Skip to main content

the washup from the Racing NSW v corporates decision

Yesterday's decision doesn't seem to have decided much - Betfair will certainly appeal the verdict against them.Bill Saunders argues that their case was hampered by Racing NSW not releasing relevant information until too late.


Betfair was in fact disadvantaged by its lack of knowledge of the rebate arrangement when preparing its statement of claim. Sportsbet, with its case being heard after Betfair, was able to amend its statement of claim accordingly.


Racing NSW will almost certainly piss more money up the wall appealing against the Sportsbet verdict as well.

One thing that will happen is that all NSW operators, including Tabcorp, will now be forced to pay the fees, which they conveniently didn't have to pay under the flawed V'Landys policy. There is no longer a threshold for payment and no mates' deals for the TABs - one policy for everyone, not just a tax on those evil interstate companies. The last point, re interstate companies, may therefore infringe the constitution, giving Betfair further grounds to take them to a higher court, where they usually win.

Some of the various press reports on the verdicts, the only ones claiming to have any sort of victory are the articles heavily influenced by TAB/Racing NSW.

Judgment in Betfair and Sportsbet Matters

State of flux stymies corporate bookmakers

Racing NSW knew it was illegal

Dumb and Dumber

One thing that does come out of these articles is the integrity of former Racing NSW chairman Gary Pemberton:

Perram's judgment noted that Gary Pemberton, the Racing NSW Chairman at the time, did not agree with this decision and voted against it explicitly asking that his dissent be recorded in the minutes. He resigned from the Board two weeks later.


Bravo sir, racing administrators with integrity, particularly in NSW are very few and far between.

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