"Yeah, well let's cut out the bullshit. I don't want to spend any more time here than I have to. You can have the license, the price is 250,000 dollars. Plus a monthly payment of 5% of the gross -- of all fantasy take. Mister Fan Duel "
Posted on 10/15/2015 5:26:31 PM PDT by dynachrome
Nevada regulators have ordered daily fantasy sports sites like DraftKings and FanDuel to shut down, saying they can't operate in the state without a gambling license.
The decision comes amid growing backlash by investigators and regulators over the sites, which have grown in popularity in the past year.
The sites insist they are skill-based games and not chance-based wagers, and are therefore not subject to gambling regulations.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
I’m watching the Dodgers Mets game and by now I would have had to sit through 10 fan duel ads and it’s only top of the 4th. For that relief alone I’m glad about this.
Which is absolutely true.
The feds (McCain being a chief antagonist) challenged the season long fantasy games back in the mid-nineties. ESPN, Sporting News, there were dozens of media-sponsored games with substantial cash prizes.
We had to prove those were games of skill and we did. Why are the daily games any different? Same scoring, same rules, just a shorter cycle.
Major League Baseball bought Draft Kings.
I realize Wikipedia is not a good source to mention on FR, but in a case like this I don’t think the basic facts are controversial.
That’s where you can find info on the history and ownership.
She is almost as old as I am!!!
And my kids think that I'm over a HUNDRED!
You are misreading the results. The fact that 17% of the participants collect 90% o the winnings is proof that they are games of skill. The most skilled players win the most money.
This is also the case in the season-long games which were legally challenged back in the mid-nineties. Basically, the same people won them every year.
The season-long games eventually proved their case and their legality was accepted. Since the scoring is basically the same, the rules are basically the same and only the term of competition has been changed -- from one season to one day (or one week) -- there is no reason why these games aren't legal, too.
I actually believe this. The catch is he started with $35 and won say $1,000 then lost a $1,000 then won it back and so on. You can argue at any point that he won a $1,000 or $10,000 or $2,000,000. What they’re not telling you is how much he currently has in the account, which was probably $35.
MLB is behind this?
Bunch of greedy hypocrites.
Pete Rose has got nothing on Joe Torre and Rob Manfred in the shady department.
“My offer is this, nothing.”
Whatever on God's green earth is shady about it?
It's a game.
Why would this be evidence of skill vs. luck? Why wouldn't the luckiest players win the most money?
Because it's a game of skill -- like chess. Some people are better at it than others -- chiefly because they work harder to understand the game.
It's not a game of luck -- like roulette -- in which case you'd expect to see the winners distributed randomly.
Like I said, I know nothing about these sites, don't care to know anything about these sites, and really could care less how the rulings go down on these sites, because I will never participate in playing on the sites
Just regurgitating what I found out trying to do a little research on these sites since their ads had become more pervasive on TV & radio.
I see the Mets beat the Dodgers and will now face off with the Cubbies. Not that I am a Cubbies fan, but I guess I feel sorry for their long draught, so I'm hoping they win. Would at least like to see them make the World Series.
perhaps all that "metadata has nothing to do with intruding on privacy" is all a lie...
I'm guessing it would be after the fact punishment because you know the Feds are monitoring to insure the IRS gets its cut - that likely gets reported to the States too. The real test is if they can prove it was done on a computer actually located in Nevada....
Probably un-Constitutional but who really cares these days.......
Ditto that.
I don't really have an opinion on whether fantasy sports betting is based on skill or chance, but I don't think the distribution of the winnings indicates anything either way.
If you had a lottery where 100 people each bought a ticket and there were 17 winning tickets, then 17% of the players would collect 100% of the winnings. You could make the distribution of winnings whatever you wanted it to be by changing the number of winning tickets. No skill involved.
Do the same 17% win consistently over time? Because it sounds much more plausible that there’s more potential for overlap winners over time picking combinations of fantasy players, at least to me. I mean there’s probably folks out there that do absolutely no research and just pick their favourite players every time regardless.
freegards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.