Interesting News coming across the wire

<TABLE height=291 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=10 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Operators reassess their positions with regard to US market.[/FONT]</TD></TR><TR><TD height=17>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Sportingbet has announced it has received a number of approaches for its US-facing businesses. Any potential sale would have to be agreed on and signed by the end of this week, before President George W. Bush signs the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act and makes it law. In its statement released today, Sportingbet said any deal would have to “be completed prior to the act becoming law”, but that “based on the approaches received so far, it is unlikely that any such sale will realise significant cash consideration”. Possible bidders mentioned include Bodog founder and chief executive Calvin Ayre and PartyGaming founder Ruth Parasol. A third option would be a potential management buy out led by Sportingbet founder Mark Blandford, although this one is thought to be unlikely.

UK press reports linking Puetra Sampoerna, the owner of sportsbook and gaming operator Mansion, to a potential bid for PartyGaming have been discounted by industry observers. Also, Party’s European-focused sportsbook Gamebookers will re-launch in early November as Partybets. The new name comes as the bookmaker is integrated into the PartyGaming infrastructure and the company shifts its focus towards maximising European sports and gaming revenues.

World Gaming, whose shares stopped trading on the London Stock Exchange further to the US anti-online gaming legislation passing last week, is expected to either close down its operations or be taken back into private ownership in the near future. However, the first option is thought more likely.

As published yesterday on this website, it is believed the US-facing side of the Leisure and Gaming business will be taken back into private ownership in order to keep operating. The most likely outcome would be a management buy out of the VIP, Nine and English Harbour businesses.

[/FONT]</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

It's interesting that it seems like the industry's position is dichomtomous (is that a word?) -- public companies have the leave the US market; private companies do not. I'm not exactly sure how the Bill requires such a result. Somewhat perplexing.

The bill does not require that either HAVE TO do anything whats so ever. Where is that written and who said they HAD TO? They are not under our law. They are acting like they are, but they are not. Its a banking law that polices US banks at that. One that puts the onus on us, not them.

Whats there to be preplexed about?

I guess i am missing something....what would a buyout do for them if bush signs this thing anyway?

I think that the deal is a public company could sell off their U.S. based sportsbook business to a private company - the public company could get at least some cash for their business while satisfying the legal issues that come with being a public company.

Private companies, on the flip side, if they have taken the "We aren't in the US, good luck trying to legislate me", don't have to answer to shareholders or a market, and would be happy to take the business off their hands (at a healthy discount, I'd assume).

thanks i knew i was missing something.

I can't imagaine that they would abandon there bread and butter and then some market altogether but then who knows.

The enchilada is the private company would be giving the US the finger instead of a publicly traded one.