Blogs: Does PokerPulse Black List Non-Public Companies


PartyPoker and Party Casino were great sites. However, after multiple ownership changes and current GVC operations, I can no longer recommend any of the Party brands.

In my opinion, GVC have made arbitrary changes to historic accounts and refuse to answer any questions. IMO, do NOT trust and avoid all GVC brands!

PartyPoker & PartyCasino, RIP. January 2019

Does PokerPulse Black List Non-Public Companies
May 19, 2009 (version 0.1)

Does PokerPulse Black List Non-Public Companies

From: Disgruntled in the Curacao, Netherlands Antilles
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008
Subject: Regarding your comments on poker sites

How much do you get paid by the public companies to black list non-public companies? Public companies face the same legal issues as do the non-publicly traded companies as far as the US DOJ is concerned. That is of course if the your insinuating that these publicly traded companies have been given a pass by the US DOJ? If that is what your saying do you have any idea of who they bought at the DOJ and how much did it cost?

Reply from Legal@PokerPulse
Friday, May 15, 2009

Wow! Amazing what one finds going through the mail archives. SORRY! for the extremely extended delay in replying.

Just to be clear: PokerPulse is not blacklisting any remote gambling operation. Using heavy-handed, selective prosecution of the industry, the U.S. Dept. of Justice (DoJ) has done that all by itself. Our interest in posting the PokerPulse Gambler's Guide to Safe Bets post-U.S. Prohibition 2.0 is simply to alert our visitors to the dangers of gambling at a site still accepting U.S. bets post-UIGEA, 2006. Just as the WTO panel indicated in its compliance review decision in the dispute btwn U.S. and Antigua, NO ONE public or private is immune from U.S. prosecution post-Prohibition 2.0, and once a site is targeted and DoJ's typical 'seize 'n freeze' policy is under way, good luck to gamblers awaiting their winnings.

Of course, public companies are much more regulated than the smaller, private outfits, and we've certainly seen the effects worldwide of poor regulation in the financial sector of late.

And, yes, we would very much like to know why some remote gambling sites seem to be more equal than others at least in terms of the attentions paid to them by DoJ. Why BetOnSports and not PokerStars, we wonder? We're hoping Barney Frank's new bill currently in committee will go a long way toward clarifying rights and responsibilities of the remote industry with respect to U.S. market access.

Hope that helps. Thanks for writing and again, sorry for the delay.

Comments? Please send them to

PokerPulse screens blog comments before posting. Your e-mail address (and related e-mail header details) will not published and will not be shared with any other site.

Follow PokerPulse at Twitter