Skip to main content

NSW TAB to be allowed to catch up with the rest of the world... at least in some areas

The 'independent review of wagering policy and regulation' (are these things ever genuinely independent anymore?), the Cameron Report, made many recommendations for changes to the NSW wagering industry and policy. The NSW govt has taken its time, but has finally come back with some changes which might actually be a positive move for the punting public.

Cameron Report - Fixed-odds breakthrough for NSW

Recommendations adopted include:

• pursuing a national co-ordinated approach to the regulation and taxation of wagering;

• allowing the NSW TAB to offer fixed odds betting on all races through its account betting network on the phone and internet;

• after further consultation and support of the industry, NSW bookmakers will be permitted to accept bets at racecourses using the internet or telephone on a 24/7 basis, as in Victoria;

• not permitting betting on reality TV shows, economic events and the like;

• prohibiting off-course retail bookmaking kiosks; and

• giving in-principle support for NSWTAB to pool with other Australian totalizators.



Still a bit misguided. Allowing the TAB to offer fixed-odds markets on all races will move turnover from pool betting (of which the industry gets a guaranteed share) to fixed-odds (which the TAB only pays a percentage to the industry on net profit). Not betting on reality TV and economic markets misses out on a big area of growth - times have changed, it's not just racing and footy anymore.

At least they might finally move forward on co-pooling with Victoria after years of stalemate. If not on the win & place pools where some punters prefer variation rather than pool strength, at least on the exotics, to ensure big pools.

UPDATE - The bookies aren't happy and Peter V'Landys chips in to show, yet again, that he doesn't have a bloody clue...

Bookies still unhappy despite reforms

Comments

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