GPWA Times Magazine - Issue 31 - February 2015

I t's pretty hard to land a spot on the APCW Wall of Shame by intro- ducing a bill that would regulate the online poker industry, but California Assemblyman Mike Gatto has man- aged to do just that. California is online poker's most cov- eted market. With a population of 38 million, it trails just 34 nations in the world. Its population is roughly 40 percent smaller than France's or Italy's, and 20 percent smaller than Spain's. These three countries have proven to generate enough liquidity to support online poker, and California, which already has a thriving live poker scene, may end up eclipsing all three if legislation is crafted correctly. But if the California legislature pass- es the bill that Gatto has introduced, it seems highly unlikely that online poker in California would even match what New Jersey, a state with a popu- lation of just 9 million, has produced. First off, the bill does everything it possibly can to protect the vested California interests: brick-and-mor- tar card rooms and Indian casinos. The bill contains a "bad actor" clause which prevents sites that have allowed California residents to play online poker in the past from applying for a license for three years. And there's even language in there to prevent Amaya, which purchased PokerStars in 2014, from obtaining a license, though the bill never specifically says anything about Amaya, only that any company that "has purchased or ac- quired assets" of previous bad actors will not be suitable for a license. If we've learned anything about on- line poker in the last year it's that players would love to have access to PokerStars, but if the site isn't avail- able to players, they'll play elsewhere. What they won't do, however, is jump through ridiculous hoops to play. When New Jersey launched online gambling operations in November 2013, thousands of potential play- ers were turned away by overly ag- gressive geolocation software. Most of those players never came back, because the registration and deposit procedures created too many barriers to entry. And now, Gattowants tomake players register and make their initial deposit in person . From the bill: "The licensed operator shall require a registered player to make the initial deposit into his or her registered player account in person at the land-based gaming facil- ity operated by the licensed operator or at a satellite service center." Oh, and if you want to be an affili- ate? You'll have to grant permission for a background check, pay a "reg- istration processing fee" and pro- vide annual reports describing your affiliate activity. The bloom on the proverbial online poker rose is fading in California, and it's all thanks to Gatto's indus- try-killing bill. It's bad for players, bad for potential operators and bad for affiliates. And that's how you land on the APCW Wall of Shame by introduc- ing a bill that would regulate on- line poker. W all of S hame 74 APCW Wall of Shame