Appendix A

On June 13, 2003, the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice filed a civil suit alleging that the National Council on Problem Gambling, Inc. ("NCPG") had engaged in certain practices that violated Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. NCPG has agreed to the entry of a civil consent order to settle this matter. The consent order does not constitute evidence or admission by any party with respect to any issue of fact or law. The consent order applies to NCPG and all of its officers, directors, employees, agents, and assigns.

Under the consent order, NCPG is prohibited from directly or indirectly initiating, adopting, or pursuing any agreement, program, or policy that has the purpose or effect of prohibiting or restraining any Problem Gambling Service Provider ("PGSP") from: (1) selling problem gambling services in any state or territory or to any customer; or (2) submitting competitive bids in any state or territory or to any customer. The NCPG is also prohibited from directly or indirectly adopting, disseminating, publishing, seeking adherence to or facilitating any agreement, code of ethics, rule, bylaw, resolution, policy, guideline, standard, certification, or statement made or ratified by an official that has the purpose or effect of prohibiting or restraining any PGSP from engaging in any of the above practices, or that states or implies that any of these practices are, in themselves, unethical, unprofessional, or contrary to the policy of the NCPG.

The consent order further provides that the NCPG is prohibited from adopting or enforcing any standard or policy that has the purpose or effect of: (1) requiring that any PGSP obtain permission from, inform, or otherwise consult with another PGSP before selling problem gambling services or submitting bids for the provision of problem gambling services in any state or territory or to any customer; or (2) requiring that any PGSP contract with, provide a fee or a portion or revenues to, or otherwise remunerate any other PGSP as a result of selling problem gambling services in any state or territory or to any customer. Finally, the NCPG is prohibited from adopting or enforcing any standard or policy or taking any action that has the purpose or effect of: (1) sanctioning, penalizing or otherwise retaliating against any PGSP for competing with any other PGSP; or (2) creating or facilitating an agreement not to compete between two or more PGSP.

The consent order does not prohibit the NCPG from negotiating any terms of its business relationship with any national, state, or local government entity, or any private entity. It also does not prohibit the NCPG member from working with another person in a valid joint venture to meet the needs of problem gamblers in ways that do not otherwise violate the consent order. Finally, it does not prohibit the NCPG from sanctioning or terminating a member pursuant to its by-laws, as long as such action does not otherwise violate the consent order.

Copies of the Complaint, proposed Final Judgment and Competitive Impact Statement are available for inspection at the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. in Room 200, 325 Seventh Street, N.W., and at the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in Washington, D.C.