NY Residents Can Kiss Their Rebates Goodbye Comes The New Year

[mannyberrios]

doesn't Nyra.com offer rebates?

[badcompany]

Online Brokerages like Scottrade have made commissions almost irrelevant even to a small investor.

While rebates help everyone, to get a significant discount, you have to put some serious money through the windows.

[acorn54]

not even close to what you get at a rebate shop, something on the order of 1%
it is a joke and they know it, probably in part the reason for the new law, nyra knows they are not competitive in a free market environment.

[badcompany]

Originally Posted by acorn54

thanks for the post
it also begs the question is the gambling on horseraces a viable means to invest for new yorkers.
for me personally with this new law the idea of making any significant money in horse betting has gone the way of the dodo bird....

Horseracing has never acknowledged this type of thinking.

They believe Horseracing is above the laws of economics, and price increases don't result in a loss of demand.

[mannyberrios]

Originally Posted by acorn54

not even close to what you get at a rebate shop, something on the order of 1%
it is a joke and they know it, probably in part the reason for the new law, nyra knows they are not competitive in a free market environment.

ok, that's bad news

[mannyberrios]

I would think that most people in New York City bet with the big 3, and they don't give rebates

[acorn54]

and most lose money, no thanks, count me out
my honest appraisal of my own gambling (i keep records) shows without a rebate horserace gambling is a financial sinkhole
the ONLY experience i have heard first hand from what i consider a trustworthy source is that the rebate is the make or break for a profitable year
if people can claim to show a significant profit without it i salute them, but then why are they gambling significant money with one hand tied behind their back, it doesn't make any sense.

[Saratoga_Mike]

How is this law not a violation of the Commerce Clause? This is a clear attempt by NY State to discriminate against non-NY-based ADWs.

[acorn54]

what we need is a good lawyer to contest this, is HANA considering such a thing?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by acorn54

what we need is a good lawyer to contest this, is HANA considering such a thing?

I would assume the large non-NY-based ADWs will sue if in fact the Commerce Clause can be invoked.

[the little guy]

You guys do understand that source market fees exist in other major states as well, right?

[Dave Schwartz]

This sounds like the same thing PA did. Within days all PA residents lost any accounts that were ADW-based outside of PA.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by the little guy

You guys do understand that source market fees exist in other major states as well, right?

How is it not discriminatory (in any state) against out-of-state ADWs?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

This sounds like the same thing PA did. Within days all PA residents lost any accounts that were ADW-based outside of PA.

Yes, I'm sure the same thing will happen in NY. Call it a "market source fee" if you like, but it's a de facto "put non-resident ADWs out of business" fee!

[Saratoga_Mike]

Quote from the Federal District Court judge in Texas who heard Churchill's case against the state's ban on online wagering:

Noting that a state law such as the one being challenged in Texas violates the Commerce Clause if it mandates "differential treatment of in-state and out-of-state economic interests that benefits the former and burdens the latter," Nowlin said the activities being treated differently must be "substantially similar."

Churchill did not prevail in this case (on appeal, I believe) because TX was differentiating between brick-and-mortar wagering and online wagering. That doesn't seem to be the case in NY.