Skip to main content

would you like some sauce on those feet Peter?

A publicly-listed company CEO is responsible to his or her shareholders and the board. Peter V'Landys, head of Racing NSW, leads a government-backed organisation and has no such issues with accountability. If he was out in the public sector, he'd been out of a job long, long ago.

What an absolute goose. He has gone public on the Racing NSW website commenting about a letter from leading NSW bookmaker Robbie Waterhouse, just before the Racing NSW vs Betfair and Sportsbet case over race fields legislation and the inappropriate turnover-based fee goes to court. Rule 1 of legal cases - don't comment in the public domain just before the case is heard. You risk putting the judge offside by making dangerous assumptions, give the opposition chance to react and risk being held in contempt of court.

Take a look at Bill Saunders' article - Racing NSW Rattled

Never has someone so powerful had so little clue about the law or anti-monopoly regulations and glossed over the facts that the organizations he is supporting are just as guilty in the rebuttal points he makes.

- he alleges that journalists supporting corporate bookies are on the take from such bookies.

How about, these journos are sick of being screwed by a corporate giant which overcharges, seeks to control the industry at the detriment of everyone else including controlling all media channels to the extent that newspaper editors reject much of the anti-TAB comment for fear of losing the advertising contract from TABCorp and UniTAB?

- he says that punters need to fund the cost of racing in NSW.

Considering that the AJC/STC merger, currently being rejected by crusty old members, is reported to save anything up to $22m per year and the ridiculous amount of money that V'Landys is personally wasting in the courts fighting impossible cases, I suggest very few punters in NSW would be willing to agree with that in their current state of management! Punters should be supporting the industry, but they should also have appropriate strong leadership not endless pissing money up against a wall.

Imagine if he lived in the real world...

Cangamble delves into the history books to find that way back in the 1930s, 10% takeout in tote pools was deemed to be excessive and governments were lobbying for less! Remind me why it is we automatically think we are smarter now than ever before?

Comments

  1. For some reason I'm not surprised by V'Landys antics. How long until he joins that other naysayer Nason at Tabcorp?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thanks for your comments, but if you're a spammer, you've just wasted your time - it won't get posted.

Popular posts from this blog

It's all gone Pete Tong at Betfair!

The Christmas Hurdle from Leopardstown, a good Grade 2 race during the holiday period. But now it will go into history as the race which brought Betfair down. Over £21m at odds of 29 available on Voler La Vedette in-running - that's a potential liability of over £500m. You might think that's a bit suspicious, something's fishy, especially with the horse starting at a Betfair SP of 2.96. Well, this wasn't a horse being stopped by a jockey either - the bloody horse won! Look at what was matched at 29. Split that in half and multiply by 28 for the actual liability for the layer(s). (Matched amounts always shown as double the backers' stake, never counts the layers' risk). There's no way a Betfair client would have £600m+ in their account. Maybe £20 or even £50m from the massive syndicates who regard(ed) Betfair as safer than any bank, but not £600m. So the error has to be something technical. However, rumour has it, a helpdesk reply (not gospel, natur

What shits me about match-fixing 'journalism'.

The anti-wagering media bandwagon has dozens of new members this week, all weighing in an industry they have absolutely no idea about. I'm all for getting the betting industry into the mainstream but it shits me no end when they roll out reports and celebrities who simply don't have a clue what they are talking about and don't bother to check basic facts which key arguments in their story. If this was the financial industry, making errors like this would have them in all sorts of trouble, but the same level of regulation doesn't apply because finance stock markets are supposedly all legitimate and serious, whereas sports betting is just a bit of fun for people who can never win in the long-term... according to the media. This week we have seen the sting by the Telegraph which, on the face of it, looks to be a tremendous piece of investigative work into fixing in English football. But the headlines around it are over-sensationalised yet again. Delroy Facey, a former pla

Racing has a Ponzi scheme - and the fallout will be enormous

When the term ' Ponzi scheme ' is mentioned these days, the names Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanford instantly spring to mind. The pair of them ran multi-billion dollar frauds (US$60bn and $8bn respectively) that destroyed the lives of thousands of investors who had put their life savings into a 'wonderful' investment strategy. How so many people were sucked into the scheme is baffling to those on the outside. The lifestyle, the sales pitch, the success stories of the early investors - I suppose it all adds up. So where does this link to racing you ask? A prominent Australian 'racing identity' this week has been reported to have lost access to a bank account with punters' club funds of $194m in it. Firstly - is there a worse term for anyone to be labelled with that 'racing identity'? It ALWAYS ends up meaning shonky crook! Secondly - who the hell has a punters' club with an active bankroll in the tens of millions? It simply can't be done. T