Privacy settings

We use a number of cookies on our website. Some are essential, while others help us improve our portal for you.

Privacy settings

Here is an overview of all the cookies we use. You can choose to accept whole categories or view more information and select only certain cookies.

Essential (6)

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the website to function properly.

Statistics (3)

Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.
If the statistics cookies are subsequently deselected, they will remain on the computer until the expiry date. However, they are neither updated nor evaluated.

Online Casinos in general: What do you think about the new Swiss gambling law? (Page 2)

Topic created on 15th Jun. 2018 | Page: 2 of 2 | Answers: 17 | Views: 4,481
Anonym
Daniel wrote on 06/18/2018 at 19:40
If there are "good", "government" providers and they get everything done then of course it makes no sense. However, in the case of a complete ban it is not technically possible. Also, payment flows cannot be stopped 100%. There will be Online Casinos (especially in the banana republics) that simply set up a legal company. A company that sells shoes, for example, or offers any legal financial service - which would explain the many deposits and withdrawals. Transactions could then be processed "legally" through this company. The payment providers cannot check every company that uses their services down to the smallest detail.

If there is a market that is big enough, then it is worthwhile to set up such constructs. And thanks to lobbying and greedy and corrupt politicians, the gambling market has at least become so big that a ban is no longer enforceable in practice.

I meant less the payment flows to the casino than the payment flows from the casinos to the player. Especially with large wins, it would be very risky for the players that the money is confiscated by the state. This restricts the number of potential bypassers even further. As for the view of the providers, I'm with you, with corporate constructs there are always ways to disguise everything

You can see this at Novomatic and Gauselmann. Because some things came to light through the Paradise Papers, they quickly "voluntarily withdrew" (see StarGames) because they are also deeply involved in German politics (party donations, etc.) and also earn a lot from the "state monopoly".

A ban is not enforceable there I give you right but here it is a "monopolization to protect the players". That makes no sense is just so. But there is still an offer. There will never be a complete ban on gambling, neither in Switzerland nor in Germany

This post has been translated automatically

Daniel
Elite
TomWegas wrote on 06/18/2018 at 19:54
I didn't mean so much the payment flows to the casino as the payment flows from the casinos to the player.

However, gambling operators specialize in circumventing laws - see gaming arcades

You can always find ways. Then it's just about Bitcoins or another cryptocurrency. Or the players don't gamble officially, but make official Financial bets or stock market speculations via these companies, for example.

Most players don't really notice when their winnings are confiscated. They see an advertisement somewhere and then just gamble. I mean, it doesn't make sense to the uninformed average citizen, why online gambling should be forbidden, if state or private providers offer gambling everywhere. Why should it be forbidden to gamble online at the same or better conditions as in gambling houses, machines in restaurants or casinos? (I mean, I'm speaking from the point of view of an uninformed average citizen). This is comparable to the prohibition to order alcohol online - if this would be forbidden. Why should that be forbidden when you can buy booze in any supermarket and there are Becks ads on TV everywhere?

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym
There will be Online Casinos in Switzerland, just from the licensed casinos. But then they will also get partner companies. How that will be about you can already see in the Belgian market. For the players makes no difference, there are pretty much the same games as in the Malta casinos

As far as Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are concerned, this is just too costly for Ottonormal. But of course there will always be black markets and evasions, which also exist offline in the form of backyard casinos, illegal Poker rounds, etc. But then again, that only appeals to a very small group of players.

This post has been translated automatically

EvaRose
Meanwhile, the referendum was financed on the one hand by the Swiss and on the other hand by the foreign gambling operators.

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym
i read that playtech has been awarded the contract by the state-owned swisscasino.
whether the same software is now running?

This post has been translated automatically

Pechstein777
Rookie
The same is true in Russia. There the casinos are blocked. but no problem for an addict. For example, there is then ru14.videoslots.com or just take a vpn. a Russian and free.... Who wants to play in Switzerland can continue to play in foreign casinos. Just have to see if vpn is allowed. You are not punished with this law. Could only be that they oblige the payment services such as Visa, etc. to block. That would be bad luck. But there are enough people in the Bundesrat who will prevent this, because you also want to continue to have something of the cake......

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym
s****e wrote on 06/16/2018 at 16:15: While it is generally never good to blanket ban something, it was a democratic
Vote, and thus perfectly ok.

And the one or the other gambler will be grateful about it, too.

Why are democratic decisions per se good?

In the end, a majority rules over a minority.
Why should other people be allowed to decide how I have to live?
Just because 51% say something, it must then make the other 49% who may not want that at all and may have to suffer from it.

And just in the example you can see it very well.

Why should the Michel, who has absolutely nothing to do with casinos, be allowed to decide whether I can gamble or not? What is it to him?




That no one ever questions something like that.

This post has been translated automatically

Ichbins2018
Top Member
Random wrote on 11/14/2018 at 9:20 pm


I'm bottom line, a majority rules over a minority.

Typical features of a democracy are e.g.... Minority protection!

This post has been translated automatically

Hot Topics23rd Dec. 2024 at 09:33 am CET

Community Forum-Moderators

Members who assist the GJ team in moderating the forum.
Profile picture of AndreAndre
Profile picture of gamble1gamble1
Profile picture of Langhans_innenLanghans_innen
Profile picture of SaphiraSaphira
GambleJoe is aimed exclusively at user whose allowed to play legally with his current location in online casinos and does not violate the current law.
It is the responsibility of the user to inform himself about the current legal situation. Gambling is prohibited for children and adolescents under the age of 18.
GambleJoe is a registered trademark with the EUIPO of GJ International Ltd.

© 2012-2024 GambleJoe.com

Forgotten your password?

Create a new password here

  • 1. Fill in the 3 fields carefully and click on the green button
  • 2. Check your email inbox for a message from GambleJoe
  • 3. Click on the confirmation link in the email and your new password will be active immediately