Forbes Calling Out Online Poker Woes

by , May 13, 2010 | 9:45 am

Check it out … from Forbes magazine:

Online Poker War Heats Up
The Department of Justice bags a Canadian payment processor in its fight against online poker. Are the big online firms next?

Interesting … these biz-media guys may not really get poker, but they do listen to The Poker Beat presumably understand a thing or two about multi-national finance and how putting rich white guys behind bars can be good for traffic circulation.

Generally, the poker world has always celebrated when the big online companies always got some mainstream media attention. But who knew there could even be a story without a press release from Full Tilt or PokerStars?

15 Comments to “Forbes Calling Out Online Poker Woes”

  1. Kevin Mathers

    They still get facts wrong, which is standard:

    “Rennick agreed to forfeit $583 million, funds that partly belonged to players of those and other companies.”

  2. DanM

    Which is the part you disagree with, Kevin? I ask because I was working on a post about the forfeiture, and moments before pressing ‘publish’ got an email suggesting my numbers were off by a few 100 million (therefore squashing the whole premise of the post).

  3. Kevin Mathers

    The part where Forbes said he forfeited $583m.

  4. DanM

    Yeah, that’s the mistake I almost made. Check out my post in drafts and you can see how it was confused. I’ve got the actual forfeiture order, signed by rennick. Forbes didn’t exactly pull that number out of nowhere. And in fact, I think it suggests that indeed, they’ve got a specific amount of Rennick money that they’re gonna pin on Stars/Tilt.

  5. Kevin Mathers

    Isn’t that ~580m figure coming from the payments that Rennick actually processed and sent to players before he was indicted?

  6. DanM

    yeah, but though i may be blowing my future new-post wad here in comments … here’s the actual order:

    what’s interesting is that Rennick admits that indeed, $583 was the size of the total conspiracy (conspiracy being to pay american players their winnings) … so now we know the DOJ has at least the beginnings of a specific amount they’ll be looking for should they go after the second most powerful person/people in poker. (According to Bluff mag’s Power 20 list.)

  7. Kevin Mathers

    I’d think they’d also be going after #1 on the Bluff Power 20.

    Seems that your boy Cyrus may be able to find someone to report about it:

  8. DanM

    “my boy” cyrus, is that a jab? i only get chummy chummy with lawyers about other people’s cases.

  9. Kevin Mathers

    It may seem that way, but no I wasn’t trying to jab, counter, or fire a haymaker at you Dan.

  10. DanM

    p.s. re: #1 … you just pointed out more reason for me to think that wicked chops is off their rocker on this one.

    we voted for that power 20 … and it was very clear that we were choosing individuals not groups. yet at the last minute, the top two got changed to online poker outfits … curiously leaving one guy off the list that forbes identified as a “king of online betting”:

    then another odd absentee would be a guy who even without any connection to the #2 finisher, is on the board of the PPA, on the WSOP Players Advisory Council, raising buttloads for charity, and appearing on just about every poker TV show. certainly whoever had those stats would expect to see his name in the Power 20.

    this sudden name-swapping happened to come around the same time Doyle Brunson started chirping seemingly out of nowhere about how if the feds wanted to come after him they could, he didn’t care, he’d take the fall.

    just coincidental, or might it be possible that some of the top honchos in poker heard around the same time — a little before the FT report — that their names might be on the DOJ’s “bad list”?

  11. Brian G.

    I seem to recall the attitude around here that online poker would be just fine if we got rid of those dastardly Republicans. Told ya no politicans are your friends. The PPA is a waste of everyone’s time.

  12. DanM

    brian, i know i personally have been saying poker players are over-estimating Obama’s support since at least november. why don’t you go back to killing Mexicans in arizona. that’s what your people do, right, lol?

  13. Brian G.


    That is perhaps the dumbest comment I ever read here, and for that, the competition is fierce. Just so you know, the only people killing Mexicans in Arizona are Mexicans. The Mexican drug gangs are running rampant, committing kidnappings and murders. The “coyotes” leave people out in the desert to die. You have no idea what Arizona is dealing with. I know of what I speak because I lived in Arizona for 7 years and have a law degree. Turn off the TV and go read the Arizona law. Then, go read the federal laws. You’ll find that there is little difference.

  14. DanM

    lolol, brian g. i was just messing around trying to lump all conservatives together as racists. (I’m not saying you ARE a racist, was just trying to call you one for fun.) who knew you actually were an Arizonan!

    i’m not gonna debate the Arizona law here — because you are right, I’ve never been to your border area — but all I can say is I have this dispute with my Arizona friends all the time … and it confuses me, because in Texas we have the same border issues as AZ does. Yet even the most conservative people in Texas (George Bush, for example) love Mexicans and never complain about them the same way Arizonans do. To me this is more about the difference between two US states. While you guys want to shoot them, we prefer to hire them and eat their food!

    Have fun pissing money away building a fence instead of a bridge.

  15. Brian G.

    When the Juarez nonsense starts pouring into El Paso on a regular basis, we’ll see how welcoming the people of Texas remain.