jontm;285018 wrote
Gaming Commisions hate online affiliation it's hard for a company who is owned by one such company to say "honestly, we will keep them totally unaffiliated!"
Then someone at Party jumps the gun and lists the Niagara event and on the same page talks about sats. Fallsview gets swarmed with questions about an event that is still technically being negotiated behind close doors and is now leaked. On top of that it makes the commission look like the bad guys in the eyes of the players, which is bound to piss them off more.
The OPs link was something from Fallsview directly and I didn't see anything on the Fallsview site which gives any kind of indication that the Fallsview Poker Classic is affiliated to ANY online poker site (unless the reverse is true and poker sites like Party, which I don't play at, are running sattys to the Fallsview Poker Classic - but I fail to see why Fallsview would want to hide that - they could let Party do their advertising for them like we are here). So again, I don't see any logical, sensible, reason why the AGCO would take issue with more, legitimate poker tournaments.
jontm;285018 wrote
We might not agree with the old views and trust me, if it wasn't for revenues from online poker I wouldn't get paid for a ton of side work, so I wish it they had a better rep. But given all the shady shit of 2011, do you blame the regulators for proceeding with caution?
I'm sorry, I just don't understand this. If there is no affiliation between any online poker site and the event in question, how would any of the "shady shit" you speak of even be a factor in whether or not Fallsview (and other casinos in Ontario) host more poker tournaments? And even if there was some online affiliation to this event - was Fallsview or the AGCO involved in said shady shit?
jontm;285018 wrote
Fallsview is sitting on a goldmine and they know it. They have a massive poker population and just need to host to an event. If they starve the players, they don't have to offer the best event either and most say that structures amongst other things have lots of room to improve
Fallsview and some of the other casinos in Ontario are sitting on a goldmine but they don't seem terribly interested in mining it. I do agree, though, that because these type of events are so few and far between, casinos don't really have to put that much thought, effort or even money into advertising it (we're advertising it for them...) and players will most likely just take what they can get.
jontm;285018 wrote
Again we get back too, why would Fallsview give up any of the pie?
They have no reason to share.
As for the pie, if you're talking about monies they might have to pay to independent organizers (like a WPT, for example) then that's just the cost of doing business and they still make money from the event itself (I guarantee you the Rio would not continue to host the WSOP if it were a money-losing proposition year after year). The casino would make money as well from the attendees in additional gambling revenue (table games, poker room, etc.), food and liquor sales. Again, more bodies in the casino = more money for the casino. More money for the casino = more money in the AGCO coffers. Even though they are a government entity, they are still, at the end of the day, a for-profit BUSINESS and ignoring opportunities to generate additional revenue at relatively low cost, is just BAD BUSINESS.
That being said, however, I will likely try and satty in to one of the events they are hosting (my meager and delayed attempt at trying to stay on topic).