in any of the following: (1) the cashless society as promoted by the anti-cashists; (2) capital controls enforced at national borders; (3) the appropriateness of any government monetary policy; and (4) the taxation of income.

For a VC, this can be a soul-searching exercise. But it does not mean that the decentralized digital currency is political by nature. It means that through its cryptographic nature bitcoin reduces the monetary Statist to irrelevancy. Bitcoin has some pretty powerful and disruptive byproducts.

With optional, user-defined transaction privacy, the use of money for purposes of identity linking falls by the wayside. True, it enables a paper cashless society but not with the attributes that the tax-efficient anti-cashists want. Without government checkpoints for financial institution wire transfers, bitcoin capital flows freely, without limits, and perhaps anonymously. The harmful tools of centralized monetary policy would also not exist. And finally, the taxation of income that began in the United States in 1913 would operate on the honor system -- the honor of the taxpayer, that is. This could be welcome news for some as a progressive income tax was a fundamental tenet of Marxism.

In his first post, Fred mentioned "the emergence of currencies that are not controlled by nation states in my lifetime." He clearly acknowledges that significant ramifications result from the "decoupling of currencies from governments," but I wonder if he has come to terms with what that actually means.

What sounds cool and hip because it is technologically advanced can also turn a lifetime of engrained political assumptions on its head. If a VC happens to believe that Greece's problems can be solved by eliminating anonymous paper cash transactions and that the taxation of income is morally justified, how does he reconcile that with bitcoin dominance?

Definitely not for the faint of heart, those skilled and experienced venture capitalists entering the arena will be
playing with fire. This is not a game of targeting an app and throwing seed money at developers located in Silicon Valley or Silicon Alley. Nor is it like catching the social media wave or jumping on the mobile payments bandwagon.

Bitcoin is the quintessential disruptor for not only does it disrupt established primary-level players in the field of payments, like VISA, Mastercard, and PayPal, but it disrupts the very nature of monetary authority.  Bitcoin is disruption within supreme disruption.

Failing to recognize this maxim, especially as a venture capital investor, can be fraught with pitfalls. Regulatory acquiescence will be tempting, but counter-productive. In a company's strategic plan, relegation of bitcoin to just another national currency type among equals fails to exploit its incredible transformative properties. The venture capitalist could become boxed in by the lack of courage to set legal precedent, by the unwillingness to go overseas, or even by the reluctance of the board. To be fair, there will be VC plays in the regulation-friendly exchange space and processor space but they won't be the home runs!

The home runs will be transformative and that just may not be possible for a NewCo in all countries. I maintain that it is more a game of multiple jurisdictions that leverages the relative strengths of competing legal jurisdictions for the best foot into the global infrastructure.

Gibraltar made an early, and deliberate, strategic decision to embrace and promote the online gambling business. They executed it brilliantly and Gibraltar is now home to the industry's leaders like publicly-traded bwin.party [BPTY:London]. Just as with online gambling, some jurisdictions around the world will be more bitcoin-friendly than others. Negotiating that outcome is the real frontier.

Many readers have commented and agreed that the investment opportunities will revolve around bitcoin-related services more than any type of client software play or attempt to control the mining and transaction fees. While I generally agree, I also think that a new company does not have to be bitcoin focused exclusively.

Also, keeping bitcoin value in bitcoin on the block chain will be the key. It may be an opportunity that moves significantly beyond an existing business model simply by having bitcoin in its arsenal. For example, a third-world e-commerce platform could bring massive shopping to the unbanked by leveraging the non-national and frictionless attributes of bitcoin. Or, asset vehicles could be designed that transfer inter-generational wealth without the need for trusts or trust administrators.

So, my advice to VCs seeking their piece of the block chain is study the FATF blacklist of 15 non-cooperative countries, go to airports you never heard of, and most importantly, surround yourself with management teams that mentally embrace bitcoin's powerful derivative byproducts.

For further reading:
"Sit down and shut up!", BLOGDIAL, August 13, 2012
"Cash Is Essential For A Free Society", Stowe Boyd, August 10, 2012
"Secure multiparty Bitcoin anonymization", Edward Z. Yang, July 20, 2012
"Nerdy Money: Bitcoin, the Private Digital Currency, and the Case Against Its Regulation", Nikolei M. Kaplanov, March 31, 2012

Saturday, April 14, 2012

Another Market Not Available to U.S. Citizens

By Jon Matonis
Forbes
Monday, April 9, 2012

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2012/04/09/another-market-not-available-to-u-s-citizens/

I find this incredible. U.S. citizens blocked out a market that the rest of the developed world has access to. Of course, I am speaking about the CFD market. CFD stands for "contract for difference" and it is a marketplace where regular people can trade the markets of the large trading houses without the same capital requirements. So, basically it is a form of democratized financial trading for the masses.

In financial parlance, a contract for difference is a contract between two parties stipulating that the seller will pay to the buyer the difference between the current value of an asset and its value at contract time. Alternatively, if the difference is negative, then the buyer pays instead to the seller. Utilizing leverage, CFDs are traded on margin without the need for ownership of the underlying asset and positions may be either long or short. Unlike futures contracts, CFDs have no fixed contract size or expiry date. Investors appreciate these instruments because of their flexibility as CFDs can be traded in an almost endless variety of contracts that are sometimes unavailable at the traditional exchanges, such as diamonds and even bitcoin.

Due to restrictions by the Securities and Exchange Commission on over-the-counter financial instruments, trading in the CFD market is not an option for U.S. residents and U.S. citizens but curiously you can still buy a book about the practice on Amazon's U.S. site. Having lived and worked in both Ireland and the United Kingdom, the choices available to foreigners in the area of online trading and online gaming puts the U.S. market to shame. CFD markets and spread betting are prevalent in other locales not to mention the smorgasbord of voluntary online gambling and poker choices.  Gibraltar has staked their jurisdictional reputation on supporting the online wagering industry and they are the leader.

America's puritanical heritage has traditionally steered it away from such pursuits but that is changing slowly. Legislation continues to be evolving in the direction of permitting online casinos and gambling provided that the established gaming lobbies and layered tax jurisdictions can receive their pound of flesh.

The restrictions against the CFD market in America are just another example of protecting us from ourselves, but instead of protection from the "sin of compulsive wagering" it is protection from the "sin of excessive leverage".

Now, there is also the sin of illiquid asset trading. Recently, the SEC charged SharesPost and Felix Investments over pre-IPO trading in the illiquid shares of Facebook. This activity occurs over an online trading platform for private shares that provides a way for small and large shareholders to cash out and new entrants to participate prior to a formal IPO event. Eventually, successful innovations such as SharesPost and SecondMarket may be driven overseas as well due to excessive regulation.

Although I disagree with Josh Brown's capitulatory conclusions of while-the-rules-aren’t-perfect-they’re-the-only-rules-we've-got attitude for the private shares secondary market, he certainly has a colorful way of describing it:
"Imagine a private market where tech-savvy people and the Digerati could buy and sell within their own little bubble stretching from San Francisco to the off-campus housing around Stanford to the Diablo Mountain range bordering the eastern fringe of San Jose.  There would be no need for all that physical “dead tree” paperwork or the prying eyes of CNBC and the Wall Street Journal.  There could be less rules because, frankly, these would be negotiated transactions between millionaires and billionaires – a brotherhood of enlightened self-interest, in it for the challenge and intellectual self-satisfaction with the money being a mere afterthought."
But we do want our private markets if we so choose, sorry Mr. Brown. It isn't all millionaires and billionaires. Marketplaces like the CFD market and the private shares secondary market are alternative free-market solutions to a financial world rife with favoritism and increasing regulatory chokeholds. Regulating these emerging markets in the U.S. under the guise of "it's for your own protection" doesn't fly and it's offensive. Markets will always seek a way to self-regulate and to survive.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Could Bitcoin be the Future of Internet Betting?

Hartley Henderson has published a prospicient article at Off Shore Gaming Association, "Could Virtual Currency be the Future of Internet Betting?". The author has identified a man known as R.C. who emphatically endorses bitcoin as a means of payment for online gambling and casinos across almost all jurisdictions. This supports our thesis that bitcoin is the digital equivalent of a physical casino chip. Henderson summarizes his discussion:
'If I had any say, all transactions at our book would be done in bitcoins,' the man said. 'They are untraceable and totally out of the control of any government. And most importantly they are an investment which someday I’m confident will rival silver prices.'
The author then asks R.C. specifically what makes bitcoins a better option than cash for online gambling:
"As you know, money transfer is vital to the sports betting, casino, and online poker industries. Bitcoin is an amazing solution. Through a combination of math and cryptography - it is a completely decentralized currency/commodity. That means no entity is in control, it is managed by all the nodes of the network, collectively. You can think about it like bitTorrent, if you are familiar with the file sharing protocol; purely peer to peer with no central management. 
Through this cryptography and decentralized design, each node on the network is a 'bookkeeper' of which bitcoin addresses own which coins. You cannot fake or forge a transaction or create coins outside of the system. Each node has a record and will not accept forgeries. So, even though there is a public record of all bitcoin transactions, the key is that nobody knows who owns a particular address and thus those bitcoins. So on the one hand it is completely transparent - all coins and transactions are public, but on the other hand nobody knows who owns those coins/bitcoin addresses. You can see how it could be useful to gamblers."
Peer-to-peer wagering, or social betting, is gaining quickly in popularity and Henderson makes the point that companies receiving a membership fee are distinctly different from companies that receive a commission on the winning bets:
"What R.C. didn’t mention is that in no country is peer to peer wagering illegal. There is nothing in the law that stops person A from wagering $20 with person B on the outcome of a game. What makes the transaction illegal in some countries is when an intermediary acts as the bookmaker. That is precisely why Betfair and Matchbook are seen as technically illegal by the U.S. government. Both are peer to peer wagering operations but they also take a commission on the winning bets. BTCSportsBet.com doesn’t do so. They simply have paid members."
Henderson also makes the bold case that bitcoin as a payment mechanism doesn't fall under the UIGEA because there is no money involved and there is no way the Department of Justice can effectively intrude. Our man R.C. perhaps explained it best:
"As far as UIGEA, there are no banks or processors involved. Moving bitcoins around is just like moving an image file or other data around. I would expect to see bitcoin-specific legislation before any attempt to apply the UIGEA. But even with legislation, I expect the future of bitcoin to be bright. There is no central authority to shut down. There are laws against file sharing copyrighted works, but due to the distributed nature of bitTorrent it cannot be effectively policed.
As far as pressure from the DOJ or other entity (it’s not a viable concern). Bitcoin can be classified as a commodity, or a currency, or nothing at all (it's just data). One can argue that it is like Facebook credits or World of Warcraft Gold. The government is not going after them. Also, the terms and conditions for BTCSportsBet.com states that the player is responsible for determining the legality of playing with bitcoins in his or her jurisdiction. Sign-ups are anonymous and the site does not know the origin of the players. No personal identification is requested; even an email address is optional. A player can sign up, send bitcoins, wager, and withdraw without the site ever knowing who he or she is. The properties of bitcoin allow this to happen. There can be no fraud, identity theft, or reversed transactions. All of those headaches are a massive cost to the industry - so you can see why bitcoin may be a significant factor in the future of online wagering."
Regarding the claims above, it remains to be seen if Facebook Credits will ever permit two-way exchange and, even if they did, that the U.S. regulatory authorities wouldn't move promptly to include them under the 'Prepaid Access Rule' for financial products. In the meantime, I agree that the resilient bitcoin is more suited to the monetary challenges ahead and it is another case of technology being ahead of the law.

For further reading:
"Leading Bitcoin Online Gambling Operator Opens Books", Bitcoin Money, January 18, 2012
"Could crypto-currency change how we pay?", Julian Bucknall, January 8, 2012
"Bitcoin and the Digital Currency Revolution", Dan Downs, January 5, 2012
"A Bitcoin Primer", Mike Koss, January 1, 2012

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Virtual Currency Poker Leaves Real Money on the Table

Tyler York of Betable presents some amazing numbers on how real money gaming would be supremely more profitable than virtual money gaming in "Virtual currency poker leaves money on the table".

Bitcoin, the digital version of a physical casino chip, is not discussed in the analysis. But since it currently falls into that legally unclassified area of 'not-real-money', it will undoubtedly start to appear in those gaming venues that inhabit the monetary space between real and virtual. Tyler York then asks, "given the tremendous revenue opportunity, why haven’t social game companies already offered real-money play?": 
"No, not because Facebook doesn’t allow gambling.

While this was true in the past, Facebook may soon allow real-money gambling on its platform. Even so, social games are on countless other platforms where gambling is already permitted in legal jurisdictions, including Android, iOS, and Google+. These companies didn’t pursue real-money social games for any of these platforms. 

No, not because gambling is illegal in the US.

While the Department of Justice opened the door for states to regulate online gambling within their jurisdictions, the fact that the US market was closed before wouldn’t have stopped major social game companies in foreign markets. The addressable ex-US worldwide gambling market contains millions of players that would give real-money social games the audience they needs to succeed. 

The reason game companies haven’t implemented real-money play is because gambling licenses are tremendously expensive and time consuming to acquire.

While theoretically possible, the process is so painful that the vast majority of game companies don’t even consider it. The time (≥18 months) and money (≥$1M including all associated costs) are an enormous barrier to entry for most game studios. Even if a studio could afford those costs, steps must be undertaken sequentially and spending more money doesn’t shorten the period of time it takes to get a license. There is also the added layer of complication arises from the necessary corporate structuring and off-shoring that must take place to comply with gambling regulations.

These time and money costs are simply too great for the vast majority of small-to-medium sized game studios, and the compliance issues become increasingly prohibitive as you look at large game companies. These huge pains have prevented Zynga and other game companies from offering real-money play to non-US players in spite of the massive potential revenue opportunity. Game companies have been better off investing their limited resources into virtual currency revenue streams because they will monetize immediately, although relatively poorly."

For further reading: 
"The Real 'New Frontier' of Gaming", Tyler York, December 19, 2011
"Real-Money vs Virtual Currency Gaming - Design Outside the Box", Jesse Schell, DICE 2010, May 12, 2011

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Switchpoker Adds Bitcoin as Deposit and Withdrawal Method


Press Release
via Marketwire
Tuesday, November 22, 2011

http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/switchpokercom-adds-controversial-virtual-currency-bitcoin-as-deposit-withdrawal-method-1589809.htm

World's First Real Money Poker Site for Apple Mobile Devices is First to Offer Revolutionary Online Virtual Currency Bitcoin
 
DUBLIN, IRELAND (Marketwire) -- Switchpoker.com, the world's first real money online poker site compatible with the iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch, today announces it is the first real money poker site to offer the revolutionary virtual currency Bitcoin as a deposit and payment method.

Bitcoin is a distributed currency that operates without any central point (such as a bank) and without any governmental control. It is very much like gold is in the offline world. Bitcoins can be exchanged from one person to another directly, anonymously and without fees. 

It has proved controversial due to its decentralized nature and the inability of governments to track its use. It has already attracted the negative attention of the Chinese government, the CIA, the US government and many lobby groups around the world. 

Conor McCarthy, spokesman for Switchpoker.com, said, "The advantage of the Bitcoin currency is that it has the ability to remove all payment processing related barriers of entry for poker and gambling sites around the world. It would allow any person to play for real money completely anonymously. 

"Players will be able to now send us funds directly without a 3rd party being privy to the transactions, and we will be able to send funds directly back to the user. It also means that people without a Skrill or Neteller account will be able to play. Players can get Bitcoins on sites such as Bitcoin247.com"

Switchpoker.com, launched in October 2010, offers a simple web-based solution to online poker players who wish to play their favourite games on the move - no download is required, simply visit Switchpoker.com using your mobile Apple device, sign up for an account and start playing immediately.

Switchpoker.com can be played by anyone over 18-years-old with an iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch or using standard web browsers including Internet Explorer 8, Internet Explorer 9, Firefox, Chrome, Safari or Opera.

Switchpoker.com is not currently available to U.S. residents.

About Switchpoker.com

Switchpoker.com is the world's first real money online poker site for use with iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch mobile devices. The software company which developed the platform used by Switch Poker was formed in Ireland in 2010. 

Contact Information:
Poker Media Consulting
Brendan Murray
+353863057469
Brendan.murray@pokermediaconsulting.com
www.Switchpoker.com 

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

U.S. Department of Justice Seizes Major Online Poker Sites

By Dan Cypra
Poker News Daily
Friday, April 15, 2011

In what has been a lively afternoon in the online poker world, the Federal Government has seized the domain names belonging to PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, UB.com, and Absolute Poker. Poker News Daily has learned that PokerStars, the world’s largest site, has ceased taking action from the United States.

According to a statement from the Justice Department, the founders of PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Absolute Poker have been charged with “bank fraud, money laundering, and illegal gambling offenses.” In addition, “restraining orders were issued against more than 75 bank accounts utilized by the Poker Companies and their payment processors, and five internet domain names used by the Poker Companies to host their illegal poker games were seized.”

Visiting any of the four major online poker sites yields a message that reads in part, “This domain name has been seized by the FBI pursuant to an arrest warrant in rem obtained by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York… Conducting, financing, managing, supervising, directing, or owning all or part of an illegal gambling business is a Federal crime.”

The new home page of PokerStars, Full Tilt, UB.com, and Absolute Poker adds that violating such laws can result in up to five years behind bars and a fine of $25,000. Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney in Manhattan, commented in the Justice Department statement, “Foreign firms that choose to operate in the United States are not free to flout the laws they don’t like simply because they can’t bear to be parted from their profits.”

The statement discusses the passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) five years ago and revealed, “Because U.S. banks and credit card issuers were largely unwilling to process their payments, the Poker Companies allegedly used fraudulent methods to circumvent federal law and trick these institutions into processing payments on their behalf.”

Read the rest of the article.

For further reading:
"Bitcoin, intermediaries, and information control", Jerry Brito, April 20, 2011
"Surprisingly Free: Gavin Andresen on Bitcoin", Jerry Brito, April 19, 2011
"Bitcoin: Imagine a net without intermediaries", Jerry Brito, April 16, 2011
"Daniel Tzvetkoff Purportedly Behind Online Poker Indictments", Dan Cypra, Poker News Daily, April 15, 2011
"U.S. Government Seizes eWalletXpress Funds", Brett Collson, Poker News Daily, November 28, 2010
"Internet Gambling Payment Processor Arrested in Las Vegas", Dan Cypra, Poker News Daily, April 17, 2010
"Online Poker Payment Processor Indicted in New York", Tom Jenkins, Poker News Daily, August 6, 2009

Saturday, April 9, 2011

Bankers, Amsterdam and Bitcoin

Last week on April 6th, 2011, a group of bankers and payment professionals at the 10th Annual European Payments Consulting Association Conference sat patiently and listened to a presentation on the disruptive bitcoin from Mr. Amir Taaki (or Genjix). Taaki is also the founder of Britcoin, a new bitcoin to Pound Sterling exchange service. The full video is below, but a recent article in DYNDY mentioned the high points:
"Our guy Genjix is a colorful and open minded type, witty and messy, a good mix that entertained the people present despite it being the last presentation of the day; he did a good (unpaid) job presenting some quite impressive information on the growth and usage of Bitcoin, making people present progressively interested (or pissed, but then hard to notice behind the suits) at this crypto-cash system that seems to be there to stay or, one could argue, to multiply in different flavors in the near future."

"Being shown an anonymous digital currency with its own laundering service. Used for selling drugs. Bit-coin, you have cheered me up." --Michael Price

"Ultimately, the positive message that bitcoin also carries is that of more possibilities in engineering currencies, that of a future in which complementary currencies can make economic systems more resilient to the the disruption of capitalist behaviors, while closely relating people to their community values and maybe even revolutionize the way we contribute to the common good – paying taxes for what we really care, rather than not paying them, let me add."


AmirTaaki from itzard on Vimeo.

Friday, April 1, 2011

Monetising Game Play on Social Network Sites

I was invited to speak at the KPMG eGaming Summit in Gibraltar (31 March 2011) on the topic of "Monetising Game Play on Social Network Sites". The presentation gives an overview of the current state of the virtual currency industry and also introduces bitcoin as the ideal digital representation of a physical casino chip.




The full KPMG Programme and agenda which included opening remarks from The Chief Minister of Gibraltar, Peter Caruana, can be found here.






Sunday, September 19, 2010

Interview with Blueshift Research on PayPal, Again

In July 2010, I was interviewed by Dann Anthony Maurno of Blueshift Research for a strategy piece that he was compiling on PayPal. Below is my excerpt from that study, "PayPal Still Dominates Online Payment Industry":

Excerpt

Alternative Payment Experts - All five alternative payment experts said PayPal is the U.S. market leader and will continue to dominate the space. Mobile payments and non-­U.S. opportunities represent areas of growth. One source said PayPal will enjoy significant growth opportunities, especially from its Facebook agreement. Source reported high levels of competition. MasterCard’s API could be a game changer while Visa’s CyberSource purchase could open up a large merchant network to its services.

Jon Matonis, a digital currency consultant and author of The Monetary Future blog, said MasterCard and Visa are not yet significant challenges to PayPal. Still, they could eliminate the need for PayPal if they can match it in offering easy online transactions. Significant opportunities await PayPal, such as moving into direct deposits and, outside of the United States, virtual currency in online gaming and serving the unbanked in developing countries.

1. “With PayPal, you really have to talk about domestic and international, where there are far more challenges. They can maintain their market share domestically, but on the international side, PayPal is not the de facto standard. If you look in the UK, there are companies like Neteller, Moneybookers and Ukash.”

2. “These [developments for Visa and MasterCard] will only have the effect of extending the establishment leaders. They don’t much change anything.”

3. “The credit cards feed in and fund PayPal. But I do think PayPal is threatened by that. They’ve made their market by filling the void left by [Visa and MasterCard]. If they fill the void themselves, that eliminates PayPal’s raison d’être.”

4. “The arrangement Facebook made with PayPal was far better for PayPal than Facebook; it opened up the entire Facebook user base to PayPal, which Facebook didn’t need to do. It’s probably going to double PayPal’s user base.”

5. “What PayPal has to do to increase its market share is to look into its own unit of accounts rather than push through other ones. If PayPal adopted something like paychecks or direct deposits into PayPal, they’d address a major problem of getting cash into the system, which is not coming through a bank or Visa or MasterCard.”

6. “Canada’s doing direct deposits for workers’ paychecks into PayPal. If you got paid that way, how much more would you use PayPal?”

7. “I don’t think you can talk about PayPal’s future without mentioning the virtual currency platform people. gWallet [Inc.] and [Jambool Inc.’s] Social Gold are the two big ones, and SponsorPay [GmbH] in Germany. They allow you to make a spontaneous purchase during a game so you can continue playing. Facebook Credits are coming out as a step toward obliterating that business platform for providers.”

8. “Internationally, Moneybookers and Neteller gained market share in the last two years, not necessarily at the expense of PayPal. One of the reasons they’re gaining is they get into merchant transactions that Visa and MasterCard and PayPal won’t even touch [including online gambling and adult entertainment].”

9. “There’s a split between the developed and undeveloped world [in terms of mobile payments]. Kenya is probably five or 10 years ahead of the U.S. because the need in that country is to serve the unbanked. Mobile payment is preferred in parts of Africa. It’s happening in the U.S., just not as quickly as in other parts of the world.”

Also, see the April 2010 Blueshift Research interview excerpt here.

Saturday, November 28, 2009

U.S. Defers Bank Rules on Internet Gambling

The Wall Street Journal
Saturday, November 28, 2009

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125934218704666645.html

WASHINGTON -- The Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve are giving U.S. financial institutions an additional six months to comply with regulations designed to ban Internet gambling.

The agencies said Friday that the new rules, which were to take effect Dec. 1, would be delayed until June 1 of next year.

The rules seek to curb online gambling by prohibiting financial institutions from accepting payments from credit cards, checks or electronic fund transfers to settle online wagers.

The financial industry complained that the new rules would be difficult to enforce because they didn't offer a clear definition of what constitutes Internet gambling.

They had sought a 12-month delay in implementing provisions of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act that Congress passed in 2006.

The Bush administration issued regulations to enforce the law in November 2008 and had set Dec. 1, 2009, as the date financial institutions would have to begin complying.

In a joint notice Friday, the Treasury and the Fed said several members of Congress had sought a delay, arguing that there was considerable support for new legislation to clarify current laws.

According to the joint release, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) and House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D., Mass.), among other lawmakers, sent letters expressing concern that the law doesn't contain a clear definition of "unlawful Internet gambling."

Mr. Frank supports legislation that would roll back the 2006 law. He proposes allowing the Treasury Department to license and regulate online gambling companies that service American customers.

Sen. Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) and Rep. Spencer Bachus (R., Ala.), however, had opposed delaying compliance, for reasons related to "the speculative nature of the problems raised by petitioners, the associations and other interest groups," the agencies' release said.

The two agencies said groups seeking a delay had provided sufficient reasons to justify a limited six-month delay. Financial organizations including the American Bankers Association had sent the agencies letters supporting a petition filed by gambling industry associations seeking a delay.

In September, a federal appellate court in Philadelphia upheld the 2006 law, rejecting a challenge from an association of offshore bookies that the federal prohibition was too vague and violated privacy rights.

U.S. bettors have been estimated to supply at least half the revenue of the $16 billion Internet gambling industry, which is largely hosted overseas.

For further reading:
"Treasury, Fed delay Internet gambling ban 6 months", Reuters, November 27, 2009
"Start-Ups Hedging Their Bets On Online-Gambling Legislation", Venture Capital Dispatch, November 27, 2009
"Representative Frank introduces bill to allow online gambling", Martin Merzer, May 6, 2009
"Bankers, poker players oppose Feds' online gaming rules", Emily Starbuck Gerson, January 8, 2008

Friday, June 12, 2009

Online Gambling Goes Underground

By Catherine Holahan
BusinessWeek
Thursday, October 19, 2006

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/oct2006/tc20061019_454543.htm

A U.S. law aimed at cracking down on Internet gambling may drive the practice more into the shadows and do little to deter bettors


It was getting late on Oct. 12, the night before a sweeping anti-Internet gambling bill would be signed into law. Paul McGuire was at his computer, enjoying one last hurrah on PartyPoker, a site that had pledged to kick off all U.S. users as soon as the law left President Bush's desk. "It was kind of like that last party before summer ends when you've got to go back to school," says McGuire, a 34-year-old New Yorker and author of the popular "Tao of Poker" blog. "They were playing loose because it was the last night." Maybe for some.

Not McGuire, whose online handle is "Dr. Pauly." At 11 p.m., he simply closed down his PartyPoker account, withdrawing thousands of dollars in winnings accumulated in recent weeks. He later wired the funds to an offshore account with NETeller, an Internet bank registered in the Isle of Man, and opened new accounts with two other poker sites—both of them privately owned.

So much for the U.S. crackdown on Internet gambling. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act is designed to halt the flow of the roughly $6 billion that flows each year from U.S. gamblers to foreign Internet casinos by officially barring credit card companies and other U.S. financial institutions from processing illegal wagers. The Justice Dept. has long maintained that online poker gambling, like sports betting, violates terms of the 1961 Wire Act.

But within hours of the new bill's signing, McGuire was back online, betting on hands of Texas Hold 'Em—and he was not alone. He's now wagering through PokerStars.com and FullTiltPoker.com, both licensed by the Canadian Mohawk territory of Kahnawake and happily taking U.S. customers. (PokerStars also has a license with the government of the Isle of Man, where it is headquartered.) Both sites saw record numbers of players the weekend following the law's adoption, according to Louisiana's Casino City, which monitors traffic on online poker sites in its trade journals.

Less Transparency Indeed, the new law will do little to stop online gambling, say gamblers, betting companies, and industry analysts alike. Instead, the law will drive out regulated, publicly traded companies like PartyGaming, the Gibraltar-based parent of PartyPoker, and make way for private gambling companies and banks based in nations where such industries are loosely policed at best. As a result, the new law could ultimately make billions of dollars in U.S. online gambling transactions more difficult to trace, and increase the likelihood that funds end up in criminal hands. "It leaves an opening for some of the more unscrupulous companies coming in from unregulated places," says Frank Catania, past director of New Jersey's Division of Gaming Enforcement and president of Catania Consulting Group (see BusinessWeek.com, 7/12/06, "Betting Against Online Gambling").

The exodus is under way—and the companies that are on the way out are those with the most financial transparency. PartyGaming, 888Holdings, and SportingBet, all of which are traded on the London Stock Exchange, have said they're exiting the U.S. market. Roughly 70% of PartyGaming's $319 million in second-quarter sales and 50% of 888 Holdings' revenue came from the U.S (see BusinessWeek.com, 10/2/06, "Party's Over for Online Gambling").

Private online gambling companies, on the other hand, have been defiant in the face of the new law, arguing it does not apply to them and cannot be enforced. Bodog Entertainment Group, which operates a Costa Rican online gambling site, has no plans to bar U.S. customers. "We've structured our business in such a way that we'll have no problems adapting to any changes in the online gaming environment," says Bodog founder Calvin Ayre. Similarly, PokerStars released a statement saying its lawyers had "concluded that these provisions do not alter the U.S. legal situation with respect to our offering of online poker games."

The private companies maintain that Internet gambling regulations in the final version of the law, unlike those in the earlier version that was passed by the House of Representatives, do not explicitly ban casino-style games. As a result, they say they are still in a legal gray area that has existed since November, 2002, when the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the 1961 Wire Act only applied to "sporting events or contests" and not wagers in general (see BusinessWeek.com, 10/3/06, "Online Gambling Still in the Cards?").

Role of E-Wallets Whatever the legal grounds, private companies are benefiting from the role played by so-called e-wallets, which for years have been processing gambling payments credit card companies won't touch. Although the largest e-wallet, eBay's (EBAY) PayPal, does block gambling transactions, NETeller—the e-wallet of choice for PokerStars and other sites—has adopted a wait-and-see policy with regard to the law. In an Oct. 12 statement, the company said it will monitor how the U.S. government implements the act over the next 270 days. Other e-wallets include CentralCoin and Click2Pay.

As a publicly traded company on the London stock exchange, NETeller faces pressures that many other e-wallets don't. Of the $7.3 billion in transactions it processed in 2005, many were for nongambling-related purchases. NETeller does not want to lose that business or spook investors. If NETeller does block U.S. customers, however, plenty of other private e-wallets will gladly take the millions in processing fees, typically a percentage of each transaction.

Many third-party processors do not reveal how much they take in or what they do with the money. Christopher Costigan, president of Gambling911.com, a trade publication for the online betting industry, expects the withdrawal of public companies will mean more loosely regulated, foreign-based e-wallets will enter the market. "There are always third-party processors popping up that are really fly-by-nights…these are small companies in Central America, Latin America, and even the Middle East." In several cases, e-wallets have operated for a few months and suddenly disappeared with the casinos' and players' money, says Costigan.

"Vulnerable to Financial Crime" The relative secrecy within which many private e-wallets operate has made them targets for money laundering and the transfer of funds to illegal organizations, says Molly Millerwise, director of public affairs at the Treasury Dept. "When such service providers are located in the U.S., they are subject to both state and federal controls that help against money laundering and terrorist financing. Overseas outfits, however, are not subject to U.S. laws and thus are very much on our radar screen as emerging trends that are vulnerable to financial crime," says Millerwise. The government's Financial Action Task Force will address the issue in a paper in the coming days.

Tracking who is supporting e-wallets and what they do with the money could be cost-prohibitive, if not near-impossible, for banks. Pamela Johnston, a partner with Foley & Lardner and an expert in white-collar crime, says blocking e-wallet transactions is not as simple as refusing to process payments marked "7995"—the code for online gambling transactions. Many e-wallets process a mix of gambling and other transactions, making it difficult to indiscriminately block payments. In addition, some e-wallets use foreign banks to process transactions. CentralCoin, for example, is registered in the British West Indies and handles transactions through Gateway Financial Services. Thus, the U.S. bank does not even see the name of the e-wallet when money is wired, and instead sees the name of another bank. The foreign headquarters of many e-wallets also makes it difficult for banks to demand the nature of transactions. "I think it is going to be costly to enforce," says Johnston. "This is not like terrorism where you can police it with a list of names and organizations you need to watch for. You can write a computer program figuring that out. This is more multifaceted and complicated."

But even if the U.S. cracks down on e-wallets, other payment options could be used. Catania says some e-wallets have begun accepting payments from phone cards. The users just load the card with money, open an e-wallet account with the funds, and then start gambling. When they want to cash out, they have the e-wallet send a check from a recognized financial institution that is then deposited in their account. "The easiest way to track money is to allow the credit card companies to take the bets online—this only makes it more anonymous" says Catania. Keith Furlong, deputy director of the Interactive Gaming Council, says he sees other shadier organizations getting into the act as well. "It will go a step further so that there will be some kind of e-cash product that will not be auditable, harder to trace, and make the movement of money much more difficult to follow."

Deterring Newbies U.S. politicians say they are aware that the act won't stop the gamblers determined to bet. But they are hopeful that it could deter those only now getting involved because it is so easy to "click a mouse, bet the house." Without more casual gamblers, less money will go to offshore accounts in general. Congressman Bob Goodlatte, the Virginia Republican who initially sponsored the legislation, says the bill adds a necessary hurdle to sending money to foreign casinos. "It will make it harder to get the money out of the country, but not impossible," he says.

However, depending on how the bill is implemented, it may not be that much more difficult. After all, online gamblers already had to have e-wallet accounts set up in order to gamble. "Dr. Pauly," for one, is betting that the law won't stop many. "It will be a nuisance, but if one site goes down a new one will pop up," says McGuire. He compares it to the illegal poker clubs in Manhattan that are closed down by police just to reopen in a new apartment building several weeks later. The night before PartyPoker stopped accepting U.S. bets; McGuire received an e-mail about a new New York club willing to take in some of the ousted players on an invitation-only basis. "One of the poker clubs goes down, another one will come up," says McGuire. "I have no intentions of stopping."

Monday, June 1, 2009

Net Gambling Bill Fans E-cash Fears

By Mike Brunker
MSNBC.com
Thursday, January 23, 2003

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3071022

Critics say law could make money laundering easier

After seven years of trying, lawmakers are widely expected to crack down on illegal Internet gambling during the current session of Congress. But in doing so, some observers say, they could breathe life into a greater menace than the one they are trying to strangle — an untraceable form of electronic cash that could undermine the ability of governments to tax their citizens and trace the flow of money around the globe.

Concern about the possible unintended consequences of anti-gambling legislation comes amid signs that Congress is serious about putting the brakes on the rapidly growing online wagering industry. With both houses of Congress now under Republican control, most legislative handicappers say chances are better than 50-50 that a bill will land on President Bush’s desk before the end of the current session.

The legislation considered most likely to win approval aims to knock the financial legs out from under the offshore betting Web sites by prohibiting Americans from using credit cards or other financial instruments — electronic fund transfers, wire transfers, checks, money orders and the like — for Internet wagering.

That has gambling site operators scrambling for other means that can’t be easily blocked, such as digital e-cash, that will allow them continued access to their biggest market, the United States.

‘We're going to try to survive’
“We’re going to try to survive as an industry,” said Jessica Davis, vice president at the Antigua-based BetWWTS.com. “We always are trying to be a step ahead and we will do whatever we have to do and use whatever means necessary to allow our clients to remain active.”

The House approved the Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Act, introduced by Rep. James Leach, R-Iowa, last year, but it died when the Senate failed to act in the waning days of the 107th Congress. Leach reintroduced the bill in the House on Jan. 7, and Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., whose name became synonymous with early efforts to ban online betting, plans to introduce identical legislation in the Senate, probably in February, a spokesman said.

Passage of the Leach bill could have a severe impact on the online gambling industry, which gaming analyst Sebastian Sinclair of Christiansen Capital Advisors LLC estimates will generate $6 billion in revenue this year.

Voluntary ban on credit cards
Gambling Web sites already have been jolted by a near-total ban on the use of U.S.-issued credit cards for Internet gambling. Banks and credit card companies imposed the ban because of concerns that they could be held responsible for aiding an illegal activity or left holding the bag if U.S. courts ruled that online gambling debts were uncollectible.

Some sites were initially able to evade the crackdown by disguising the nature of gambling transactions, but new credit card company policies tightening reporting requirements are expected to put an end to that dodge.

“We have a policy that Visa and its members should engage only in legal activities, so it’s imperative that activities like gambling and Internet gambling be identified clearly so that the issuer can determine whether they’re processing a legal or illegal transaction,” said Casey Watson, a spokeswoman for Visa International.

Most gambling sites still allow customers to attempt to use credit cards to fund their accounts, but they have added other less-convenient means, including wire transfers, electronic remittance services and Automated Clearance House transfers, a banking procedure similar to direct payroll deposits, to keep the money coming in. All those mechanisms would be cut off if the Leach bill becomes law.

Facing that likelihood, industry insiders are hinting at plans to move to some sort of e-cash or smart card system that would match credit cards for convenience and be widely embraced by bettors.

An 'ace in the hole'
One gambling site operator said the industry has an “ace in the hole” that it will play if it is denied access to traditional financial mechanisms. The operator, who spoke with MSNBC.com on condition of anonymity, declined to discuss the nature of the financing scheme, saying, “It wouldn’t be an ace in the hole if I told you, would it?”

Most experts say e-cash — a digital form of money capable of being stored on hard drives and transferred over the Internet — will eventually become the coin of the realm for online commerce because it is instantaneous, inexpensive enough to be used for payments as small as a few cents and does not require third-party clearance.

Melody Wigdahl, a consultant who has worked with companies trying to develop an alternative payment system for online gambling sites, indicated that industry leaders may act in concert in an effort to ensure that the e-commerce solution they select achieves critical mass with consumers.

“Sometime over the next six months we’re going to see major players in the industry step forward and fund their own (alternative payment) project,” she said. “There are probably half a dozen good products that are in the beta testing stage right now.”

The systems “are cost effective and more or less independent of the banking system,” she said.

Wigdahl, also declined to discuss specifics of the systems, saying the companies “don’t want their names mentioned” until they are sure they are on secure legal footing.

Law enforcement concerns
Despite e-cash’s promise, regulators and law enforcement officials have warned that its anonymous nature could provide new opportunities to commit numerous crimes, including tax evasion, money laundering and financing of terrorism.

The U.S. Treasury Department warned in its 2002 Money Laundering Strategy that widespread use of e-cash or smart card payment systems would “make it more difficult for law enforcement to trace money laundering activity and potentially easier for money launders to use, move and store their illegitimate funds.”

It also would be “extremely difficult” for U.S. authorities to attempt to take any action to shut down an e-cash system incorporated overseas in accordance with banking laws in that jurisdiction, according to Joe Kelly, an associated professor at New York’s Buffalo State College and an expert on Internet gaming law.

“Will all these electronic money systems be subject to the whims of a U.S. ban?” he said.

“The answer, I think, is ‘no.’ With e-gold (a digital cash backed by real gold), for example, you could transmit it to an offshore casino without ever going though a bank.”

Gambling site operators say that belies the Leach bill’s stated purpose — combating money laundering.

“I would much prefer that the transaction be completely transparent as it is with a credit card, where there is a complete audit trail,” said David Carruthers, CEO of the Costa Rica-based betonsports.com, which bills itself as the world’s largest online sportsbook with more than $1 billion in revenue last year. “It would be much more sensible to regulate this business as opposed to taking draconian action to force it into the shadows, where who knows what would go on.”

A similar point was made by Gord Herman, chief operating officer of Neteller, a Canadian electronic remittance company similar to PayPal that is used by many gambling sites.

‘You will cause a black market
“Right now, we operate in a regulated environment and we are compliant with all Canadian and U.S. reporting regulations,” he said. “By eliminating organized programs such as ours, where everything is very trackable and accountable, you will cause a black market … that will create opportunities for less-than-scrupulous individuals and companies.”

A spokeswoman for Leach did not respond when asked if the congressman was concerned that his bill could speed development of e-cash and actually aid money launderers. But Andrew Wilder, a spokesman for Kyl, indicated that future legislation could address the issue if it becomes a problem.

Not all experts are convinced that the online gambling industry is capable of launching e-cash into the mainstream.

“It hasn’t caught on primarily because people are worried about the security,” said James Dorn, vice president for academic affairs at the Cato Institute, referring to the commercial failure of companies such as Digicash that pioneered the e-cash concept. “I don’t see that as being a viable alternative at this point.”

Others say that early e-cash efforts failed because there was no existing demand for the product.

“In the past it was too difficult, but now you’ve got a captive audience that wants to gamble and can’t use their cards, so they’ve got no choice but to figure out how to work this,” said Ken Kerr, a senior research analyst with the Gartner market research firm.

The key to creating a successful e-cash product that can be easily used by Internet gamblers is ensuring it can be used in multiple venues, said Wigdahl, the payment industry consultant. Otherwise, banks and credit card companies could refuse to approve transactions to the service just as they are blocking them at online gambling sites, she said.

High-risk merchants targeted
Mark Lesnick, a New York-based consultant for the Internet gaming industry who earlier this month hosted a conference in Costa Rica devoted to alternative payment solutions, said the e-cash companies are initially attempting to solve that problem by targeting other Internet merchants classified as “high risk” by banks and credit card companies, notably porn and travel sites.

Kerr predicted that an e-cash provider might make significant inroads with such retailers, who often are plagued by costly “charge-backs” from credit card companies that hurt their bottom lines. But a company would have a much tougher time selling outside the “high-risk” niches, he said.

“You’ve really got to have a compelling reason, something that makes their eyes light up,” he said. “You have to show them that your fraud rate is going to be lower and that your processing costs are lower than Visa and MasterCard. Some merchants are going to listen, but it’s going to be difficult.”

As CEO of Payment-zone.com, one of the dozens of small companies seeking to position itself as the winning e-cash solution for the online gambling industry, Clark Russell can appreciate the difficult task he faces in establishing a business that won’t be limited to the sin-and-vice niche. But at the same time, he sees opportunity in Leach’s efforts to stamp out the business that he hopes will launch his Netherlands Antilles-based company, which relies on digital certificates to authenticate a user’s identity and thereby prevent fraud, on an unlimited upward trajectory.

“I think mass market prohibition is basically the fuel for these types of developments,” he said. “What the market is looking for will spark creativity and make new ideas come to life.”