Poll: Does regulated poker need liquidity sharing?

Since the early success of the dot.it poker market in Italy, the European regulated poker sector has seen its stock fall somewhat. Hopes for a thriving, profitable sector in various ring-fenced markets haven’t really transpired with Spain and France both struggling to be competitive and even the Italian market saw revenues fall in its latest results released in July with tournaments down 36.9% and cash games down 33.5%.

So it was no surprise to hear the new president of Spain’s regulatory body, Carlos Hernandez, say his intention is to introduce international liquidity to the Spanish online poker market by the middle of next year. With the Spanish market dominated by PokerStars and only 888 with any reasonable liquidity from the chasing pack it’s easy to understand the need to allow operators a more compelling offering. But there remains some challenges with allowing international player pools and it is still unclear if this will be a Denmark style expansion or a cross-border agreement with Italy.

The Italian poker market is more robust, and there are some success stories from the sector, but it is also suffering from falling player numbers and increasing discontent from the operators within the regulated market. The Italian regulators have previously discussed the concept of liquidity sharing with its Spanish counterparts and this is thought to be a real possibility within the next 12-24 months. There is a feeling that the other nations need Italian liquidity more than it needs them, however.

Meanwhile in France a combination of high taxes and a restricted player pools has meant a steady flow of companies pulling out of the market, with the most recent being Caesars Interactive Entertainment’s technology partner Barriere. The closure of Barriere’s .fr site was blamed on the “decline of the poker market” in France, where the sector is dominated by Winamax and PokerStars, and suggests even the local operators are unhappy with the current system.

So is regulated online poker doomed without liquidity sharing? The UK is not thought to be considering a ring-fenced network, and Denmark has proved you can regulate while allowing access to wider player pools. But is it too early to give up on the dot country player model. Is this just a natural market correction after so much initial interest? Were there too many operators from the start and is regulated poker only ever going to work for a limited number of firms? Let us know what you think and cast your vote on the right hand side of the page.