General Chat

[Deleted member 4957]

Wayward Lad
Thanks for that, very informative.
Though your finger of blame appears to be pointing at government for potentially imposing additional taxes on bookmakers; bookmakers themselves have been allowed to restrict/close punters at will for many years forcing an enormously large number of punters to the black market or to lose interest in the game, if they welcomed back those punters with some (non brutal) restrictions their income will increase, their profits will increase and their contribution to the levy will also increase, it's a win for bookmakers, it's a win for racing and it's a win for punters, the only losers are the black market operators and there'll be very limited sympathy for them.
There's a reason why bookmakers don't do anything proactive to re-dress their income/profit hits, they don't want racing business, they would be happy for the game to go to the wall and their only customers are casino crackheads and mug football acca punters.
You are of course correct, they'll increase margins across the board, punters will pay and it'll be another nail heading towards the coffin...

 

[Wayward Lad]

Thanks Itsabraq, I hope you found some of the info surprising, especially around what the bookmakers pay to lay a bet on football verses horse racing, as this example should show how expensive racing is as a product verses other products for bookmakers. There is no mandatory levy on any other sports product. Even greyhound racing is only a voluntary levy.

I agree with you around bookmakers not being prepared to lay a bet and not wanting business that potentially beats the book. Unfortunately nowadays the major betting companies are run by Accountants and they are by and large not prepared to take a view. They also want you to move from volatile horse race betting, which is a skill product, to more built in margin products such as casino, numbers, fruits etc

I didn’t mean to point the finger of blame at the governments door as I believe there are many different factions to blame for where UK horse racing is and where it’s going. Too many have their noses in the trough I’m afraid, although I don’t believe the government gives a rats **** about racing. Their words say they do, but their actions say otherwise.

Racecourses would be equally at fault with government and bookmakers, and probably my leading villain as they receive both media right payments and Levy payments, yet run as separate stand alone businesses and there is no transparency around how much of the Levy contributions made to them go towards Prize money? I think it should be all. Peter Savill (ex BHA chief and Plumpton racecourse owner) has said that racecourses should show how much of their Levy payments goes to there Prize Money.

Why should the Levy subsidise the profitability of some racecourses when some open for less than 10 days a year ?

In my view for horse racing to survive then all levy payments should go directly towards prize money, less racecourses as a result of not subsidising their profits and also as a result less racing (especially as there aren’t enough horses in training to support the fixture list). The bigger tracks should survive with quality racing and higher prize money.

At the moment it’s the owners and punters who are keeping horse racing afloat through supporting their hobby and passion, when knowing deep down that it’s going to cost them in the long term.

My message is enjoy it whilst it’s here !

 

[thorne365]

At the moment it’s the owners and punters who are keeping horse racing afloat through supporting their hobby and passion, when knowing deep down that it’s going to cost them in the long term.

My message is enjoy it whilst it’s here !

2 good posts Wayward Lad! Further context: All the big UK [+ Ire] bookies are multinational these days and the UK TAM [Total Addressable Market] is shrinking in comparison to other jurisdictions. Fanduel [Flutter - Skybet/pp/betfair] just added ~80% to their estimate of the US market size in 2030 [up to 60 billion - I think GGR (Gross Gaming Revenue) in the UK is not much more than a tenth of that]. 365 have 'americanised' their app which has to taken as a signal of intent [Because they're privately owned, they are the barometer for longer term thinking - such as it is/can be in the industry] . In addition South America [Brazil right now] is starting to regulate which is drawing company focus.

Racing makes up virtually none of those markets fwiw.

I differ from most people engaged in racing in that I don't necessarily blame bookmakers for where we are with regard to falling racing t/o - they operate in a supply / demand ecosystem which isn't telling them to focus on Racing.

I find it hard to make an argument that any decent sized bookie is gonna ever focus on Racing again unless its pushed to by customer demand. Thus the only thing I can see that will ever reverse the current trend is proper long term thinking / planning about how to regrow the sport so that its embedded in peoples minds again. Damned if I know how to approach this - things like the Racign League have the right sentiment [possibly - I like the idea of different branding to engage new fans and possibly keep them longer, but the current reach means its can't work] but are far too short termist and demanding of instant results imo.

For me/us, its a great betting medium - for the majority of people it's a closed shop that a pain to attend, understand, follow and empathize with it's competitors [when compared with football in the UK, and especially NFL in the US] - there simply isn't enough widespread grass roots understanding of it as a sport.

 

[Deleted member 4957]

I differ from most people engaged in racing in that I don't necessarily blame bookmakers for where we are with regard to falling racing t/o - they operate in a supply / demand ecosystem which isn't telling them to focus on Racing.

Not sure that's true.
Bookmakers have been restricting punters for many years, this isn't new, I had my first account closed (not restricted) in 2005
I know two black market operators, one is based overseas with significant turnover, the other is a smaller more private operation based in UK, I speak to both of them and they say the vast majority of their business is on UK horse racing and their client base is built up entirely of UK punters who have either been restricted by UK bookmakers or had accounts suspended due to failing to comply with affordability intrusions.
And believe me, whatever numbers you hear banded around re the value of turnover with black market operators, this is only a fraction of what is really staked, the regulator can't give accurate figures because it will highlight the complete mess they've made of regulating the industry with incompetence of the highest order allowing bookmakers to run the industry how best suits them with no consideration for the punter, the lack of opposition from bookmakers around affordability checks is telling, performing these checks allows them to unearth duplicate accounts.
Bookmakers want it all ways, always have, for sure there's blame that can be apportioned to others but it starts with them....

 

[thorne365]

Not sure that's true.
Bookmakers have been restricting punters for many years, this isn't new, I had my first account closed (not restricted) in 2005
I know two black market operators, one is based overseas with significant turnover, the other is a smaller more private operation based in UK, I speak to both of them and they say the vast majority of their business is on UK horse racing and their client base is built up entirely of UK punters who have either been restricted by UK bookmakers or had accounts suspended due to failing to comply with affordability intrusions.
And believe me, whatever numbers you hear banded around re the value of turnover with black market operators, this is only a fraction of what is really staked, the regulator can't give accurate figures because it will highlight the complete mess they've made of regulating the industry with incompetence of the highest order allowing bookmakers to run the industry how best suits them with no consideration for the punter, the lack of opposition from bookmakers around affordability checks is telling, performing these checks allows them to unearth duplicate accounts.
Bookmakers want it all ways, always have, for sure there's blame that can be apportioned to others but it starts with them....

I don't think any of that matters to the main point does it? That being that Racing is now a small product in most 'mainstream' bookies portfolio so what incentive do they have to protect it - and who can protect it?

[I had gone through a few points in your response with comments but decided against dragging it out here - happy to take off-line if you want]

 

[Wayward Lad]

Andrew Rhodes CEO Gambling Commission stated in his Sept 2023 questioning by MP’s that the Black Market was overstated and very small ! ….with no acknowledgement or acceptance that it was growing at pace with the trend generated by OTT financial disclosure activity by bookmakers afraid of losing their trading licence.

He went on to detail what activity the GC were taking against illegal operators but accepted that VPN’s (virtual private networks) were a stumbling block (my words) to take action against these illegal sites. All he was interested in was stopping these sites, rather than reducing the harshness/strictness of the financial disclosure activity undertaken by bookmakers…..which was supposedly meant to be a ‘light touch’ approach ! The GC doesn’t give a monkeys about what turnover is lost through financial disclosure as it’s not in their remit and they are not measured by it.

I have never thought about why the bookmakers didn’t challenge the massive fines that have been levied against them over the last few years (over £20m), thinking that they were just scared of losing their trading licence. But thinking about it now then why didn’t they have a legal challenge against the fines - whether they were proportional or fair. Maybe just one of them as a test case? They did it with VAT on FOBT’s and won after a long battle with HMRC. Maybe there were ulterior motives in doffing their caps and meekly accepting the massive fines as Istabraq infers…..

Whatever the reality, customers restricted or blocked for refusing to provide financial disclosure will either stop betting (unlikely as for many its a hobby, passion, habit, part of their routine etc which they enjoy) or find alternative sites/mediums where their business is accepted without having to provide financial info. Deep down the industry/regulator/government knows this is going to happen but accepts the GC’s approach of stopping the opportunity of betting illegally rather than amend the legislation that is making it happen and fuelling the growth of the black market !

There are so many vested interests and players within the industry/sport that, is it any wonder Racing is in such a state?

 

[Spectre]

The bookmaker solution is really simple and always has been. The Government should only license bookmakers to operate in the UK that both reside and pay full tax in the UK. All those that are registered in tax havens should be regarded as unlicensed.

Light touch financial checks are okay with me, but anything beyond that is unacceptable. None of us need to be told how we can spend out money. We aren't told what we can spend on anything else, nor should we be.

As for bookmakers restricting punters, closing accounts, etc, it should be a term of their license that they should take a bet, as it is in other countries. They shouldn't be compelled to include racing as a sport though. If they don't want to take a bet on racing don't include it. They'll never admit it, but they need racing because of the amount of accounts it opens, and the amount of bets they take from people who don't have sufficient knowledge to make it pay.

Quite frankly it's time someone stood up to them and called their bluff. It's a big game they're playing, and they win because the UK legislation both allows them to, and the deterrents (fines) aren't big enough to genuinely deter them.

 

[HoldenTheReins]

The bookmaker solution is really simple and always has been. The Government should only license bookmakers to operate in the UK that both reside and pay full tax in the UK. All those that are registered in tax havens should be regarded as unlicensed.

Light touch financial checks are okay with me, but anything beyond that is unacceptable. None of us need to be told how we can spend out money. We aren't told what we can spend on anything else, nor should we be.

As for bookmakers restricting punters, closing accounts, etc, it should be a term of their license that they should take a bet, as it is in other countries. They shouldn't be compelled to include racing as a sport though. If they don't want to take a bet on racing don't include it. They'll never admit it, but they need racing because of the amount of accounts it opens, and the amount of bets they take from people who don't have sufficient knowledge to make it pay.

Quite frankly it's time someone stood up to them and called their bluff. It's a big game they're playing, and they win because the UK legislation both allows them to, and the deterrents (fines) aren't big enough to genuinely deter them.

100%

On the AK bets podcast the lawyer on there said some casino online with a license here took 40k from someone who won on slots and he can't sue them as they don't have an office here. Fucking scandalous that is and should be illegal.

 

[Deleted member 4957]

I don't think any of that matters to the main point does it? That being that Racing is now a small product in most 'mainstream' bookies portfolio so what incentive do they have to protect it - and who can protect it?

[I had gone through a few points in your response with comments but decided against dragging it out here - happy to take off-line if you want]

I think it is relevant but there is so much wrong with how the game/industry is run we could write a book in here.
Wayward Lad raises some very interesting points...

 

[Deleted member 4957]

Andrew Rhodes CEO Gambling Commission stated in his Sept 2023 questioning by MP’s that the Black Market was overstated and very small ! ….with no acknowledgement or acceptance that it was growing at pace with the trend generated by OTT financial disclosure activity by bookmakers afraid of losing their trading licence.

He went on to detail what activity the GC were taking against illegal operators but accepted that VPN’s (virtual private networks) were a stumbling block (my words) to take action against these illegal sites. All he was interested in was stopping these sites, rather than reducing the harshness/strictness of the financial disclosure activity undertaken by bookmakers…..which was supposedly meant to be a ‘light touch’ approach ! The GC doesn’t give a monkeys about what turnover is lost through financial disclosure as it’s not in their remit and they are not measured by it.

I have never thought about why the bookmakers didn’t challenge the massive fines that have been levied against them over the last few years (over £20m), thinking that they were just scared of losing their trading licence. But thinking about it now then why didn’t they have a legal challenge against the fines - whether they were proportional or fair. Maybe just one of them as a test case? They did it with VAT on FOBT’s and won after a long battle with HMRC. Maybe there were ulterior motives in doffing their caps and meekly accepting the massive fines as Istabraq infers…..

Whatever the reality, customers restricted or blocked for refusing to provide financial disclosure will either stop betting (unlikely as for many its a hobby, passion, habit, part of their routine etc which they enjoy) or find alternative sites/mediums where their business is accepted without having to provide financial info. Deep down the industry/regulator/government knows this is going to happen but accepts the GC’s approach of stopping the opportunity of betting illegally rather than amend the legislation that is making it happen and fuelling the growth of the black market !

There are so many vested interests and players within the industry/sport that, is it any wonder Racing is in such a state?

They simply can't acknowledge the extent of the black market 'problem' because it will just confirm the incompetence of how racing authorities and the regulator have 'managed' the sport in recent years.
You are bang on about the regulator's strategy in attempting to eradicate the black operators rather than tackle the issues that have created their emergence which has to be high level ignorance and stubbornness, the black market can/will never disappear just as it hasn't in every industry, they will find a way.

The point Spectre raises about the licences is interesting, I know in the States restrictions are now commonplace albeit less brutal than here, I also know in Australia that restrictions on accounts doesn't exist, presumably the regulator there has seen the chaos caused by the behaviour of UK bookmakers and insisted they can't do it.
Sending the gambling underground helps no-one and maybe the Aussies are cleverer than I've ever given them credit for in realising this.

I do believe that while the game is funded the way it is the potential exists for catastrophe, like everyone I hope someone somewhere has a masterplan that can be implemented to ensure its' success and future growth but attitudes all round (regulator, BHA and bookmakers) right now don't suggest that's imminent....

 

[The Fellow]

other news from Brian Acheson , who apparently was a very nice chap

not confident on the strength of his string this season

Kilgame , very big and may take time

he mentioned one for the Triumph , thinks its called Kurasso Blue , will aim for the DRF and hopefully Triumph

Bob Olinger will be aimed for the American National next year

 

[OverTheLast]

They simply can't acknowledge the extent of the black market 'problem' because it will just confirm the incompetence of how racing authorities and the regulator have 'managed' the sport in recent years.
You are bang on about the regulator's strategy in attempting to eradicate the black operators rather than tackle the issues that have created their emergence which has to be high level ignorance and stubbornness, the black market can/will never disappear just as it hasn't in every industry, they will find a way.

The point Spectre raises about the licences is interesting, I know in the States restrictions are now commonplace albeit less brutal than here, I also know in Australia that restrictions on accounts doesn't exist, presumably the regulator there has seen the chaos caused by the behaviour of UK bookmakers and insisted they can't do it.
Sending the gambling underground helps no-one and maybe the Aussies are cleverer than I've ever given them credit for in realising this.

I do believe that while the game is funded the way it is the potential exists for catastrophe, like everyone I hope someone somewhere has a masterplan that can be implemented to ensure its' success and future growth but attitudes all round (regulator, BHA and bookmakers) right now don't suggest that's imminent....

Is that true about about Australian firms having no restrictions? I watch quite a bit of their racing and they are excessive on the safe gambling advertisements and read a few things on twitter about them clamping down a bit over there

 

[Quevega]

Is that true about about Australian firms having no restrictions? I watch quite a bit of their racing and they are excessive on the safe gambling advertisements and read a few things on twitter about them clamping down a bit over there

I think most of them have to take a minimum wager (payout) before placing restrictions.
But the rules may differ from state to state.

Minimum bet limits refer to the minimum wager to lose (win or win/place payout) that a bookmaker must accept without restricting or closing a customer’s account. Minimum bet limits have recently been introduced by Racing NSW, Racing Victoria and soon Queensland.

excerpt from Government report

 

[Quevega]

Probably one dollar :highly_amused:

 

[Deleted member 4957]

Is that true about about Australian firms having no restrictions? I watch quite a bit of their racing and they are excessive on the safe gambling advertisements and read a few things on twitter about them clamping down a bit over there

My Son lives in Queensland, he's 28 and has a large group of like minded mates who all bet, none of them had ever heard about account closure/restrictions until my Son told them of the battles I face in the UK, they are dumbfounded at the questions we get quizzed with by bookmakers and at they can't comprehend the idea that someone performs affordability checks and decides what you are permitted to bet (although I'm convinced this is just a screen for bookies restricting punters).
My Son gets a deposit match bonus every Friday from his bookmaker (Sports Bet) up to $250, he also gets boosts, free bets and all kinds of promotions.
He uses Bet365 there and can bet whatever he wants, no questions asked, I doubt there's anyone in here who has an unrestricted 365 account, same Ladbrokes.
What they don't get is extra places on UK horse racing, he often bemoans me for having a nice place multi when everything finishes 4th and he gets nothing.
The idea of moving there, getting set up with bank account, bookmaker accs etc is very appealing...

 

[Quevega]

My Son lives in Queensland, he's 28 and has a large group of like minded mates who all bet, none of them had ever heard about account closure/restrictions until my Son told them of the battles I face in the UK, they are dumbfounded at the questions we get quizzed with by bookmakers and at they can't comprehend the idea that someone performs affordability checks and decides what you are permitted to bet (although I'm convinced this is just a screen for bookies restricting punters).
My Son gets a deposit match bonus every Friday from his bookmaker (Sports Bet) up to $250, he also gets boosts, free bets and all kinds of promotions.
He uses Bet365 there and can bet whatever he wants, no questions asked, I doubt there's anyone in here who has an unrestricted 365 account, same Ladbrokes.
What they don't get is extra places on UK horse racing, he often bemoans me for having a nice place multi when everything finishes 4th and he gets nothing.
The idea of moving there, getting set up with bank account, bookmaker accs etc is very appealing...

Pretty certain it's not quite as rosy as you make it sound down under. But your son and his mates should just enjoy it :encouragement:

Whilst not as prevalent (and unchecked) as in the UK. The Aussie online bookmakers have also latched on to the theory and practice of restricting accounts to appease shareholders and boost profits. This is obviously something they would do as they are mostly Global businesses branded slightly differently across the World.

It's one of the reasons the studies into this practice over there introduced minimum bet limits in several states, something sadly lacking in the UK.
I think they have also banned online poker/casino's etc and using credit cards for funding.

I think they quickly realised where the majority of problem gamblers played.
I read into all this a couple of years back.

https://www.dss.gov.au/sites/defaul...inal_report_-_betting_restrictions_report.pdf

 

[Deleted member 4957]

Pretty certain it's not quite as rosy as you make it sound down under. But your son and his mates should just enjoy it :encouragement:

Whilst not as prevalent (and unchecked) as in the UK. The Aussie online bookmakers have also latched on to the theory and practice of restricting accounts to appease shareholders and boost profits. This is obviously something they would do as they are mostly Global businesses branded slightly differently across the World.

It's one of the reasons the studies into this practice over there introduced minimum bet limits in several states, something sadly lacking in the UK.
I think they have also banned online poker/casino's etc and using credit cards for funding.

I think they quickly realised where the majority of problem gamblers played.
I read into all this a couple of years back.

https://www.dss.gov.au/sites/defaul...inal_report_-_betting_restrictions_report.pdf

Yeah, my boy plays serious poker and hasn't been able to play online for while now.
I know he does OK (shows a profit from his punting) and I know he shares stuff with his group of mates and they all follow, so they would all be prime candidates for restrictions, the fact none of them have seen any restrictions I assumed was something to do with a regulator/government who issue licences with rules attached around the practice.
W Hills used to be prominent over there but pulled out of the Aussie market a few years ago.
I've told him exactly the same, make the most of it while it's there...

 

[Quevega]

Yeah, my boy plays serious poker and hasn't been able to play online for while now.
I know he does OK (shows a profit from his punting) and I know he shares stuff with his group of mates and they all follow, so they would all be prime candidates for restrictions, the fact none of them have seen any restrictions I assumed was something to do with a regulator/government who issue licences with rules attached around the practice.
W Hills used to be prominent over there but pulled out of the Aussie market a few years ago.
I've told him exactly the same, make the most of it while it's there...

I think the minimum bet limits are related to the profits of the bookies.
Basically the bigger the profit the more a punter can win on any single bet.
So as sportsbet are the biggest Aus firm then this might explain your lads experience.
And B365 obviously also a big fish.

Minimum bet limits vs bookie profits, over here would remove most of us from any hassle I'm sure.
Just corporate greed really.

It's like what we've discussed before, the number of punters restricted that will not win long term must be a very high percentage as most of us will lose in the long run. So the bookies are losing revenue in this market (horse/sports betting - skilled), but whilst ever they can rake profits from online poker and casinos then they don't need to take the risk elsewhere.

It's fucking obvious really but for some reason our government and regulators cannot see this or choose to ignore it.

 

[Deleted member 4957]

Yep, completely agreee Q

 

[Brooker17]

Good news that Jonny Dineen is returning for Upping the ante.
Definitely one of the best ante post shows around and glad Jonny is returning