PokerStars’ parent company Rational Group US Holdings Inc. has a letter with New Jersey gambling regulators in opposition to the Petition for Participation which has been filed by the American Gaming Association (AGA).
The 15-page document sent to the heads of the state’s Division of Gaming Enforcement and Casino Control Commission outlines with the AGA should have no say in the matter of licensing. “Under New Jersey Administrative Code 1:1-16.6, only an entity with a significant interest in the outcome of a case may move to participate, and participation will be allowed only if the participant’s interest is likely to add constructively to the case without causing undue delay or confusion. The AGA meets neither of these criteria”, reads the document. According to Jeff Ifrah of Ifrah Law, who sent the letter on behalf of Rational Group, the Casino Control Commission “should deny the AGA’s petition to avoid setting a dangerous precedent that would eviscerate all requirements for participation in the context of the Commission’s consideration of licensing applications, and would empower the AGA’s thinly veiled anti-competitive campaign against the entry of a competitor into the market”. Before adding “for all of its lofty rhetoric, the only interest he AGA actually has in this proceedings derives from the fast that some of its members perceive themselves to be Rational’s competitors. At bottom, the AGA’s brief constitutes an attempt by these competitors to exclude Rational from the US market”.
The document further states that “the decision for determining suitability of a casino license rests with New Jersey’s expert regulators. The quality of that decision will not be improved by the participation of trade associations whose members wish to eliminate competition for purely economic reasons. To permit the AGA to participate would undermine the licensing process, create administrative inefficiencies, and set a negative precedent for a competitor to dictate and influence whether a casino receives a license. The Commission should not invite the counterproductive consequences to its investigative and deliberative process that will inevitably follow if the AGA is permitted to participate in this proceeding.
