| 09/11/2010 |
Online Casino Style - News: |
|
|
|
The recent news that a Dutch Commission
came up with the definitive recommendations that the legalization of the
online gambling industry in the Netherlands would hold the most benefit
for the government has rocked the internet casino market, some with the
hopes that the lawmakers will take the advice to heart and eliminate the
monopoly that has gone largely unenforced in recent years. Of course,
opposition is already popping up, but this time from a rather surprising
source as the Remote Gambling Association spoke up against the findings.
Their problem was not with the fact that the Commission recommended that online poker be liberalized in the Dutch market, but instead questioned by legalization should end with poker, and not extend to all the factors and divisions of the online gambling industry? The recommendations, the RGA claims, should have recommended that all forms of online gambling be opened up to offshore companies, though some analysts are countering the point by saying that legalization often has to start somewhere. The arguments from the RGA came courtesy of Clive Hawkswood, who spoke up on behalf of the organization, saying that the Jansen Commission hadn’t done nearly enough, or the market justice with their suggestions, encouraging them to take a closer look at the status quo and developing trends in the rest of Europe. "The RGA believes that there is only one logical and realistic way to address the burgeoning remote gambling market and that is through proper regulation for poker, sports betting and casino games,” said Cliveswood, emphatically. "It would be churlish of us not to welcome the poker opening, if it is granted in a viable way, but it appears as an opportunity missed for other segments. If consumer protection rather than market protectionism is the real policy objective then this recommendation should embrace other areas." |
|---|
| Copyright © 2008 Online Casino Style Quick links for news ♦ Jan 2008 ♦ Oct 2008 ♦ Nov 2008 ♦ Dec 2008 ♦ Jan 2009 ♦ Jan 2010 ♦ Feb 2010 ♦ Mar 2010 ♦ Apr 2010 ♦ May 2010 ♦ June 2010 ♦ July 2010 ♦ Aug 2010 ♦ Sep2010 ♦ |