<<<<I've always wondered about this. Sure, I've heard the same thing about no 100% machines being allowed by law, but I've never seen such a law in print, and I've always wonder wtf do they care?>>>
FWIW, the most common reason I've heard given is to reduce money laundering concerns.
Sent from my iPhone
you must nit have read my email. It was church's not wanting gambling and the 100% games was the compromise. Laundering had nothing to do with it. Laundering money on 100% machines would stick out like a sore thumb. And their much better was to launder it anyways.
________________________________
From: Vegasvpplayer <vegasvpplayer@gmail.com>
To: "vpFREE@yahoogroups.com" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 8:08 AM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: In what Atlantic City casinos can I find full pay machines?
<<<<I've always wondered about this. Sure, I've heard the same thing about no 100% machines being allowed by law, but I've never seen such a law in print, and I've always wonder wtf do they care?>>>
FWIW, the most common reason I've heard given is to reduce money laundering concerns.
Sent from my iPhone
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
As if a fraction of a percent would matter to the launderers as much as it does for vp players.
On 11/21/2011 11:08 AM, Vegasvpplayer wrote:
<<<<I've always wondered about this. Sure, I've heard the same thing about no 100% machines being allowed by law, but I've never seen such a law in print, and I've always wonder wtf do they care?>>>
FWIW, the most common reason I've heard given is to reduce money laundering concerns.
Actually I was speaking about the reason I have heard for states in general not allowing 100%+ games, not NJ specifically. In the case of NJ, why did the church oppose 100%+ games? Did they fear it would compete with their "charity" church bingo games?
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, kellypkjoe <kellypkjoe@...> wrote:
you must nit have read my email. It was church's not wanting gambling and the 100% games was the compromise. Laundering had nothing to do with it. Laundering money on 100% machines would stick out like a sore thumb. And their much better was to launder it anyways.
Some have been known to use under 50% lotteries to launder
'dirty' money. A mob wife put a big part of a million into a
lottery ticket machine to try and get half back 'clean'.
I guess the story goes she never hit, AND they popper her
and her husband for even trying.
--- On Mon, 11/21/11, MHS <mspevack@optonline.net> wrote:
From: MHS <mspevack@optonline.net>
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: In what Atlantic City casinos can I find full pay machines?
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 21, 2011, 10:37 AM
On 11/21/2011 11:08 AM, Vegasvpplayer wrote:
<<<<I've always wondered about this. Sure, I've heard the same thing
about no 100% machines being allowed by law, but I've never seen such
a law in print, and I've always wonder wtf do they care?>>>FWIW, the most common reason I've heard given is to reduce money
laundering concerns.
As if a fraction of a percent would matter to the launderers as much as
it does for vp players.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!
________________________________
From: vegasvpplayer <vegasvpplayer@gmail.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 11:22 AM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: In what Atlantic City casinos can I find full pay machines?
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, kellypkjoe <kellypkjoe@...> wrote:
you must nit have read my email. It was church's not wanting gambling and the 100% games was the compromise. Laundering had nothing to do with it. Laundering money on 100% machines would stick out like a sore thumb. And their much better was to launder it anyways.
Actually I was speaking about the reason I have heard for states in general not allowing 100%+ games, not NJ specifically. In the case of NJ, why did the church oppose 100%+ games? Did they fear it would compete with their "charity" church bingo games?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]