Betfair in Asia? [Archive] - Horse racing discussion at Asian Racing Forums

Horny Harry

15-11-2002, 19:13

I got this email from two flys today...I sent back anemail asking them to bet on Hong Kong racing and any other asian racing that they could thing of. Not as big as Betfair...in fact they havnt even started doing any real business yet as far as I am aware, though getting close to a bit of action.
Can only imagine Betfair betting on HK racing...
would be humungous.
TwoFlys Punters,
Thanks for taking part in the TwoFlys trial and competition. We’ve signed up hundreds of punters who have made tens of thousands of bets over the last few weeks during the Spring Carnival. Our top punter reached a total balance of $305,339 from a $50,000 start – not at all bad.
We are making a few changes and carrying out some updates to the software based on your feedback. Many of you have expressed an interest in TwoFlys going live to enable you to get cracking in what is truly the first Australian Betting Exchange in the world! Before we go on, we’d like to hear from you – we’ve got 5 simple questions that we’d really like to hear your opinions on to help us further our plans…
Would you bet at TwoFlys if the site went live to real-money betting tomorrow? (Or was it just the competition and fun-money that was enjoyable?)
Which method(s) of depositing would you happily use, and what would be your preferred method out of a) manual bank deposit, b) online banking deposit, c)BPay, d) credit card.
What suggestions do you have for improving the way the exchange works?
Which sports would you most like to bet on at the Exchange (gallops, trots, dogs, rugby league, AFL, rugby union?)
What scope of coverage do you want TwoFlys to provide? (Ie sports and racing every day. Metro only, metro and country etc.)
Please fire off a quick email to us to tell us what you think - we look forward to your comments and gearing up to providing you with a great service!
Customer Service
TwoFlys Betting Exchange
www.TwoFlys.com (http://www.TwoFlys.com)

cheesebeast

15-11-2002, 19:32

I tried the Two Flys Exchange quite a bit during their trial period and the software is very average - quite confusing and not at all intuitive or easy to use - I emailed them several times trying to help them out but didn't really get anywhere with them. I wish them luck.

Scarper

15-11-2002, 20:03

I agree - the two flys software is very ordinary and not a patch on the betfair interface - i dont see them lasting. If they cant get the front end interface right i imagine the banking and settling software (significantly more complex) will be a nightmare - wouldnt trust them with real $$$ for a while.

hobbes

02-12-2002, 20:59

they take a commision between 5 and 2% depending on total turnover in your account.

SCARPER -- as i imagine you are aware the commission is based only on winnings NOT on total turnover. ( but the commission rate declines as net wins/losses on various bets increase ( again not total turnover as some bets may offset )).

jack

04-12-2002, 22:35

any news on when this is going to start on HK racing?

cheesebeast

06-12-2002, 07:26

Ante Post markets are now up for the 4 big international races.

Scarper

09-12-2002, 18:44

as anyone would expect the markets are way out currently - one joker layed all runners at 1.8 for the cup. Ive actually seen this sort of thing before - could it be someone testing a bot???

13-12-2002, 08:46

I`ve been trying to place a bet recently but the HK International races have all been suspended.......anyone know the reason why ?

cheesebeast

13-12-2002, 09:00

The markets have been moved JB - they were under Ante Post, but now can get to them by clicking on Horse Racing and then Hong Kong instead of clicking on Ante Post. These markets seem to be operating - place markets also.

13-12-2002, 09:24

Thx beast.

cheesebeast

13-12-2002, 20:16

The world racing spotlight heads to Sha Tin Racecourse in Hong Kong this Sunday for the annual International Day programme. High-class thoroughbreds from around the world will compete in these four Group 1 races worth a combined US$7.18 million:

Hong Kong Sprint (1000m – Can the Aussie speed machine Falvelon win this race three years in a row or will the Japanese flyers Believe and Shonan Kampf fight it out?

Hong Kong Mile (1600m) – Is this the race for the Japanese grey Admiral Cozzene or can local champion Electronic Unicorn improve on his second in this race last year? Don’t forget the Godolphin runner Noverre, who will be retired to stud after this race.

Hong Kong Vase (2400m) – French mare Aquarelliste is all the rage after a fine European season. Frankie Dettori is gunning for a win on Godolphin’s Ekraar who lost out by a head last year.

Hong Kong Cup (2000m) – World Series leader Grandera hopes to finish 2002 in style but watch out for Japanese star Eishin Preston, winner of two big races here already and the American gelding Sarafan, who narrowly missed out on victories in the Arlington Million and the Japan Cup earlier this year.

Betfair will be covering all nine races on Sunday’s card, offering punters the chance to back and lay every runner.

13-12-2002, 20:48

Every race - the HK JC don`t allow me to bet with them so bring it on.....Yee Ha.

cheesebeast

13-12-2002, 23:20

By Paul Haigh in the Racing Post 13/12/2002

Much has already been made of the effect of exchanges on betting in Britain. But that effect is as nothing compared with their potential for undermining the rigid structure that has made Hong Kong the greatest racing betting area on earth.

Hong Kong is, as everybody surely knows by now, the perfect example of what can be achieved with an absolute tote monopoly. No other form of betting is legal here. Given the Chinese fondness for gambling, this has created in the Hong Kong Jockey Club, an organisation whose turnover is almost single-handedly responsible for funding schools, hospitals, universities and any number of charitable projects.

But the monopoly is under constant siege, mainly in the past from internal illegal bookmakers, who were stamped on when caught with a ferocity that would make all good BOLA members blench. But more recently from the internet and offshore operators in the Victor Chandler mould whose depredations were far more difficult, if not impossible to counter.

The turnover of the HKJC has been in steady – although not until recently frightening – decline in the last five years. This has nothing whatsoever to do with a loss of enthusiasm for racing among Hong Kong punters, which remains as high as ever, or even with economic downturns, which historically have never had much of an adverse effect on the amount people bet.

It may have something to do with the inexplicable and apparently insatiable desire of all oriental people to bet on soccer and English soccer in particular, but the black market is the real cause of the decline.

This year, however, turnover on the Hong Kong tote is down by a definitely worrying 15 per cent – a figure that suggests the movement towards betting on personal computers (and not the hand-held ones issued to HKJC account holding-clients, either) is gathering pace.

In fact it raises the possibility of a landslide in the not too distant future. And this is before what may turn out to be the HKJC’s greatest challenge to date.

This weekend Betfair and the other exchanges will all be offering markets on the International Group 1 races in Hong Kong. On just about every horse running someone will take a view and a better price will be available than that offered by the Hong Kong tote.

In effect, a tote is a sort of betting exchange (though one on which you cannot lay of course), but the great advantage the exchanges will always have over any tote is that they offer the chance to take a contrary view to an individual punter and profit from it.

The other big advantage they have over the HKJC is they do not have the HKJC’s takeout of an average 19 per cent on all bets. The exchange phenomenon hasn’t really hit Hong Kong punters yet, but once it does the effect on turnover for the international races could be catastrophic.

But wait, as they say in those irritating ads for machines to sandblast your house or paint around light switches, because there’s more – much more.

Betfair and the other exchanges already offer prices on all races from the US and South Africa; and while there is no evidence yet of major money that would have gone into local pools crossing the Atlantic or the Dark Continent, there is definitely plenty of money that would have got into those pools through those British bookmakers with access to them going through the exchanges instead.

There is already talk that the major exchanges might bet on Hong Kong’s ordinary races as well as the international races. There is no technological reason why they shouldn’t. The only thing that’s holding them up is the fact that the ordinary Hong Kong races on which the great mass of Hong Kong betting takes place are not available on British TV.

But why should the exchanges have such an insular outlook? Why shouldn’t they recognize that their real future is as a global market rather than mainly British?

What would happen if our exchanges were to bet on every Hong Kong race, when every Hong Kong punter can access the markets on his or her own PC? What would happen then to the ten per cent of the HK government’s income that the HKJC’s still massive turnover currently provides?

What would happen to the wealth that currently funds the international races? And what would happen to the HKJC itself?

These are many questions which must keep many people in Hong Kong racing awake at nights, and not just chief executive Larry Wong, whose intimidating job it is to find a way of fighting the tide of technology lapping at the HKJC’s might foundations.

cheesebeast

13-12-2002, 23:56

The exchanges seem likely to have an adverse effect on the HKJC's win and place markets over time, however you'd have to think that the exotic betting pools are fairly safe as I can't see how the exchange concept lends itself to the large payouts that occur in the TT and many of the other exotic pools.

It will be interesting to see if the exchanges were to introduce quinella betting in time, something that hasn't occurred yet in the UK.

masun

14-12-2002, 00:24

CB, is it the case that all the bets on Betfair have to be fully funded? Say you are prepared to lay a certain quinella combination @ 50-1 and you're willing to accept a stake of $1,000. So you need to have $50,000 in your account to win the 1,000 bucks. The way I see it, it can create liquidity problems. (Win bets are less of a problem because the odds are usually much lower than quinellas.) It'd seem to be me that only few people would have enough money to cover their offers on multiple combinations in the same race.

cheesebeast

14-12-2002, 00:27

Yes Masun, you need to have the cash in your account to cover the liability of each bet you place if you are laying.

14-12-2002, 00:41

CB....i`ve yet to back a winner using betfair so interested to know how long does it take before your winnings are deposited in your account ?

cheesebeast

14-12-2002, 00:45

Just as long as it takes them to deduct the money from your account if you are losing then, JB!;)

Usually they settle the race within 10 - 15 minutes of the race finishing, I guess they have to wait until official weight confirmation etc.

Scarper

14-12-2002, 09:20

masun - i think its max liablity per race that you need to cover. So you only need to have the maximum liablitly in the account, rather than the sum of each lay in the race - and i assume if you are willing to lay 50/1 shots you will be laying others too. So i think this makes no difference to liquidity - same as backing a 1/50 shot - got to part with the 50k first to win the 1k.

Im sure BF's existing customers would have complained about this a few years ago if runners are not pooled in each race.

I would expect that most people would rather back runners though as this is what they are used to, and on BF the prices should be better than the JC by 15% or so.

15-12-2002, 20:59

What an interesting day - i started off ok & naturally thought how easy is this & then instantly got stung.

Made plenty of errors that i put down to greenness & i`ll def improve with the run.

Best move i made was laying Grandera at $2.6 for everything i had but they kept coming & in the end were keen on taking less .

Got stung laying Medic Corps & Ange Gabriel.

Clearly better odds here than the tote - maybe on every horse.
I got $7 on My Fortune (R2)

Anyway i`m hooked - whens the next time they bet on HK races ?

jack

17-12-2002, 10:33

Any word on Betfair's ongoing operations for Hong Kong?

hobbes

17-12-2002, 13:47

Best move i made was laying Grandera at $2.6 for everything i had but they kept coming & in the end were keen on taking less.

Clearly better odds here than the tote - maybe on every horse.
I got $7 on My Fortune (R2)

for both the above you would have been competing with us -- am inclined to think the $2.6 was a little high.

Got stung laying Medic Corps & Ange Gabriel.

i think we were backing medic corps so different opinion there.

imaufo

17-12-2002, 14:17

Yes...I backed Medic Corp on NSW tote at 9-1 then when the money came in for him on HK tote his price dropped rather suddenly. Ended up around 5.50 I think which was still good.

JB what were you thinking? :confused:

17-12-2002, 14:52

I was laying 5 or 6 in each race so not a big deal , i wouldn`t want to send any of yous broke - so why don`t u switch to William Hill or Mark Reid & leave Betfair to me ?

imaufo

17-12-2002, 15:08

Cripes JB...if you keep laying horses like that..im heading straight to BETFAIR !!!!!!!!!!!:D :D :D

Scarper

17-12-2002, 15:15

no for markets tomorrow i hear - maybe on the weekend ???

masun

17-12-2002, 15:27

Hope this is not too stupid a question: When I click on "Chinese" at Betfair I get taken to drhobets -- what exactly is the relationship between these two? Are they different language interfaces to the same pools or are they separate pools?

Scarper

17-12-2002, 15:39

Masun,

I believe DrHo Bets is basically the result of an affiliate agreement with BetFair, where the DrHo company is responsible for all asian business. The DrHoBets web site is basically a different wrapper for the same site - markets are the same etc.

masun

17-12-2002, 15:48

Thanks Scarper. I am tempted after hearing JB got $7 on My Fortune. What an early Christmas he got!

Scarper

17-12-2002, 16:07

i think most winners went off a fair bit over the HK tote prices.

17-12-2002, 17:13

Masun - i think the odds offered on Betfair were around 20% better than the HK tote for almost all runners.

Anyone betting win pool on the tote is costing themselves..

Clearly the best thing invented since viagra..

masun

17-12-2002, 18:38

JB, re Betfair's 20% premium over HK tote, was it true even for extreme longshots? For example, can you remember how much one could get for Precision and Oriental Express?

zeditave

17-12-2002, 18:52

I made a few notes during the day on the winners - Precision went mostly at 100-102, but someone got 195 for £2. I laid him at 82 enough to make my day less cheery.... :(

Highest matched price on Olympic Express was only 42, but I reckon I saw 60-70 available just before the jump, mustn't have been taken as it didn't come up on the trading info report on the market page.

17-12-2002, 19:00

Masun - i can`t recall those longshots u mention but Zeditave seems on the mark - i can remember some longshots being offered at large 3 figures.

The odds appear & disapear quickly because punters quickly grab them - when $7 appeared for My Fortune i nearly broke my fingers on the keyboard trying to snap it up - sometimes i was too slow...it certainly makes for an interesting day ?

It was my first day out on Betfair & i made plenty of mistakes but will clearly improve for the run.

imaufo

17-12-2002, 19:19

I have been signed up for a couple of weeks now...it is a FANTASTIC idea and I cant recommend the betfair site highly enough.
After just a few minutes you will have the hang of it and be looking to make some real money with all the value on offer.

Tosser

07-01-2003, 03:26

In my email box this morning ...

"The Wednesday January 8 meeting at Happy Valley begins a new era for Betfair clients – it will be the first day of our regular coverage on the world’s richest domestic racing. Race 7, the January Cup over 1800m headlines the card with several runners from the International Day meeting scheduled to start. Betfair will be covering all eight races on the programme, allowing punters to back and lay every runner. All Hong Kong races will now be offered on Betfair"

What's the HKJC going to do about that? :p

imaufo

07-01-2003, 05:02

http://www.asianracing.nu/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=6289#post6289

:eek: :eek: :eek:

07-01-2003, 05:48

Reading the betfair chatroom , it looks like the punters in UK prefer betting on events that they can see (cant blame them) - anyway i hope tomorrow night is as successful as International day......should be.

Cant wait to get be getting 20-30% better win divvies than offered on the tote.....yum yum.

jack

07-01-2003, 08:31

It's a great concept for sure. But they will need to give players access to either vision or (at the least) audio if Hong kong is going to catch fire.

imaufo

07-01-2003, 10:43

Audio is readily available at the Hong Kong Jockey Club website either in english or chinese.

Hong Kong Jockey Club website (http://www.hongkongjockeyclub.com/english/index.asp)

Just click on this link and go to Multimedia showcase ( on the left of the main page) This will take you to some replays of latest races and or trackwork.
Then click on the live broadcast button ( at the top)

;) :p ;)

You can also watch barrier trial replays here.
It is a very good site.

Live broadcast (http://www.hongkongjockeyclub.com/english/press/showcase.asp)

jack

07-01-2003, 10:56

But does Betfair tell their customers this information? I didn't see any pointer to where I could hear the races?

Scarper

07-01-2003, 12:15

They point their customers to http://racing.scmp.com/english/index.asp where most info is available and links to the live radio broadcasts.

imaufo

07-01-2003, 12:54

I think that SCMP site audio is all in chinese?

cheesebeast

07-01-2003, 17:53

I guess given that the HKJC aren't exactly jumping up and down singing hallelujah about Betfair covering HK races, it would have been a bit on the nose for Betfair to use the Jockey Club url on their website telling Betfair's customers how to listen in to the races.

I imagine the Betfair punters will discover the HKJC url for English commentary via the Betfair "chatback" message board.

William Hill might cover the HK races on William Hill radio? Will check this tomorrow night, William Hill certainly cover the races for betting purposes.

08-01-2003, 11:43

The HKJC website that provides English commentary can overload & it sounds like half the UK will be online tonite ?

hobbes

08-01-2003, 13:05

i imagine you could post the URL and instructions in the chatback.

masun

08-01-2003, 14:15

The HKJC website that provides English commentary can overload & it sounds like half the UK will be online tonite ?

I doubt if Betfair is really targetting UK customers. More likely they want to attrack HK punters.

Scarper

08-01-2003, 14:32

i think there is some interest in HK racing in the UK for the wed night meetings. When compared to UK racing HK must seem like a dream. few horses and tracks, more exicting racing + significantly cleaner racing. i know a few UK residents that are followers of HK racing and who normally bet through hills. still the big bucks would come from HK im sure.

i wonder what the chances are of anyone getting live coverage to the UK. i guess tiny if its to be legal, as the HKJC probably own the rights to the footage etc...

cheesebeast

08-01-2003, 15:45

cheesebeast
i imagine you could post the URL and instructions in the chatback.

Have done a couple of times but will keep at it! The more the merrier.:D :D :D

Certainly seems to be quite a bit of interest among UK chatback folk, and with only one meeting in the UK today it should give the UK punters a bit more interest.

Yes, the HKJC regularly gets overloaded on a normal meeting, often is very difficult to get in and check race card or dividends or listen to the races.

Funnily enough Zeditave posted a link to this website on one of the chatback discussion topics last night saying it was a good place to go for information and the odd tip and before I could get in there and say that I heartily agree, the link to asianracing.nu was deleted by one of the Betfair chatback forum nazis.:mad: :mad:

cheesebeast

08-01-2003, 16:37

From Betfair ......

Betfair Non-Runner Rule applies. Odds of matched bets will only be adjusted if there are ADDITIONAL non-runners after your bet is matched. See Rules and Regulations for a full explanation. For Cards and form please go to WWW.RACING.SCMP.COM. Please note that Hong Kong residents are advised not to bet on these markets. The following non-runners have been removed from this market (Key: Race Card Number, Reduction Factor at time of withdrawal, Time)

zeditave

08-01-2003, 17:17

just a disclaimer to cover their hide in case there's any fuss with the authorities I'd say....

zeditave

08-01-2003, 19:17

here's something of interest for you....

Betfair matched £13,244 on Race 3, almost £12k was on Super Elite! Look at the fluctuations, and compare it with the closing HKJC price of 3.05....

zeditave

08-01-2003, 19:19

hmm, how do I get that to show on screen?

08-01-2003, 23:18

It went ok but i thought there was far more action on international day ?

Should just get biggger & bigger ..

hobbes

09-01-2003, 00:54

zeditave i don't know but am super impressed you even managed to post it as an attachment. as it has been viewed 11 times already that would seem to be good enough.

imaufo

09-01-2003, 07:30

POSTING IMAGES...( I tried it with the attachment but couldnt get it to work)

1 Find a picture
2 right click on the picture
3 left click on properties
4 left click / drag/ highlight URL
5 right click / copy
6 come back to Asian racing
7 left click on IMG
8 right click/ paste

http://ninemsn.com.au/blipimages/news1/0901_Tcrash.jpg

09-01-2003, 08:58

I`m willing to share some of my experiences - as i said earlier the value didn`t appear as strong as International day - i myself had learn`t my lesson & tightened up.

I`m only an average judge but rated Super Elite a $10 chance - punters were keen to put plenty on at around $5.5-$6 - i held a bit but lacked the balls to hold the lot...weak!

Rated Grandway Shuttle $10 & he also didn`t look good prior to the race - on the tote he was about $3.8 but if you wanted to lay him u needed to offer around $5 - anyway i took the punt & it payed off.

Held a few others - none of them won - so not a bad night - also got $5.4 for Noble Hero when it was paying around $3.95 on the tote.

Since the JC don`t let me bet with them , i`m more than happy to have fun here..

Handy Harry

09-01-2003, 10:16

I was tossing up wether to go with the flow and back Me And You last night ....there was still some value with Betfair up to the jump ( compared to HK tote anyway)

Once the interestand knowledge gains strength, so too will the pools for HK on Betfair.

I have a friend who is wquite excited about the American betfair advantage...though is concerened that the overall coverage of USA racing is limited.

zeditave

09-01-2003, 15:57

and the big plunge of the night was on Come See You....

09-01-2003, 16:11

Wow $11 was good for Come see You - bad luck there wasn`t much money around.

I havn`t analysed things correctly but from where i was sitting around 80-90% of runners were paying more than the tote on International day but yesterday only about 50% - a lot were around the same price & around 10% were actually under.
The big longshots are hardly ever paying more & best value would be on the tote.

zeditave

09-01-2003, 16:11

these snapshots were taken after the race, when all unmatched bets were cancelled, hence you are unable to see what was left at the jump.

zeditave

09-01-2003, 16:15

have to agree with that. There was a debate earlier this week on 'At The Races', one of the racing channels on UK TV. It was agreed that most of the big bets on offer are on shorter priced horses - punters at home are generally unwilling to lay a horse at 14/1 and above, as it takes a sizeable bank to be able to do so. For horses up to about 8/1, it is fantastic.

A single betting firm, whether it be a traditional bookie, the tote or an exchange, is never going to provide the complete service for a well-rounded punter. We now have the opportunity to pick and choose - there's never been a better time for punters! :)

cheesebeast

09-01-2003, 18:15

Here's a bit of info from last night's betting

Total bets matched - this is the Betfair total hence need to halve to get total - all in GBP

Race 1 ??
Race 2 5,700
Race 3 13,200
Race 4 5,300
Race 5 24,500
Race 6 13,600
Race 7 17,300
Race 8 5,800

Race 5 most of the action was on Grandway Shuttle which closed at 3.20 on the HK Tote and 4.60 on Betfair.

Below is the winning tote dividend with HKJC compared with the final price available on Betfair when the market was suspended.

Race 1 ???
Race 2 Konrad the Great 8.65 v 10.0
Race 3 Super Sixty Six 7.75 v 8.2
Race 4 Noble Hero 2.95 v 4
Race 5 Rare 23.25 v 26
Race 6 Admiral 3.15 v 4
Race 7 Come See You 3.65 v 5
Race 8 Cheeky 3.15 v 3.75

Most of the above horses were available for higher prices on Betfair prior to start time.

09-01-2003, 19:37

Glancing thru the betfair chatroom it sounds like most of the UK punters did there money......i hope they dont turn it up as it may get lonely in there ?

zeditave

09-01-2003, 20:16

cheesebeast,

The last price recorded on Ace of Pace was 12.5, it did get as high as 15. From memory, the first race did about £7900.

09-01-2003, 21:12

Thx guys for sharing the stats - i guess i`ll fall into the usual pattern of willing to hold them under $8 but wary of taking on outsiders.

I hear a lot of people sat out & watched to see how it goes - hopefully Saturday will be a lot more action.....looking forward to it..

Homer J.

11-01-2003, 09:01

Saturday, January 11, 2003

RACING
Net bet 'invader' sparks probe
Concerned Jockey Club chiefs and government officials seek legal guidance as Betfair exchange site targets Hong Kong

ALAN AITKEN

Next Story

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Value added: Come See You won at 2.6-1 on Wednesday night, but British betting exchange Betfair offered odds of up to 10-1. Picture by Kenneth Chan

The latest and potentially most lethal Internet predator to move into the Hong Kong market has sent the Jockey Club and government scrambling for firm legal opinion. Betfair, a British betting exchange, started regular operations on Hong Kong racing with Wednesday night's Happy Valley meeting - but it remains unclear whether it is contravening the Gambling Ordinance.
"We and the Home Affairs Department are still looking for an answer to that," said Jockey Club director of betting Henry Chan Shing-kai. "Even racing in the United Kingdom is looking at that question, because the way that Betfair operates appears to be outside the existing framework.

"The lawyers are still discussing whether what they do constitutes bookmaking, but if the question is whether someone in Hong Kong can legally place a bet through Betfair, well I believe the existing legislation covers any betting activities which originate in Hong Kong, whether it is betting, settling bets or the transfer of money to make bets with."

British bookmakers have been operating via the Internet on Hong Kong racing for some time, and it is illegal for SAR residents to place a bet with them, but few experts regard them as a threat to Hong Kong turnover as they are notoriously "risk averse" and hold interest for only the smallest punters.

Betfair is another matter, however, as it takes no risk and therefore has no limit to the scope of its holdings. Rather than being an odds-setting organisation, a betting exchange is a facilitator and the Betfair name has become almost a generic term for all betting exchanges.

Punters establish cash accounts and then offer each other odds via the Betfair Web site, which is processing 12,000 bets a minute during peak periods in Britain. Betfair acts as a go-between to match the backer with the layer at whatever odds they agree, then it takes a small percentage from the winning side of any "matched" bet.

Mark Davies, Betfair's director of communications, said yesterday: "The Hong Kong legality question is obviously one that is brought up a lot, but we have taken a step back and kept away from it by ensuring our legality at a more fundamental level - namely by not offering the product to Hong Kong residents. Therefore we are not taking money out of the pool there."

Betfair pronounces its handle in matched bets rather than turnover. If one punter lays a bet at 5-1 for £10, he risks £50 and the other punter risks £10 in taking the odds - this is regarded as £60 in matched bets. Thus the figures are difficult to compare with turnover in the classic sense.

Betfair operated on Hong Kong for the first time on International Day last month but Wednesday was its debut on bread-and-butter racing. At Happy Valley, Betfair matched bets totalling nearly £96,000, an average of close to £12,000 a race with more than £24,000 wagered on the fifth race and £17,000 on the January Cup won by Come See You.

With a disadvantage to the punter which usually hovers around one or two per cent - as opposed to 19 per cent on the Jockey Club's tote - better odds are offered on most, if not all, runners, especially strong chances. As much as 10-1 was bet about Come See You and, while Ivan Allan's stayer jumped away at 2.6-1 on the Jockey Club tote, he was still 4-1 on Betfair. Six of the other seven winners showed price advantages.

"The odds on Betfair are very attractive because the company pays little in the way of tax and nothing for the product," Chan said. "Really, they have exploited a loophole and the sufferer will be the racing or sport on which they operate, which will not receive the revenue needed to keep going."

Davies said Betfair's policy was not to ignore the intellectual property rights of those who stage events. "We're keen to come to a deal about paying money back into Hong Kong racing, since we derive something from it in offering it to our UK userbase," he said. "So, in line with our policy as exemplified by our deals in the UK and Ireland, we are very keen to strike a rights deal with those who organise the sport in order to pay our way in its funding."

In addition to a wide range of sports, Betfair operates on racing throughout the UK, and in the United States, South Africa, Sweden and now Hong Kong. In October, Betfair passed a milestone when the punter-to-punter site matched more than £1 million on a single racing event, the Breeders' Cup Mile featuring British superhorse Rock Of Gibraltar.

However, Davies told the Racing Post in England that the figure "probably equated to about £100,000" in traditional terms. While that is dwarfed by Jockey Club pools of more than $100 million a race, Betfair's potential is immeasurable.

The company was launched in June 2000 and has undergone extraordinary growth. In October 2002, it was reported to be growing at five per cent per week. The firm now has more than 50,000 account holders.

11-01-2003, 09:33

If the JC re-openned my betting account - i wouldn`t bet with anyone else..

Have u seen the latest odds on Betfair - only early yet but theres already good value in there..

cheesebeast

11-01-2003, 11:32

Fields and form for Hong Kong races can be found at the following links

http://www.hongkongjockeyclub.com/english/racing/startersR1_e.asp

http://www.racing.scmp.com/english/free/racecard/index.asp

http://www.willhill.com/iibs/hongkong.pdf

Some live tote information may be provided at the link below, otherwise this is available for an annual subscription of HKD$500.

http://www.surewinracing.com/index.jsp

Broadcast can be found at the link below

http://www.hongkongjockeyclub.com/english/press/live_eng.asx

imaufo

11-01-2003, 16:47

I tried to get on to Betfair tonight...but I found that there were some problems with the betfair site ( though there were problems across the board it seems with several sites playing up, eg SCMP site)
In any case I wasnt able to get a bet on unfortunatly.

11-01-2003, 17:18

Bad luck UFO - again there were some generous punters out there.

In R1 i mopped up all the 17`s about Winning Laurels.

R5) I averaged $11 for Lucky Owners .

R6) Averaged $6.3 for Chivas Lad.

How longs this been going on ?

imaufo

12-01-2003, 12:27

From: parrapete Sent: 12/01/2003 4:15 PM

Betfair odds available on Tennis/ Sportstab

Hewitt $3.75 ..................$2.75
Agassi $7 .......................$6
Safin $12...................... $7.50
Federer $16.5 ...............$7
Moya $21...................... $13

Why would anyone bet with Sportstab?????????????

http://www.smh.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1041990143878_2003/01/11/12tennis.jpg

WHY?

imaufo

12-01-2003, 16:39

Net bet 'invader' sparks probe

Concerned Jockey Club chiefs and government officials seek legal guidance as Betfair exchange site targets Hong Kong

http://racing.scmp.com/english/images/news/cent11012003a.jpg

Value added: Come See You won at 2.6-1 on Wednesday night, but British betting exchange Betfair offered odds of up to 10-1. Picture by Kenneth Chan

ALAN AITKEN

The latest and potentially most lethal Internet predator to move into the Hong Kong market has sent the Jockey Club and government scrambling for firm legal opinion. Betfair, a British betting exchange, started regular operations on Hong Kong racing with Wednesday night's Happy Valley meeting - but it remains unclear whether it is contravening the Gambling Ordinance.

"We and the Home Affairs Department are still looking for an answer to that," said Jockey Club director of betting Henry Chan Shing-kai. "Even racing in the United Kingdom is looking at that question, because the way that Betfair operates appears to be outside the existing framework.

"The lawyers are still discussing whether what they do constitutes bookmaking, but if the question is whether someone in Hong Kong can legally place a bet through Betfair, well I believe the existing legislation covers any betting activities which originate in Hong Kong, whether it is betting, settling bets or the transfer of money to make bets with." British bookmakers have been operating via the Internet on Hong Kong racing for some time, and it is illegal for SAR residents to place a bet with them, but few experts regard them as a threat to Hong Kong turnover as they are notoriously "risk averse" and hold interest for only the smallest punters.

Betfair is another matter, however, as it takes no risk and therefore has no limit to the scope of its holdings. Rather than being an odds-setting organisation, a betting exchange is a facilitator and the Betfair name has become almost a generic term for all betting exchanges.

Punters establish cash accounts and then offer each other odds via the Betfair Web site, which is processing 12,000 bets a minute during peak periods in Britain. Betfair acts as a go-between to match the backer with the layer at whatever odds they agree, then it takes a small percentage from the winning side of any "matched" bet.

Mark Davies, Betfair's director of communications, said yesterday: "The Hong Kong legality question is obviously one that is brought up a lot, but we have taken a step back and kept away from it by ensuring our legality at a more fundamental level - namely by not offering the product to Hong Kong residents. Therefore we are not taking money out of the pool there." Betfair pronounces its handle in matched bets rather than turnover. If one punter lays a bet at 5-1 for £10, he risks £50 and the other punter risks £10 in taking the odds - this is regarded as £60 in matched bets. Thus the figures are difficult to compare with turnover in the classic sense.

Betfair operated on Hong Kong for the first time on International Day last month but Wednesday was its debut on bread-and-butter racing. At Happy Valley, Betfair matched bets totalling nearly £96,000, an average of close to £12,000 a race with more than £24,000 wagered on the fifth race and £17,000 on the January Cup won by Come See You.

With a disadvantage to the punter which usually hovers around one or two per cent - as opposed to 19 per cent on the Jockey Club's tote - better odds are offered on most, if not all, runners, especially strong chances. As much as 10-1 was bet about Come See You and, while Ivan Allan's stayer jumped away at 2.6-1 on the Jockey Club tote, he was still 4-1 on Betfair. Six of the other seven winners showed price advantages.

"The odds on Betfair are very attractive because the company pays little in the way of tax and nothing for the product," Chan said. "Really, they have exploited a loophole and the sufferer will be the racing or sport on which they operate, which will not receive the revenue needed to keep going." Davies said Betfair's policy was not to ignore the intellectual property rights of those who stage events.

"We're keen to come to a deal about paying money back into Hong Kong racing, since we derive something from it in offering it to our UK userbase," he said. "So, in line with our policy as exemplified by our deals in the UK and Ireland, we are very keen to strike a rights deal with those who organise the sport in order to pay our way in its funding."

In addition to a wide range of sports, Betfair operates on racing throughout the UK, and in the United States, South Africa, Sweden and now Hong Kong. In October, Betfair passed a milestone when the punter-to-punter site matched more than £1 million on a single racing event, the Breeders' Cup Mile featuring British superhorse Rock Of Gibraltar.

However, Davies told the Racing Post in England that the figure "probably equated to about £100,000" in traditional terms. While that is dwarfed by Jockey Club pools of more than $100 million a race, Betfair's potential is immeasurable.

The company was launched in June 2000 and has undergone extraordinary growth. In October 2002, it was reported to be growing at five per cent per week. The firm now has more than 50,000 account holders.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Cindy B

13-01-2003, 09:54

The following is meant to be informative (please move or delete if considered spam-like), with regards to Hong Kong racing.

Spinbet.com (UK based betting exchange), will go live in about three weeks, offering Hong Kong racing, although not to Hong Kong residents due to the current legal climate.

The exchange is currently in demo mode, and thus users may register and demo the technology for the next three weeks, while receiving a pre-launch bonus.

London based, and operating under a UK bookmaker's permit.

Commission 2% NET winnings.

Moneybookers.com will be available for deposits/withdrawals. Credit/debit cards will be added shortly (currently undergoing due diligence with the UK banks - long, laborious process).

Take Care,
Cindy Benson
www.spinbet.com
www.spingaming.com

13-01-2003, 10:32

Sounds interesting Cindy B.

I like the sound of 2% commission on winnings , does it get smaller if your a regular customer ?

zeditave

13-01-2003, 20:04

imaufo,

That's what you can get when the company holds a monopoly - access to the lazy cash punters via shops in the street and in pubs, the phone punters, and are also on the net (for those that should know better).

Numbers like that show exactly why they are so against competition!

Cindy B

14-01-2003, 10:43

Hello jb,

Commission really has been set-up as a simple, straight-forward 2% of net winnings. Indeed, there really is not a whole lot lower to go. However, if a member wanted to bring some substantial volume to the exchange, we would of course be willing to discuss to see if something could be worked out.

Take care,
Cindy Benson
www.spinbet.com
www.spingaming.com

14-01-2003, 12:13

Thx Cindy.

cheesebeast

14-01-2003, 18:53

Why HK authorities will not be releasing pictures

Published: 09/01/2003 (Features) Paul Haigh

From the Racing Post, UK

SITTING in front of the TV yesterday trying to decide who rode Best Mate in the King George (now let me guess Jason, was it AP McCoy?); how badly I needed a free Parker pen; how big "a cheque" all these people are going to receive on their birthdays is likely to be (I mean, it could be 5p, couldn't it?) and whether to phone the bloke from Z Cars or the woman from Absolutely Fabulous about all those (lovely phrase) "final expenses", it occurred to me that this column has actually come up with something of a first.
I refer, of course, to a correct prediction.
Some weeks ago we suggested (real journalists always say `we' in these circumstances as it makes them sound more important - and modest) that, as Betfair were producing markets on all races at the Hong Kong International meeting, it was surely only a matter of time before they, and the other exchanges, decided to tuck in to every race in what is now known as the `Special Administrative Region' of China, and by doing so add to the already considerable woes of what was until recently the healthiest and, man-for-man, most powerful racing administration in the world.
It's still much too early for us to start wasting any sympathy on the Hong Kong Jockey Club, whose general robustness in relation to our own remains about the same as that between, say, the brute who won the truck-pulling competition in World's Strongest Man and Dame Thora Hird. But these have not been a good two or three years for the HKJC and, whereas it once looked utterly impregnable, it is now looking quite pregnable indeed.
Turnover, still monstrous by our standards, is now down by almost a quarter on its high point at the end of the last century; and, if it didn't seem ridiculous even to think such a thing, you could almost say the beneficiary of the perfect tote monopoly is actually running scared.
The reason is not so much the competition from internet bookmakers. The law forbidding any Hong Kong resident from dealing with such operators, even on racing and sporting events taking place outside the SAR, is rigidly enforced; and, in any case, if anyone were silly enough to want to risk a jail sentence in order to punt with external bookmakers, they'd only find Victor Chandler and others respecting Hong Kong law by refusing to take their bets.
The reason (and, `we' admit it, this contradicts `our' contention of last month) is largely the competition racing is getting from Premiership football. Betting on anything except racing is illegal in Hong Kong. But Hong Kong racing, featuring mostly handicaps, brilliantly assessed by Irishman Ciaran Kenneally, is fiendishly difficult for the average punter. Just to give some idea: only one in five favourites oblige.
Football on the other hand, a simple game on which anyone can have an opinion and back it, is much more accessible to the average Chang in the street.
Illegal betting, done with a nod and a wink, is much harder to police. And the SAR government, concerned at the loss of betting revenue on which it has become dependent, has made the classic error of exacerbating the situation by increasing take out on the Hong Kong tote in a vain attempt to maintain that revenue at previous levels. By doing so, it is driving the betting public further into the arms of the illegals.
The latest plan is to legalise betting on football through a government tote - a move that may well satisfy the government's revenue addiction but could prove disastrous for the HKJC, which has come to take its betting monopoly for granted.
So what's all this got to do with us in frozen Britain, and the fact that now we can bet again if we want to on events at Happy Valley and Sha Tin?
In our present climatic emergency, that may seem quite attractive - more attractive, anyway, than the meaningless cartoon races betting shop proprietors are currently using to insult their clientele.
There are now a few calls for us to be shown Hong Kong racing again, now we have a more internationalist mentality, and see whether it takes this time, as it failed to do a decade or so ago.
Those making such calls would be ill-advised to hold their breath. In its present, entirely justified, siege mentality, the HKJC will be doing everything in its power - whatever that may be - to see the Betfair experiment fails.
The very last thing they'll be doing is releasing pictures of the racing that can only help the Betfair boys build a market and so encourage the HKJC's own increasingly disloyal punters to defect.

Handy Harry

15-01-2003, 15:03

Centre Link (http://www.centreracing.com.au/)

Was searching for something else but have come accross another Northern Territoy bookmaker that you can bet with on Hong Kong races.

Enter here for Australia's most comprehensive betting site offering:

Fixed Odds
Multibets

SP (starting price)

Tote prices

On all metropolitan races, major provincial and country meetings and specific international races.

Our fully integrated web site enables you to easily and quickly place bets with just a $1 minimum.

CentreRacing is operated by Terry Lillis, the Centrebet founder and a registered bookmaker since 1969.

The Hong Kong Season for 2002/2003 has started.

We will be providing an internet-only service for every HK meeting.

Handy Harry

15-01-2003, 21:58

You currently have 2 Commission Points.

This is calculated as follows:

Commission Points at the end of last week: 1 Your rate this week: 5.0%, see table below

Points expired at the end of last week: 0 (15% of 1, adjusted for rounding.)

Commission Points earned this week : 1

Total: 2 (Your rate next week will be 5.0% or lower)

THE MORE YOU BET THE LESS YOU PAY:

Betfair's Commission Structure Explained:
Betfair's customer incentive scheme is determined on a sliding scale, the lowest rate of which is 2%. The top rate is set at 5%. Each Betfair user will be allocated a level on a weekly basis. The more you bet the less commission you pay.

Users will be awarded commission points every time they bet. Commission Points are earned from your net profit or loss per market. You can gain 1 point per HK$300 profit or loss per market. For example, if you profit HK$2400 on a single market, you would gain 8 commission points. If your overall loss is HK$1200 on a single market then you would gain 4 commission points.

The more points you accrue, the lower your commission will be. Your weekly volumes are calculated on Sunday evenings and your new commission rate is set. Commission levels are not determined purely from the previous week's spend. Instead they are based on spending over a much longer period. Points from previous weeks decay over time, so it is possible that your rate can go up as well as down. Thus, points for the current week carry more weight than points for last week which in turn carry more weight than points from the week before etc.

Commission will be charged according to the rate each user was on at the time of settlement and not at the time the bet was placed - your account statement will show the rate at which commission has been charged on each event. Here is a table with the betfair commission rates and points:
Commission structure:

Points: Rates: Points: Rates:
0 - 69 5% 2,125 - 2,446 3.5%
70 - 143 4.9% 2,447- 2,819 3.4%
144 - 220 4.8% 2,820 - 3,249 3.3%
221 - 306 4.7% 3,250 - 3,740 3.2%
307 - 396 4.6% 3,741 - 4,310 3.1%
397 - 495 4.5% 4,311 - 4,964 3%
496 - 606 4.4% 4,965 - 5,722 2.9%
607 - 729 4.3% 5,723 - 6,606 2.8%
730 - 864 4.2% 6,607 - 7,629 2.7%
865 - 1,012 4.1% 7,630 - 8,809 2.6%
1,013 - 1,181 4% 8,810 - 10,187 2.5%
1,182 - 1,374 3.9% 10,188 - 11,790 2.4%
1,375 - 1,591 3.8% 11,791 - 13,647 2.3%
1,592 - 1,843 3.7% 13,648 - 15,821 2.2%
1,844 - 2,124 3.6% 15,822 - 18,359 2.1%
> 18,359 2%

I think that this is a great idea?

jack

16-01-2003, 08:46

How did Betfair go last night? Were the pools any better?

Tosser

16-01-2003, 11:15

Wasn't taking too much notice, but they seemed quite small - maybe between 3,000 and 10,000 quid a race matched

16-01-2003, 11:20

Jack , i think they were bigger - i backed one horse at long odds & had him going for about 200k.

The English punters who are prob the most active ,even on HK races prefer Wed night as Sat/Sun races are run in the wee hours.

Layed a few winners , so not a good night for me but still got $18 for High Sky.

Again prob every winner was a better price than the tote , unsure about Highlight ?

jack

16-01-2003, 11:27

I'll have to take a closer look. I'm sure it's the best thing since sliced bread, but they won't kick goals on Asian racing until they get asians involved. Cannot flourish with just pommies and a few aussies and kiwis playing.

16-01-2003, 11:36

Fully agree , betfair needs Asians in there but its possible they may never arrive ?

Scarper

16-01-2003, 12:58

From what i saw its the lack of people wanting to back runners thats keeping the 'matched' amounts down. It seem that if you want you can get set on most horses to win about GBP20000 and i would be sure there is more to be had if this all got snapped up. last night did see a fair bit of action of longer odds horses - i saw P75 go at 90:1 and another load on the same horse around 60-70 - started about 45 on the HK tote. with th bigger prices it would be silly for asians not to get involved. maybe the introduction of quinella betting would make the difference.

cheesebeast

16-01-2003, 14:42

Last night's total bets matched in GBP were

R1 2,171
R2 13,314
R3 7,435
R4 7,766
R5 12,439
R6 4,433
R7 10,161
R8 11,738

masun

16-01-2003, 17:46

but still got $18 for High Sky

Just curious as to how the payout for High Sky was decided since it finished dead heat with New Planet. Did the layers still have to pay the full amount?

16-01-2003, 17:56

Masun , i was curious on this also.

I only recieved half of whats expected so..

Tosser

17-01-2003, 03:47

From Betfair's Rules and Regs (I've filled in the numbers in the example):

"Dead Heat Rule

The Dead Heat Rule applies to bets on an event when there are more winners than expected, or the result is a draw or tie and there is no such market offered.

For each matched bet on a winning selection, the stake money is first reduced in proportion to the number of winners expected divided by the number of actual winners. The winnings are then paid to the successful backers on this 'reduced stake' (reduced stake x odds) and the remaining stake money is paid to the appropriate layers.

For example, assume there is a dead heat for first place between three horses. 'Client A' has backed one of the winners for 300 at digital odds of 4.0 and 'Client B' has taken the other side of this bet. When the event is settled, the stake (300) is divided by the number of winners (3) to calculate the reduced stake (100) and the remainder given to the layer (200). The backer then receives the odds matched (4.0) multiplied by the reduced stake (i.e 4.0 x 100). In this example, Client A's net winnings are 100, and Client B net losses are 100. "

This seems logical. With the dead heat on Wed night, I had profits on both High Sky and New Planet - after the dead heat I divided those profits by 2 on both horses as that is what I expected to receive - and that is what I got.

hobbes

17-01-2003, 09:01

that must be a very rare occurrence -- ie a dead heat and you have backed both horses. very well done.

anyway no problems with the dead heat rule but i am concerned with the rule4 deduction for scratched horses. the deduction is apparently based on overnight prices which may bear little relation to the final prices.

also if they are basing the % deduction on those applied to english racing same would not apply to HK where the favourite / longshot bias always inherent in bookies prices does not exist in HK.

Tosser

17-01-2003, 09:50

I must confess I only backed High Sky and only had a profit on New Planet due to laying other horses ...

I agree about the Rule 4 deduction, but I guess Betfair would need to have the reduction factors set when they open the markets for betting. I haven't thought through the ramifications, but changing those factors once a market has opened might present problems.

imaufo

17-01-2003, 13:49

What's the Secret of Winning Big on Sports Wagers?

Written by Alan English 2002-12-20 11:00:20
Printable version

What’s the secret of winning big on sports wagers? Well, try asking 10 big-time bettors about the fundamental rules that guide their betting activity. You can be sure that top of the list will be this one: only bet when the odds are right.

When all’s said and done there are two ways to bet on sports – smart and stupid.

When it comes to sports wagering, bookies have always been in control. They set the odds and their sole aim is to manipulate the market in their favour, so that they win no matter what.

That was then!

Now, stand by for person-to-person betting. When you log on to TradeSports you take the bookie out of the equation, along with the vig that pays the mortgage on his mansion.

After pioneering a unique sports trading exchange which brought all buzz of trading Wall Street stocks to the sports arena, TradeSports has now launched a new Betting Screen interface which makes the trading concept more accessible to the sports bettor who is more familiar with the language of sports wagering.

TradeSports is a true exchange. It’s not a sportsbook.

TradeSports takes no position on any of the events its members bet on – it makes its money by charging a small commission on each bet. Just like in a stock exchange, it’s the players themselves that decide the prices or odds and the odds on any bet rises and falls depending on market sentiment.

Steve in Cincinnati thinks one thing, Joe in Jacksonville thinks the opposite. Up to now, they could go to two different bookies, both of whom would take a vig and thus offer a price reflecting the fact that because he has to balance his book (so that he can turn a profit), his odds are not what they might be.

With exchange betting, it’s different. When buyers and sellers come together in a fair market, the result is better odds for everyone. Why would somebody offer you 2-1 against a team when a bookie is only going 7-4? Because that person does not have a book to balance and feels strongly that the team will lose.

It took the power of the internet to finally give bookies something to think about. Previously, you could never have brought enough people together to form a proper market.

Now it’s happening – thanks to TradeSports.

The word is spreading and in November the exchange set several records, including the number of active traders and trades in a single day. After less than a year in operation, TradeSports will soon boast a turnover approaching $1 million on its busiest days.

And the more people that come to the exchange, the better the value will get. Call it the snowball effect.

A liquid exchange will beat the bookies every time and that’s why TradeSports is going places fast.

Finally, an interesting stat. Close to 50 per cent of bettors on TradeSports are winners, compare that to your Sportsbook.

Now ask yourself a question and answer truthfully – what percentage of the bets you strike with your Sportsbook are winners?

Enough said. It’s time to change. Time to check out TradeSports. It will take you 10 minutes to understand it, but it’s a dead cert to be your best investment in 2003.

imaufo

17-01-2003, 13:54

Written by Alan English 2003-01-02 10:29:37
Printable version

It may not happen very often these days, but sometimes Britain leads and the US follows. Right now, it’s happening in the world of wagering. The British bookies are running for cover. A revolution has swept the country – it’s called exchange betting. And guess what? It’s about to happen in the US too.

What’s it all about? Let’s take a practical example. The New York Jets play Indianapolis Saturday. If you want to bet on this game, you can get in contact with a bookie – or you can join the revolution and try exchange betting on TradeSports.com.

What makes exchange betting different and better? There’s one big reason – because it cuts out the middle man, namely the bookie. Most bettors don’t even realize that they are being systematically fleeced. Slowly but surely they will lose their money. It has always been that way. It’s a numbers game and the bookies crunch the numbers. They decide the odds and you can take them or leave them.

On TradeSports it’s you and people like you that decide the odds. You can bet for or against something. That means you can effectively become a bookmaker yourself.

Take Saturday’s game. The Jets (9-7) are looking good. They’ve gone from a terrible 1-4 start to the playoffs. They’ve got a new quarterback, Chad Pennington, who looks like he might be good enough to take them all the way to the Super Bowl.

Naturally, they are favorites against the Colts (10-6). But wait. Pennington’s opposite number, Peyton Manning, has some seriously good options around him, such as the terrific Marvin Harrison, Edgerrin James and Marcus Pollard.

So there will be plenty out there who like the Colts. What TradeSports does is it offers a platform for bettors who think one way to bet in real time against bettors who think the opposite. That’s why exchange betting is a vastly superior model to betting with bookmakers – because bettors with an opinion are in a position to offer better odds than a bookie who has to balance his book and take a vig into the bargain.

It’s the kind of betting system the internet was born to facilitate. And it couldn’t be easier to bet. The new TradeSports betting interface allows you to bet in moneyline, fractions, digital odds or the 0-100 system.

It’s at its best during a game. It’s your judgement on the line and you get to make as many judgement calls as you like. You can bet for or against a team numerous times in the same game and if you’re judgment is correct, as the game ebbs and flows, you’re making money every minute.

If there’s a more exciting thing to do on the internet, then this writer hasn’t come across it yet! The adrenalin rushes are intense and it makes a game many times more exciting. Sometimes you’ll find yourself in a strong position. Do you hang on to it – at the risk of losing everything if the game turns around – or cash up and get out while you’re ahead? Decisions like these are the lifeblood of being an exchange bettor.

Not all bookies in the US realise it yet, but the revolution is coming and they should be afraid. Very afraid.

cheesebeast

17-01-2003, 14:20

More free advertising for Betfair on the back page of the SCMP sport's section this morning.

Betting exchanges 'a global threat'
'Every jurisdiction in the world should work with government to ban this,' says Jockey Club as a new firm enters the fray

ALAN AITKEN

Betting exchanges are "the biggest worldwide threat to racing's integrity" and racing jurisdictions around the globe should pressure their governments to outlaw them, the Hong Kong Jockey Club said yesterday.
Jockey Club director of racing Winfried Engelbrecht-Bresges said even the issue of turnover piracy was secondary to the threat posed to racing's image by betting exchanges. His comments came as it emerged that a second betting exchange, Spinbet, was set to follow Betfair by launching operations on the Hong Kong market.

"For me, this is the biggest threat to racing's integrity, and it is a worldwide threat," said Engelbrecht-Bresges. "I admire the idea of the exchange - it is very clever - and I don't question the integrity of the people running them. In fact, I can see that the idea may have some merit on sports where integrity is not a central issue.

"However, their growth in relation to horseracing is very negative and will place racing control in an impossible position. Every jurisdiction in the world should work with government to ban this."

A betting exchange is radically different from a traditional Internet bookmaker in that it is not an odds-setting organisation. Punters establish cash accounts and then offer each other odds via the betting exchange's Web site. The betting exchange acts as a go-between to match the backer with the layer at whatever odds they agree and then takes a small percentage from the winning side of any "matched" bet.

Betfair started regular operations on Hong Kong racing with last week's Happy Valley meeting, joining overseas and illegal bookmakers in the lucrative SAR market.

Engelbrecht-Bresges went on: "People might say that we are overreacting, that the temptation or the capability to make money from a losing horse has always been there in the past. But what I am saying is, yes, it may have been there as an illegal act but now it has a legalised platform."

Commentators have likened the exchanges to trading on the stock market but Engelbrecht-Bresges was at pains to dispel the notion. "This is nothing like the stock market, or even like operating race betting in an environment of licensed bookmakers," he said.

"Every investor on the stock market has stringent registration requirements before they can invest, so there is the capability of monitoring actions. Exchanges are ideal vehicles for illegal bookmakers to balance their books, too, so their operation assists that area of gambling.

"I understand the people at Betfair have been very willing to co-operate with authorities in England but even with their assistance, it is very difficult to be sure of who is doing what."

Engelbrecht-Bresges said an insider with knowledge that a horse could not win a race, perhaps for reasons of health or fitness, should not be presented with the easy opportunity to profit from it. "What of the owner who knows his horse has some problem and can't win, but he can profit from it losing? There is already an example in England of a horse being laid on a betting exchange, its odds moved out from 7-1 to 67-1 and it broke down in the race.

"What about the unfashionable jockey with just a couple of no-chance rides who finds he is drawn next to the favourite? He has the opportunity to hamper the favourite and prevent it from winning and now has a way to make money from it."

Engelbrecht-Bresges added: "In the past, our only concern would have been if someone had a link with an illegal bookmaker. Not everyone is in that position, but anyone can gain access to a betting exchange. For the first time, there is access for anyone to bet on and to profit from a horse losing.

"I don't want to suggest that racing has an integrity problem, but this kind of operation creates a situation that is very high risk. Suddenly, racing control authorities will have to worry about everyone involved in racing."

Engelbrecht-Bresges said the job of the stewards would become a nightmare. "Every time an incident happened in a race, everyone would be asking themselves the same question - was it an accident? There are many accidental occurrences every race and they each have their effect on the final result but overwhelmingly they are accidental.

"How does racing anywhere deal with the alternative perception? And we are especially concerned in Hong Kong, where there is so much attention on everything that happens in racing."

With Betfair commencing full-time Hong Kong operations and Spinbet ready to follow suit in the coming weeks, Jockey Club director of betting Henry Chan Shing-kai is preparing a letter to the Home Affairs Department to advise it formally of the latest development in the Internet gambling scene.

"Obviously, it will be up to the government to decide if the existing Internet betting legislation is adequate but it cannot be aware of everything. The government is normally aware of something when it is on their desk and I think it is our duty as the experts in the field of betting to keep them informed," Chan said.

"Now there is a legal platform allowing people to lay bets against a horse, anyone can be a freelance bookmaker. We have to encourage the government to monitor the situation here and through its offices in the UK."

British bookmakers have been operating via the Internet on Hong Kong racing for some time, and it is illegal for SAR residents to place a bet with them, but few experts regard them as a threat to Hong Kong turnover as they are "risk averse" and hold interest for only the smallest punters.

A betting exchange, however, takes no risk and therefore has no limit to the scope of its holdings.

imaufo

17-01-2003, 14:39

Engelbrecht-Bresges said an insider with knowledge that a horse could not win a race, perhaps for reasons of health or fitness, should not be presented with the easy opportunity to profit from it. "What of the owner who knows his horse has some problem and can't win, but he can profit from it losing? There is already an example in England of a horse being laid on a betting exchange, its odds moved out from 7-1 to 67-1 and it broke down in the race.

I find these sorts of arguements intruiging.

These are the types of comments that you would normally expect to find sitting at a dinner table with a bunch of oldies who often question racing's integrity ( after you have casually mentioned apres' entree, that you enjoy betting on the races)

" Oh, I would never bet on a racehorse...how do you know that it isnt going to be pulled up by the jockey???" one of them will undoubtedly say.

Usually the reply goes something like " oh well, they have stewards that are very good these days, and camera's on every corner...bla bla bla"

But there is another answer. And that is that racing, when you look at countries like Hong Kong and big races in Australia and Japan etc offer big prizemoney on their races...especially their top class races.

So if you are in luck and actually own a good horse that has a good chance of winning say the Derby, why the hell would you pull it up? First of all you would have to forgo the first prizemeoney. In the AJC Derby that would be 1 million +.
You would have to lay a large amount in order to recoup the lost prizemoney and make a profit.

I doubt if you would be able to do that just yet on any betting exchange.

As for Hong Kong, the betting and prizemeoney there is always huge...and I think that you would have a hard time trying to convince someone like Ivan Alllan or John Size to race a lame horse, instruct the jockey to pull it up ( and risk heavy fines and a world wide ban...see Robbie Fradd fiasco) and bet against a good horse that can earn all concerned a fortune in prizemoney.

:p

cheesebeast

17-01-2003, 15:36

Engelbrecht-Bresges said the job of the stewards would become a nightmare. "Every time an incident happened in a race, everyone would be asking themselves the same question - was it an accident? There are many accidental occurrences every race and they each have their effect on the final result but overwhelmingly they are accidental.

I think EB is presenting a fairly tenuous argument here - if HK has the best judiciary in the world, then surely they should be looking out for this sort of thing in the cause of their normal business.

I believe Betfair are in the process of requesting that all account holders "identify" their true identity in the event that something fishy occurs re betting patterns, if so, they will turn all betting records over to the authorities who would then be able to check through all transactions in a race - sure, there are ways of getting an acquaintance to do your betting for you, but I don't think a heck of a lot of the merits of EB's argument.

There is already an example in England of a horse being laid on a betting exchange, its odds moved out from 7-1 to 67-1 and it broke down in the race.

I suspect this horse went out to 67-1 with in running betting when the horse had tailed off and had no chance in the race?

masun

17-01-2003, 17:04

On the whole, I find EB's arguments very weak. Sure, there may be the odd race when something fishy happens. On the other hand, many punters already suspect that there's something fish about many of the races. As far as most punters are concerned, the advantage of getting better prices far outweigh all such non-arguments.

imaufo

17-01-2003, 17:41

The Jockey Club has a right to be worried...but not for the reasons outlined. They know that if Betfair and other betting exchanges take off in HK and China (and they will unless the JC can somehow ban access) , the revenue to the club will drop. However...they may decide to drop the levels of t/o tax in order to remain competitive......which may have the added bonus of increasing turnover.
Or perhaps they may come to some sort of arrangement with Betfair and Co...who knows.

zeditave

17-01-2003, 18:37

Cheesebeast,
That market move on Regal Insult was pre-race, and it's also slightly wrong, it was 7-1 out to 49-1.

Tosser

18-01-2003, 01:11

I'm trying to feel some sympathy for the HKJC.

I'm still trying - nup, can't feel any

A betting exchange the biggest threat to racing's integrity? What a load of horse dung! I would have thought the biggest threat to racing's integrity are those within who try to fix a race - by whatever means. If everyone within racing was pure and lily white, then there wouldn't be a problem. :D

zeditave

18-01-2003, 02:20

can someone please describe how a betting exchange is a bigger threat to integrity than the illegal bookies? aren't we talking about the squeakiest clean racing circuit of them all here?

hobbes

18-01-2003, 08:58

I'm trying to feel some sympathy for the HKJC.

I'm still trying - nup, can't feel any.

LOL. agree with your later argument btw.

can someone please describe how a betting exchange is a bigger threat to integrity than the illegal bookies? aren't we talking about the squeakiest clean racing circuit of them all here?

zeditave --- of course it is not even close. the illegal bookies would be / have been a far greater threat.

re "squeakiest clean racing circuit" that is a nice thought. i suspect it is not far from the truth currently.

masun

19-01-2003, 13:32

I have a question which is tangentially related to this thread. How much does a packet of cigarettes cost in various countries, e.g. the UK, Oz, NZ, Japan, US?

What prompts me to ask this question is that a friend, who is a smoker, came to visit me yesterday. I gave up smoking years ago and had no idea how much a packet of cigarettes cost. He told me it's $32 (about US$4). For me, that's very expensive, especially in view of the present economic hard times. My friend told me that he has stopped buying cigarettes from regular shops and is buying contraband cigarettes instead. He went on to say that almost everyone he knew were getting their fags from the smugglers, mostly vietnamese. To me, that's really quite alarming, the loss of tax revenue must be very substantial.

The parellel with Betfair in Asia is that the government has not fully grasped the fact that people now have choices. If they don't like the prices, they will shop elsewhere. The possibility of being caught buying contraband cigarettes must be higher than that of betting with Betfair. If most people are not averse to getting cigarettes from smugglers, they will not be deterred from betting with Betfair.

Scarper

19-01-2003, 18:19

If most people are not averse to getting cigarettes from smugglers, they will not be deterred from betting with Betfair.

i would like to think so, but as it takes effort etc to open accounts and the belief that this would be easier to prove if they ever did get caught due to records etc is maybe hindering betfairs progress here. If it was a cash deal like the cigarettes i have no doubt betfair would exploded.

Handy Harry

20-01-2003, 06:20

By Max Presnell, Sydney Morning Herald

January 20 2003

Betting exchanges, regarded as "the biggest worldwide threat to racing's integrity", look to be being primed to tap the Australian market.

Already, I believe, Betfair, the major player in the field, has made overtures to Racing NSW to gamble on the state's events.

Operating through the internet, punters lodge a deposit with Betfair and can either back or lay horses. Betfair takes a five-per cent commission of winning wagers, minimal by comparison to what is taken out by totes and bookmakers.

Betfair operates on racing in the United Kingdom, the United States, South Africa, Sweden and now Hong Kong. Last October, a punter was reported to have backed a horse to win a million pounds in a single bet on the Breeders Cup in the United States. The company is also reputed to have 50,000 account holders and processes 12,000 bets a minute during peak periods in Britain.

According to Hong Kong Jockey Club executive director of racing Winfried Engelbrecht-Bresges, and one of the world's foremost turf administrators, betting exchanges should be shunned, not embraced.

"I admire the idea of the exchange - it is very clever - and I don't question the integrity of the people running them," he told The South China Morning Post recently.

However, racing control, he maintained, would be placed in an
impossible position by betting exchanges.

"Every jurisdiction in the world should work with government to ban this," Engelbrecht-Bresges said.

"For the first time there is access for anyone to bet on and profit from a horse losing ...

"What about the unfashionable jockey with just a couple of no-chance rides who finds he is drawn next to the favourite? He has the opportunity to hamper the favourite and prevent it from winning and now has a way to make money from it.

"Every time an incident happened in a race, everyone would be asking themselves the same question: was it an accident? There are many accidental occurrences every race and they each have their effect on the final result, but overwhelmingly they are accidental."

At Happy Valley recently, in an early bid for the Hong Kong market, Betfair matched bets totalling nearly £96,000 ($259,200). Better prices were gained by punters using Betfair for six of the seven winners.

Considering the grip TAB Limited enjoys on NSW racing, it will doubtless flex its political muscle against any Betfair intrusion, yet the innovation does have supporters.

"A revolution has rocked gambling in Britain," Andrew Beyer wrote in The Washington Post. "So-called sports betting exchanges, exemplified by a company called Betfair, have enthralled gamblers, giving them unprecedented opportunities, while generating fear and intense opposition from established bookmaking firms."

Handy Harry

21-01-2003, 13:23

ALAN AITKEN

Leading British-based betting exchange Betfair has countered criticism from the Hong Kong Jockey Club, calling itself "a big stick with which to fight corruption" in racing.

Betfair director of communications Mark Davies made the comment in response to Jockey Club director of racing Winfried Engelbrecht-Bresges' description of betting exchanges as "the biggest threat to horseracing's integrity worldwide".

Davies said the opposite was true. "Properly run, and in tandem with the authorities, the product that Betfair created is a big stick with which to fight corruption and uphold the integrity of sport, but those authorities must be prepared to use it," he said.

Davies said that by Engelbrecht-Bresges' admission, integrity problems pre-dated Betfair and "may have been there as an illegal act". Davies added: "Betfair creates a platform which fully audits every move, so the potential to fight the problem now exists in a very powerful way where previously there was none."

Davies reiterated that Betfair does not seek to operate in opposition to racing authorities. "For maximum effect, the exchange needs to work alongside those who run sport. To this end we have been working very hard in the UK, and wish to do the same in Hong Kong.

"There is misunderstanding about how Betfair operates and, from the comments quoted in the South China Morning Post , we have further work to do in explaining it."

A betting exchange is radically different from a traditional Internet bookmaker in that it is not an odds-setting organisation. Punters establish cash accounts and then offer each other odds via the betting exchange's Web site. The betting exchange acts as a go-between to match the backer with the layer at whatever odds they agree and then takes a small percentage from the winning side of any matched bet.

According to Davies, Betfair's ability to draw information from vast amounts of betting data offers an unrivalled weapon for upholding integrity.

"We download 20 megabytes of data per second at busy times and keep that information indefinitely. We know every bet, matched or not, its size, the time it was placed, the time it was cancelled, the IP address it came from, every credit card and bank it is traceable to, etc," he explained.

"Every bet can be linked to every other bet by the same person. This is a deep, detailed, and unprecedented trail - more detailed than anything conventional bookmaking has ever provided, and, it goes without saying, a million miles away from what happens when bookmaking takes place illegally.

"We are making it very clear to the Hong Kong Jockey Club that we want them to benefit from the technological developments that we bring - they can make whatever rules of racing they want and we can help them to enforce those rules as never before."

Davies said that comparisons with stock market regulation of investors were overwhelmingly in Betfair's favour. "Mr Engelbrecht-Bresges' statement that 'every investor on the stock market has stringent registration requirements before they can invest' is obviously untrue," Davies said.

"You and I can buy or sell shares as we please, without any regulatory authority asking anything about us. We just go through a licensed broker."

And Davies also pointed out that the case cited by Engelbrecht-Bresges of a horse who eased spectacularly on Betfair, then broke down in a race, only highlighted Betfair's positives.

"We brought this to the [British] Jockey Club's attention, which is how it got out in the first place," he said. "The horse drifted on-course from 7-1 to 10-1, but on Betfair went to 49-1. It was reported that it went to 99-1, but that was in-running, after it pulled up, so that figure is less relevant."

Davies said the firm had happily co-operated with the Jockey Club in Britain over the matter. "The total amount involved was just short of £15,000 matched money - that is, on both sides of the bet," he said. "Admittedly, for legal reasons, we were not allowed to give the bettor's name to the Jockey Club unless they had a warrant, and that required the event of criminal activity.

"We advised them that we saw no evidence of criminal activity - given the account involved, the timing of the bets, the normal patterns from that account, etc, so they took it no further."

Davies said Betfair was involved in making this investigative process more open and that there would soon be changes to the terms and conditions accepted by all Betfair account holders.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Scarper

21-01-2003, 14:48

I agree with betfairs veiw in that their platform is useful for fighting corruption and that its certainly much better than the illegal bookies who were maybe responsible for dirty racing in the past. The jockey club as usual came up with all the wrong responses....(unusual for EB though!!)

21-01-2003, 16:00

I wish the JC would re-open my betting account , then there`d be no need to bet anywhere else.

Scarper

21-01-2003, 16:34

cheesebeast

22-01-2003, 16:35

South China Morning Post 22-1-03

ALAN AITKEN

The open debate on the merits, pitfalls and machinations of betting exchanges continues to take space in newspapers around the world, with Betfair reported now to have turned its attention to discussions on Australia. How it is being received in Sydney is as yet unknown but, given that a law similar to the Betting Ordinance Amendments was enacted there somewhat earlier than in Hong Kong, Betfair is not likely to find the greeting any warmer.
In Hong Kong, meanwhile, a siege mentality seems to have been adopted on gambling, whereby every and any threat must be repelled in principle and entirely, rather than examined and milked for any good it may contain.

The Jockey Club's rigid stance on exchanges as clever but ultimately a power for evil and a threat to integrity throughout the world is surely taking it too far, and must make it impossible to include the concept in any scenario on soccer betting operations, where it may have been the ideal.

Betfair's Mark Davies has been at pains to explain how the firm has massive potential for fighting activities which threaten racing's integrity and that it offers access to much more information on the who, what, where and when of betting than any previous system.

The Jockey Club's Winfried Engelbrecht-Bresges has countered now that if evidence of criminal activity is required before names are given out to racing authorities, then what constitutes a serious integrity breach in the sport's own terms may not lead to assistance from the firms, rendering such promises empty.

A jockey who bets is breaching the rules of racing but is not undertaking a criminal activity, even if the jockey was betting against his or her own rides. Would a name be handed to racing authorities for betting through an exchange?

Likewise, he believes that betting exchanges are morally wrong as they provide the opportunities for wrongdoing or insider trading. An owner or trainer who is aware of some health reason why a horse probably won't win may choose to benefit from that inside knowledge and lay the horse.

They may also take the extra step to ensure it doesn't surprise, if given a financial reason to take the step. At the end of the day, though, surely there is merit to the view that people have never had any problem finding crooked ways to do things if that is what they seek and someone always will.

There is nothing to stop any so-called insider betting legally against his own horse through the Jockey Club tote if he or she has a "sure lose" favourite. It comes down to the policing of the game, and exchanges do promise a more defined money trail than at any previous time.

To hold them to that kind of promise would first require some acceptance of their potential and see where it could lead. There is a view among some in racing, that authorities everywhere are trying to hold back the tide - that the Jockey Club for instance has erred in fixing its flag so determinedly to the mast of the questionable Good Neighbour policy in an ocean where sharks have always been in the waters and are now swimming the Web in ever increasing numbers.

Regardless of any technological improvement, the Club is sticking to the old roads and how things have always been and continuing to pray for a return to the boom days of 1997, instead of looking for new directions.

Betting exchanges will thrive simply because the customer will overwhelmingly want them and one has to ponder whether it is an error not to look more closely at something the customer wants. The guys running the Jockey Club are powerful, smart businessmen. Would they so readily shout down a rival's innovation in any other business, or would they find out what it could do for them?

cheesebeast

22-01-2003, 21:57

Have a bet with Betfair on the racing from Italy tonight if you feel that way inclined!

Ciao.;) ;) ;)

jrb

23-01-2003, 08:42

I don't know about betting on Italy, but the sooner we get betfair here in Australia on a permanent basis, the better. They whet our appetites with selective races during the Melbourne Spring, and there are plenty of us who have a taste for more !

04-02-2003, 06:18

The surprising shutdown of betfair yesterday put me in a vulnerable position - i had about a 100k of unmatched bets out there & for 5 races had no idea if i was on or not.
What made it worse was all my backs lost & half my lays won .

Anyway the gang running betfair seem to be a very honest bunch.....thank goodness.

Handy Harry

06-02-2003, 06:33

On Tuesday February 4th we introduced some changes to the Betfair site in response to customer requests and feedback.

Mainly focused on increasing the flexibility, performance and relevance of the menus, these features are described below and can be viewed now at :-

www.betfair.com

Please also note that we now have a special freecall number for Australian clients – 1800 759 354 – for Help Desk enquiries. This is currently available from 1900-0900 AEDST.

For those of you that may have have missed it, you can now bet in Australian dollars. To change currencies, you will need to open a new account, then contact the Help Desk via info@betfair.com to transfer your balance and commission rate from your old account if applicable.

Menu Enhancements
Users will now be able to choose between :

1) the menu that shows ‘All Markets’

2) a regional menu tailored to local interests (UK & Ireland, Australia & New Zealand, RSA, N. America or Nordic are available now but more are planned) and

3) a new customised ‘My Markets’ view.

The ‘My Markets’ functionality allows items at any level in the menu hierarchy to be listed as a top level item, so that selected markets of interest to an individual user are only ever one click away.

It is possible to switch between these menus at any time.

We have also made some improvements to menu performance. Due to the large and growing number of markets on offer, the initial download of the menu and subsequent periodic refresh activity had started to cause delays, especially for users on slower connections. Menu items will now be downloaded at the time they are needed.

Time Zone Option
We have introduced a time zone option which can be found in the Profile section within My Account. This enables users to request that their local time be used in displaying their markets, bets and other data.

Refer A Friend Scheme
A GBP 500 (or local currency equivalent) Top Referral Prize has been added to our existing Refer A Friend scheme. Details can be found via links on the homepage.

Other Homepage Changes
> Information about the day’s events can now be accessed via the ‘Today’s Live Events’ link.

> We have now included a link to the Betfair Affiliate Programme. If you run a website and want to earn money from sending people through to Betfair, then click on the link on the Betfair homepage to find out more.

If you have any questions, comments or suggestions regarding any of the above please feel free to submit them by replying to this email.

Best regards,

The Betfair Team

Scarper

10-02-2003, 15:21

Ive been getting this rubbish for the last few hours when tring to get onto betfair. Its something to do with Datebase SQL .... anyone else having the same problem?

INSERT /*+ APPEND */ INTO tbl_user_session (session_id, ip_address, timestamp_lastaction, server_name, lang_id,super_partner_id,partner_id,sub_partner_id ,region_id, timezone) VALUES ( ?, ?, SYSDATE, ? , ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?)
SupPartner partner sid 0,bfweb

cheesebeast

10-02-2003, 15:55

I'm on Betfair OK at the moment.

cheesebeast

28-02-2003, 19:58

Jockey Club officials set to play a key role in Asian Racing Conference

28 February 2003

The 29th Asian Racing Conference in Auckland from March 1 to March 6 is being staged to strengthen the Asian Racing Federation's position in global racing.

A 25-strong delegation from the Hong Kong Jockey Club is travelling to New Zealand for the various Business Sessions discussing topics ranging from cross-border protection of the racing product, to international race planning and veterinary issues.

Jockey Club Chairman Mr Ronald Arculli will head the delegation from Hong Kong along with Chief Executive Mr Lawrence Wong and the Executive Directors and senior officials from the Racing, Betting, Finance, Security, Charities, Veterinary and IT Departments of the Club.

Mr Lawrence Wong will chair the first Business Session on Wagering on Monday March 3 during which Mr John Schreck, Senior Consultant of Racing Control, will present a paper entitled 'Racing Integrity and Betting Exchanges'. Mr Schreck will analyse the worldwide threat posed by betting exchanges, offer possible solutions to counter this growing menace to racing, and urge ARF nations to act quickly against them.

Fat Bastard

28-02-2003, 20:37

The world-wide threat and growing menace..???? .the stupid bastards. It's the best thing since sliced bread. Good luck holding back the tide gentlemen. They said the same thing when TV first came out - it will never take off! Lawrence Wong wouldn't know a horse if it kicked him. Embrace the concept and benefit from it !!!

cheesebeast

28-02-2003, 21:16

Absafuckinlutely fat bastard, I daresay all the learned delegates to the Asian Racing Conference will nod sagely to whatever it is that Schreck serves up to them.

Betfair have effectively countered the "threat to racing's integrity" line, it's a bit disappointing that they haven't been able to come up with something better than that?

I'm tipping the solutions to counter the "growing menace" will revolve around lobbying governments to ban their citizens from using these evil exchanges.

The HKJC need to embrace the internet or they will slowly wither away at a similar rate to that which their turnover is currently falling.

Scarper

01-03-2003, 09:21

They should be presenting a paper on the benefits that betting exchanges can bring. The integrity argument is dead - i have no doubt anyone would need to be insane to get upto no good though a betting exchange as the betting records are there to be seen. Secondly, and this is something many racing juristictions are aware of, is the fact that lower takes can and will increase turnover and total governent revenue. The HKJC closed the big computer teams accounts in a effort to reduce thier winnings, which they regarded as akin to tax due to thier consistent win rates and have been lobbying the gov to freeze and even reduce/adjust tax rates. In the UK after betting tax was abandonded in favour of profits tax, after lobbying by bookies, turnover shot up 70% when the bookies could lower thier margins. The exchanges can offer the lowest takes around and it follows that this must be extremely heathly for the industries turnover, profits and tax to be paid. Betfair has always claimed it would put the same percentages back into all the racing juristictions it opereates on, so using these old arguments they may be able to persude the race tracks, owners and government officials that they will eventually contribute more. And so what if it doesnt come from the bookies and totes? And why is no one listening to the betting public who clearly love exchanges? All this winging and contunually battling against the tide of progress just reveals them for the dinosaurs that they are.

I beleive that an austarlian university study originally showed that tax rates can, and does, reduce turnover and total revenue if they are too high and that there is an optimum level at some point which maximizes goverment revenue. I cant remeber the figure suggested but i would be sure its closer to the betfair take than any other. Maybe betfair should commission these same professors to present thier findings again. It should be an easy sell as the industry seems to have already agreed takes need to be low to be healthy.

01-03-2003, 09:31

Yes , clear majority of the public love the betting exchanges , pity these dudes cant see it .

Seabiscuit

01-03-2003, 11:36

If you all feel so strongly on this issue, why not email this Asian Racing Conference with your views?

cheesebeast

01-03-2003, 13:50

Probably got as much chance of convincing the Pope that the devil really ain't such a bad guy.:p :p :p

02-03-2003, 10:36

Probably correct that our views would be dismissed but Seabiscuit is right , people associated & fans of betting exchanges should be in there stating there case.

Am surprised there seems many powerful people around the globe are trying to close the betting exchanges down , still cant understand why they dont adopt the system ?

imaufo

02-03-2003, 11:03

Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Jockey Club, Mr Lawrence Wong was today elected Chairman of the Asian Racing Federation (ARF) at the 29th Asian Racing Conference (ARC) in Auckland, New Zealand.

Mr Wong is now at the helm of an organisation with three seats on the Executive Council of International Federation of Horseracing Authorities.

Mr Bob Charley, Chairman of the Australian Racing Board, was elected Vice-Chairman of the ARF, along with Mr Naoki Koike, who will become the head of the Japan Racing Association later this month.

This is most prominent position that Hong Kong has ever held in international racing. The ARF comprises 20 controlling bodies of horseracing stretching from Hong Kong to Turkey, and Australia to South Africa.

Accepting his new position, Mr Wong said: "I am very honoured to take on a role of great importance to our Federation, and also as I am following in the footsteps of Murray Acklin, a great leader from New Zealand who helped grant this body a much louder voice in world horseracing. Our sport owes him a debt of thanks."

"Together racing's governing bodies must take immediate and firm action against these offshore operators. I urge ARF members not just to take a united front against these parasitical and illegal pirates that threaten racing's integrity, but also to lobby their respective governments to help arrest this problem," Mr Wong said.

All 20 nations unanimously adopted in principle the Good Neighbour Policy which says no organisation will accept bets from residents in the other jurisdiction and neither will solicit, market or advertise wagering without prior authorisation from the other jurisdiction.

ARF nations contribute 66% of total betting turnover globally, race for 53% of the world's racing stakes, and feature almost 40% of the world's racing population.

Its member countries are Australia, Bahrain, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Korea, Macau, Malaysia, Mauritius, New Zealand, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates.

By: Racenet - Sunday, 2 March 2003

http://members.fortunecity.com/dbard/billfall.gif

Perhaps it might be a good idea to get all the Betfair forum people sending in emails? :rolleyes:

Seabiscuit

02-03-2003, 16:42

All 20 nations unanimously adopted in principle the Good Neighbour Policy which says no organisation will accept bets from residents in the other jurisdiction and neither will solicit, market or advertise wagering without prior authorisation from the other jurisdiction.

Imagine the screams of protest if a bunch of oil companies or gas stations adopted a policy along the lines of this so called Good Neighbour policy. Deadset collusion that is what it is. And I am getting sick of it. I notice on the website for this conference that no punters representatives seem to be invited. So punters have no voice. My old school headmaster used to have a favorite saying taken from a British MP - "Evil flourishes when good men do nothing".

It might be time to start acting.

cheesebeast

02-03-2003, 19:33

I urge ARF members not just to take a united front against these parasitical and illegal pirates

Surely the HKJC's football betting will be no less parasitical than Betfair or William Hill et al, as I would be very surprised if the Jockey Club will be tipping any of their profits from soccer betting back into the EPL etc.

Seabiscuit

03-03-2003, 09:07

Here is a take on the Conference from Chris Scholtz at www.aapracingandsports.com

He correctly points out that Australian TABs who have foreign customers will have problems under the policy.

Interesting are the comments at the end when just after mentioning Schreck's contribution he says "Other viewpoints were presented by New Zealand’s former Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer and Hans Stahl, president of the US Jockey Club".

Can we find out what these "other viewpoints" were? Were they voicing some sort of opposition to the Schreck/HKJC monopolist line or were the "other viewpoints" on totally unrelated topics to Schreck?

I remember reading about 12 months ago a statement by a US racing official saying that the USA has just realised if they could only tap into a small percentage of racing turnover outside USA it could benefit the US industry greatly. I don't know if this was a personal view or a more official policy of the US racing authorities generally. It might even be that the Americans are the only ones fighting for competition to rule rather than the "good neighbour policy". Having said that I know the Americans don't want USA people playing Betfair.

I have doubts myself as to whether the Good Neighbour Policy is within anti-trust/competition laws in various jurisdictions as the law currently stands.

Australian Racing Board Adopts "Good Neighbour" Betting Policy

Story By Chris Scholtz

Monday, 3 March 2003: The 20 member countries of the Asian Racing Federation have unanimously agreed to adopt a “Good Neighbour Policy” aimed at curbing the spread of unregulated internet bookmakers and betting exchanges.

The members of the ARF voted to adopt in principle the Good Neighbour Policy at the 29th Asian Racing Conference being held in Auckland.

The policy, first adopted by Japan and Hong Kong last year, says no domestic betting organisation will accept bets from residents in another jurisdiction and neither will solicit, market or advertise wagering in another country without prior authorisation from the other jurisdiction.

The member countries are Australia, Bahrain, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Korea, Macau, Malaysia, Mauritius, New Zealand, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates.

The policy has considerable ramifications for Australian TAB companies and corporate bookmakers and their relationship with their many widespread offshore clients.

The Australian Racing Board will be responsible for enforcing the “Good Neighbour Policy” but its effectiveness will rely on considerable legislative support from Federal and State Governments.
Newly elected ARF president Lawrence Wong welcomed the adoption of the Good Neighbour Policy.

"No doubt racing will deal with important issues over the coming years, but surely none will be as pressing as the threat posed to the racing's very fabric by unlimited, unregulated and uncontrolled betting companies that contribute nothing to our sport, and nothing to society,” Wong said.

"Together racing's governing bodies must take immediate and firm action against these offshore operators. I urge ARF members not just to take a united front against these parasitical and illegal pirates that threaten racing's integrity, but also to lobby their respective governments to help arrest this problem.”

Monday’s first business session of the Asian racing Conference focused on internet betting and the advent of betting exchanges and the implications they hold for the racing industry.

The key speakers included Dr Teruyuki Imahara, the presidential counsellor of the Japan Racing Association, and former AJC and Hong Kong chief steward John Schreck.

Dr Imahara focused on the measures taken to legally offer wagering to Japanese citizens and whether legislation than can effectively outlaw overseas operators.

Schreck presented a paper entitled 'Racing Integrity and Betting Exchanges', analysing the threat posed by betting exchanges and offering possible solutions to counter this growing phenomenon.

Other viewpoints were presented by New Zealand’s former Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer and Hans Stahl, president of the US Jockey Club.

cheesebeast

03-03-2003, 13:31

Betting exchanges a threat to racing's integrity: Schreck 3 Mar 2003

By Phillip Quay

The latest international gambling craze – betting exchanges – are posing a real threat to the integrity of horse racing, according to Hong Kong Jockey Club senior consultant and former Sydney-based chief stipendiary steward John Schreck.

“It is a cancer that threatens to ruin the horse-racing industry. They are already beginning to have an effect on the integrity of racing and have the potential to do enormous harm to the industry in general,” Schreck said during a business session on wagering at the Asian Racing Conference today.

“They have only just begun to spring up but already are proliferating across the world as more and more consciousless people grab at the chance to get rich quick at the expense of world racing,” he said.

Betting exchanges are run by organizations such as London-based Betfair and the recently established Australian-based TwoFlys.

These exchanges manage the transaction of a person who deposits with it an amount of money. This in turn is made available at attractive betting odds on the Internet for accredited punters to bet against each other.

The betting exchange operator brings together these people via the Internet and makes a profit from deducting a management fee of about five per cent from net winnings by either the layer or the bettor.

Schreck said that exchange betting raised a number of factors which could impact on the integrity of horse racing. These include:

· Neither the exchange operator nor the layer or bettor are bound by the Rules Of Racing.
· The exchange operator is not subject to any probity check by either racing or civil authorities.
· The operator of the betting exchange is not subject to any criminal record check.
· Presently the betting exchange operator is unwilling to disclose to racing authorities the names of bettors.
· Licensed trainers or jockeys could, under the cloak of anonymity, may be inclined to assist their horse to lose.
· The bettor could have a close connection with a trainer, rider or stablehand.

Schreck said that already rumours were rife that many jockeys and trainers had been earning plenty from laying odds on their horses to lose or getting someone close to them to lay odds. “This is easily arranged given the anonymity of betting exchanges>

“My view is that the only way horse racing can survive this threat to its integrity is for it to be made illegal for anybody to have transactions with betting exchanges. If this is not possible then a second solution is that perhaps there may be grounds for establishing a structure that will enable racing supervisors to follow the money trail and thereby making the covert modus operandi of today an overt operation. This would require a club to establish its own legal betting exchange, creaming off a set percentage of the turnover that would benefit racing control and the supervision of the racing contests and hopefully ensure that participants were reputable and subject to the Rules Of Racing,” Schreck said.

England’s Racing Post news editor Tony Smurthwaite said Betfair.com was launched in London in June, 2000.

“From the outset it was more popular with existing sports fans with odds tending to be higher than those offered by traditional bookmakers as the profit margin was effectively stripped out. It was a maverick cool way of betting and people liked the fact they were not feathering the nests of the major bookmakers in betting through exchanges,” Smurthwaite said.

“Within nine months of its lauch Betfair broke through 1 million pounds a week in turnover,” he said.

“From 1 million pounds in April 2001 the figure grew to 5 million pounds a week by December 2001. By February 2002, after a merger of two exchanges, the turnover per week reached 10 million pounds and by the start of January this year the figure had exceeded 50 million pounds,” Smurthwaite said.

Betfair chief executive Edward Wray said the organization handled 600,000 bets last Saturday alone.

He said there was a lot of hysteria among traditional betting outlets about betting exchanges but this was totally unwarranted.

“We are helping to grow the racing industry and reputable organizations such as ours are putting something back to racing in the United Kingdom by way of a product fee which is currently 10 per cent on commissions (gross profit) which is paid to British Racing. We are also prepared to do so in other overseas countries by talking to the racing clubs concerned,” Wray said.

He said Betfair was operating globally and had taken bets on races in Australia and New Zealand in recent months.

“Betting exchanges are here to stay. There is no turning the technology clock back and the betting public want them,” said Wray.

Tosser

03-03-2003, 14:54

An earlier article on NZ Thoroughbred News sheds more light.

"Good Neighbour" policy moves by ARF 3 Mar 2003

By Phillip Quay

The Asian Racing Federation is to move towards a ‘Good Neighbour’ policy to combat the effects of illegal off-shore gambling operations.

Outgoing Asian Racing Federation chairman Murray Acklin said the 19 members of the Federation had unanimously supported the policy in principle at its management meeting attended by all countries on Saturday morning.

The policy has been developed by members of the ARF in response to a growing number of betting outlets using modern technology such as the internet, mobile phones and a new wave of betting exchanges for gambling.

“We must move immediately to protect our product from an invasion of overseas betting operators who are not putting anything back to the local supplier which is providing the product,” Acklin said. “There is no sense in waiting around and watching it happen any longer.”

At the conclusion of the Conference an ARF development meeting on Thursday will progress the policy. This meeting will be attended by the ARF executive council, chairmen of the Conference business sessions and the members of the International Federation Of Horse Racing Authorities attending the Conference.

“This will plan the way forward for implementing such a policy to recommend to the International Body at its Paris meeting in April,” Acklin said.

Former New Zealand Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer said the racing world must unite in coming up with a co-operative agreement to take to Governments.

“Once mechanisms have been put in place to explore co-operative arrangements it will be possible to implement a long-term ‘Good Neighbour’ policy among horse racing jurisdictions. Those countries adhering to a ‘Good Neighbour’ policy would approach their Governments with a proposal for international negotiations for a formal multi-lateral agreement at Government level concerning off-shore gaming sites in the Asia-Pacific region,” Sir Geoffrey said.

The Japan Racing Association and the Hong Kong Jockey Club were the first two Federation members to sign the agreement in December last year.

Japan Racing Association presidential counselor for foreign affairs Dr Teruyuki Imahara said the bilateral “Good Neighbour” policy had sent a clear and strong message to internet wagering that “we will no longer let you off the hook”.

“Good neighbour policy also gives us new business opportunities with protecting each other’s wagering market as long as signatories mutually agree,” Dr Imahara said.

“I am of the opinion that the most effective measure against internet wagering is blocking financial transactions because most of those transactions are carried out through credit cards,” he said.

British Horseracing Board secretary general Tristram Ricketts said such an international agreement would be practically impossible in the United Kingdom.

“There are immediate differences between the situation in Hong Kong and Japan and the position in the United Kingdom. In Hong Kong and Japan respectively Chairman Arculli and President Takahashi control virtually everything that moves. They control the racing, they control the betting and they control the racetracks,” Ricketts said.

“On the other hand the British Horseracing Board, as the governing authority for racing in Great Britain, controls no betting, controls no racecourses and controls at present and has very limited central funding for the industry although this will change when the statutory horse-race betting levy is abolished.

“So we simply are not, ourselves, able to subscribe to precisely the sort of ‘Good Neighbour’ policy that is being so strong advocated on this side of the globe,” Ricketts said.

cheesebeast

03-03-2003, 18:22

Asian Racing Federation (ARF) members today called for the signing of the Good Neighbour Policy to form the basis for dealing with the threat of Internet and offshore operators encroaching on the regions' betting income that amounts to 66% of world turnover.

The danger posed to racing by unlimited, unregulated and uncontrolled (3U) gambling formed the central theme to the wagering business session at the 29th Asian Racing Conference in Auckland, New Zealand.

The problem was comprehensively discussed and potential solutions were proposed, and the point was made consistently that something must be done - and done fast - if racing in its known form is to survive.

Mr Lawrence Wong, Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Jockey Club and the incoming Chairman of the ARF, chaired this morning's session and opened by outlining the challenges faced by racing's governing bodies against pirate betting organisations and the hefty edge they possess.

Mr Wong said: "They pay no taxes and face minimal costs. This wagering takes away from our governments' tax base and in many cases, such as with Hong Kong, takes away from the charities that need our support."

Mr John Schreck, the Hong Kong Jockey Club's Senior Racing Consultant and former Chief Stipendiary Steward, said that betting exchanges posed the greatest threat to the integrity of racing ever faced.

Betting exchanges are Internet-based third parties that facilitate the bettors to "back" or "lay" - ie. play the role of bookmaker - at generally more attractive odds than legal bookmakers.

Mr Schreck said the only way to combat this menace was to make these exchanges illegal. If this is not possible, then he said a structure should be established to follow the money trail and make what is a covert and anonymous modus operandi into an open operation.

Mr Schreck said: "The racing industry must get on the front foot and take positive action to run, regulate and control any type of betting on the races it organises. It must not stand back and allow an unknown group of faceless bootleggers to rape our sport."

Mr Christopher Foster, Executive Director of the British Jockey Club (racing¡¦s regulatory body in the UK, with no control over betting) said his organisation is currently engaged in dialogue with the betting exchanges "with the object of cutting right across the privacy issue to allow us access to the identity of people who lay horses. We believe this ability to get at the audit trail will provide a very strong deterrent against malpractice."

Sir Geoffrey Palmer, a former Prime Minister of New Zealand, and currently a partner in the Wellington-based law firm Chen and Palmer, strongly endorsed the Good Neighbour Policy, signed by Hong Kong and Japan last December, as the basis for co-operation to counter the threat posed by illegal offshore organisations.

Vice chairman of the world racing's governing body, the International Federation of Horseracing Associations (IFHA), Mr Hans Stahl, stated that it was paramount that the global racing industry has a strong Federation and that with the Good Neighbour Policy as a foundation, countries should successfully work together in the future.

"No country alone can solve this problem but building international co-operation will give some opportunity to improve this situation," said Sir Geoffrey, who proposed that individual racing bodies first reach a consensus on this issue, and then request that their respective governments negotiate a treaty that would lead to uniform legislation throughout the countries of those nations in agreement.

Sir Geoffrey pointed out that this treaty would need to be compliant with statutes enshrined in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), but said it was achievable if racing's bodies willed it.

He said that if betting turnover continues to be eroded at its present rate, "serious political and social implications will result" with the turnover from racing, a major revenue producer for governments, going to the pockets of those who contribute nothing to the sport or its upkeep. Sir Geoffrey stressed that the ARF nations must be absolutely united before lobbying governments for their assistance.

Dr Teruyuki Imahara, Presidential Counsellor for Foreign Affairs of the Japanese Racing Association (JRA), informed delegates of the extent to which the JRA is losing out heavily to illegal operators. Japan is the world's highest grossing nation in terms of betting turnover but that income is now sliding.

He referred to bilateral Good Neighbour Policy recently signed with the Hong Kong Jockey Club and expressed a desire for all ARF countries to sign it.

Foreign websites, Dr Imahara said, are reaping HK$934.8 million (US$120 million) per annum. However, he said the most effective measure of countering this problem is by blocking financial transactions thanks to the strong assistance from the Japanese Government. As most transactions are carried out via credit cards, the JRA has met with the major credit card companies to preclude their customers from becoming involved in illegal activities. The majority of these companies in Japan have agreed to stop such transactions. The JRA has also sensitized other racing industries in Japan ¡V motorbikes, powerboats and cycling ¡V to the threat of Internet wagering and established a unity of purpose with them.

Dr Imahara also dealt with illegal domestic wagering operators known as "Nomiya" - "Gobblers" in English - with strong ties to organised crime syndicates. Nomiya, he said, are devouring 38% of annual turnover ¡V that's HK$93.48 billion (US$12 billion) per annum. Dr Imahara said it was proving difficult to crack down on the Nomiya as they operated through the use of cellular phones and not via Internet technology, but the JRA has embarked on a public education campaign as to their illegal nature and is modernizing its betting channels. He said if the JRA can retrieve 10% of the customers back from the Nomiya, racing turnover would increase by 4%.

Secretary General of the British Horseracing Board (the governing authority for racing in the UK, with no jurisdiction over betting in that nation), Mr Tristram Ricketts, explained how betting tax in Britain shifted towards the Gross Profits Tax (GPT) adopted in 2001, and how betting turnover has since soared "with rises of up to 50% being widely reported." However, one of the reasons the British Government was persuaded to introduce the GPT was that the radical change in the tax structure would enable British gambling operators to compete for business internationally. Therefore, this legislation has provided the platform for offshore betting organisations to tackle markets overseas, where in many countries it is illegal for them to do so.

As Mr Bob Charley, Chairman of the Australian Racing Board, later asked: "Does the UK Government wish for its companies to actively encourage citizens to go out and break the law?"

This, allied with the fact that British racing has up to half a dozen separate entities controlling the sport, would make it difficult for Britain to sign up to the Good Neighbour Policy, Mr Ricketts said.

Mr Tony Smurthwaite, News Editor of the Racing Post in London, explained the mechanism of betting exchanges, and estimated that one exchange website is set to generate turnover of between HK$116 billion and HK$155 billion (US$15 billion-$20 billion) this year.

One site, he added, has begun operating on Hong Kong racing and is achieving turnover of approximately HK$3 million (US$384,000) per meeting, a figure that is increasing almost weekly.

This equates to tax income of about HK$420,000 (US$53,000) that the Hong Kong Government misses out on per race meeting, and HK$33million (US$4.2 million) per annum.

Finally, in a speech entitled "The Protection and Development of Racing's Intellectual Property," Mr Neville Fielke, CEO of Racing Victoria in Australia, said racing must quickly recognise its intellectual property (IP) to get to know its customers better. He said IP was the key to addressing unavoidable issues, the potential consequences of which, if ignored, will amount to the marginalisation of the sport.

Tosser

03-03-2003, 18:40

Mr Wong said: "They pay no taxes and face minimal costs. This wagering takes away from our governments' tax base and in many cases, such as with Hong Kong, takes away from the charities that need our support."

What a load of horse manure!!!!! Correct me if I'm wrong, but many of us betting on HK racing on Betfair do not live in Hong Kong, and as we are banned from operating HK accounts, the impact on their tax base is five eighths of F.A.

Geez I'm getting pissed. Either open up HK betting to foreigners or let Betfair operate - they can't have it both ways.

Tell me, when HKJC operate betting on English soccer, are they going to donate some of their profits to the Football Association?

Someone give me Wong and Shreck's email address :mad:

03-03-2003, 18:48

Wongs a HYPOCRITE , when i lived in HK desperate to bet & give money to the charities - Wong & co refused to except my bets.

Seabiscuit

03-03-2003, 19:40

The good news is that the Pommies are dragging their feet re the Good Neighbour Policy and seem to have no intention of joining in.

That is because their government will be the one raking in the cash from the punters of the world when it goes through Betfair etc. UK government will be in no hurry to close down Betfair if it is generating good revenue for them.

The obvious answer is for other countries to set up betting exchanges in competition but alas I think years of monopoly etc in HK has poisoned their minds. They don't know how to compete.

Good Neighbour Policy is most likely illegal under present laws and would need laws changed (as they realise).

I don't care where my tax money goes. If I am helping orphans in London I am as happy as when I am helping the homeless in the USA or the sick in Australia. We are all living on the one planet and should worry less about these national boundaries. The HKJC attitude is very inward looking.

Monty Burns

03-03-2003, 22:27

ARF nations vow to combat illegal gambling

3 March 2003

Mr Lawrence Wong, Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Jockey Club and the incoming Chairman of the ARF, chaired this morning's Wagering session at the 29th Asian Racing Conference in Auckland, New Zealand, and opened by outlining the challenges faced by racing's governing bodies against pirate betting organisations and the hefty edge they possess. "They pay no taxes and face minimal costs. This wagering takes away from our governments' tax base and in many cases, such as with Hong Kong, takes away from the charities that need our support," he said.
Asian Racing Federation (ARF) members today called for the signing of the Good Neighbour Policy to form the basis for dealing with the threat of Internet and offshore operators encroaching on the regions' betting income that amounts to 66% of world turnover.

The danger posed to racing by unlimited, unregulated and uncontrolled (3U) gambling formed the central theme to the wagering business session at the 29th Asian Racing Conference in Auckland, New Zealand.

The problem was comprehensively discussed and potential solutions were proposed, and the point was made consistently that something must be done - and done fast - if racing in its known form is to survive.

Mr John Schreck, the Hong Kong Jockey Club's Senior Racing Consultant and former Chief Stipendiary Steward, said that betting exchanges posed the greatest threat to the integrity of racing ever faced. "The racing industry must not stand back and allow an unknown group of faceless bootleggers to rape our sport," Mr Schreck said.

Mr John Schreck, the Hong Kong Jockey Club's Senior Racing Consultant and former Chief Stipendiary Steward, said that betting exchanges posed the greatest threat to the integrity of racing ever faced.

Betting exchanges are Internet-based third parties that facilitate the bettors to "back" or "lay" - ie. play the role of bookmaker - at generally more attractive odds than legal bookmakers.

Mr Schreck said the only way to combat this menace was to make these exchanges illegal. If this is not possible, then he said a structure should be established to follow the money trail and make what is a covert and anonymous modus operandi into an open operation.

Mr Schreck said: "The racing industry must get on the front foot and take positive action to run, regulate and control any type of betting on the races it organises. It must not stand back and allow an unknown group of faceless bootleggers to rape our sport."

Mr Christopher Foster, Executive Director of the British Jockey Club (racing¡¦s regulatory body in the UK, with no control over betting) said his organisation is currently engaged in dialogue with the betting exchanges "with the object of cutting right across the privacy issue to allow us access to the identity of people who lay horses. We believe this ability to get at the audit trail will provide a very strong deterrent against malpractice."

Sir Geoffrey Palmer, a former Prime Minister of New Zealand, and currently a partner in the Wellington-based law firm Chen and Palmer, strongly endorsed the Good Neighbour Policy, signed by Hong Kong and Japan last December, as the basis for co-operation to counter the threat posed by illegal offshore organisations.

Vice chairman of the world racing's governing body, the International Federation of Horseracing Associations (IFHA), Mr Hans Stahl, stated that it was paramount that the global racing industry has a strong Federation and that with the Good Neighbour Policy as a foundation, countries should successfully work together in the future.

"No country alone can solve this problem but building international co-operation will give some opportunity to improve this situation," said Sir Geoffrey, who proposed that individual racing bodies first reach a consensus on this issue, and then request that their respective governments negotiate a treaty that would lead to uniform legislation throughout the countries of those nations in agreement.

Sir Geoffrey pointed out that this treaty would need to be compliant with statutes enshrined in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), but said it was achievable if racing's bodies willed it.

He said that if betting turnover continues to be eroded at its present rate, "serious political and social implications will result" with the turnover from racing, a major revenue producer for governments, going to the pockets of those who contribute nothing to the sport or its upkeep. Sir Geoffrey stressed that the ARF nations must be absolutely united before lobbying governments for their assistance.

Dr Teruyuki Imahara, Presidential Counsellor for Foreign Affairs of the Japanese Racing Association (JRA), informed delegates of the extent to which the JRA is losing out heavily to illegal operators. Japan is the world's highest grossing nation in terms of betting turnover but that income is now sliding.

He referred to bilateral Good Neighbour Policy recently signed with the Hong Kong Jockey Club and expressed a desire for all ARF countries to sign it.

Foreign websites, Dr Imahara said, are reaping HK$934.8 million (US$120 million) per annum. However, he said the most effective measure of countering this problem is by blocking financial transactions thanks to the strong assistance from the Japanese Government. As most transactions are carried out via credit cards, the JRA has met with the major credit card companies to preclude their customers from becoming involved in illegal activities. The majority of these companies in Japan have agreed to stop such transactions. The JRA has also sensitized other racing industries in Japan ¡V motorbikes, powerboats and cycling ¡V to the threat of Internet wagering and established a unity of purpose with them.

Dr Imahara also dealt with illegal domestic wagering operators known as "Nomiya" - "Gobblers" in English - with strong ties to organised crime syndicates. Nomiya, he said, are devouring 38% of annual turnover ¡V that's HK$93.48 billion (US$12 billion) per annum. Dr Imahara said it was proving difficult to crack down on the Nomiya as they operated through the use of cellular phones and not via Internet technology, but the JRA has embarked on a public education campaign as to their illegal nature and is modernizing its betting channels. He said if the JRA can retrieve 10% of the customers back from the Nomiya, racing turnover would increase by 4%.

Secretary General of the British Horseracing Board (the governing authority for racing in the UK, with no jurisdiction over betting in that nation), Mr Tristram Ricketts, explained how betting tax in Britain shifted towards the Gross Profits Tax (GPT) adopted in 2001, and how betting turnover has since soared "with rises of up to 50% being widely reported." However, one of the reasons the British Government was persuaded to introduce the GPT was that the radical change in the tax structure would enable British gambling operators to compete for business internationally. Therefore, this legislation has provided the platform for offshore betting organisations to tackle markets overseas, where in many countries it is illegal for them to do so.

As Mr Bob Charley, Chairman of the Australian Racing Board, later asked: "Does the UK Government wish for its companies to actively encourage citizens to go out and break the law?"

This, allied with the fact that British racing has up to half a dozen separate entities controlling the sport, would make it difficult for Britain to sign up to the Good Neighbour Policy, Mr Ricketts said.

Mr Tony Smurthwaite, News Editor of the Racing Post in London, explained the mechanism of betting exchanges, and estimated that one exchange website is set to generate turnover of between HK$116 billion and HK$155 billion (US$15 billion-$20 billion) this year.

One site, he added, has begun operating on Hong Kong racing and is achieving turnover of approximately HK$3 million (US$384,000) per meeting, a figure that is increasing almost weekly.

This equates to tax income of about HK$420,000 (US$53,000) that the Hong Kong Government misses out on per race meeting, and HK$33million (US$4.2 million) per annum.

Finally, in a speech entitled "The Protection and Development of Racing's Intellectual Property," Mr Neville Fielke, CEO of Racing Victoria in Australia, said racing must quickly recognise its intellectual property (IP) to get to know its customers better. He said IP was the key to addressing unavoidable issues, the potential consequences of which, if ignored, will amount to the marginalisation of the sport.

Tosser

04-03-2003, 09:48

From today's NZ Herald. Usually I don't rate this journo, but must admit found this article well-balanced and enjoyable (except the reference to the America's Cup :mad: )

04.03.2003
By MIKE DILLON

Fifty million pounds turnover a week and growing by five per cent a week. Outside of oil wells, it's got to be the best business in the world.

That's English-based Betfair, an on-line exchange betting mode not aligned to traditional racing bodies and tipped to completely eclipse race gambling worldwide if left unchecked.

Which is why it's co-founder and CEO Edward Wray stood up very tentatively when he spoke from the floor at the gaming session of yesterday's Asian Racing Federation conference in Auckland.

Few knew he was there.

Ringing in his ears were two hours of declarations from Asian Racing Federation delegates stating that exchange betting was the worst disaster since Gallipoli.

It's only a handful of years since two mates, one based in the United States, the other in England, starting exchanging bets on the internet.

Astonishingly, that formed flutter.com, which mushroomed into Betfair, which exploded into a business worth, conservatively, £50 million ($141 million) a week.

There are two issues: how to get such agencies to pay the taxes and returns to racing all other gambling companies are committed to - and the vexed question of integrity.

In exchange betting, one party backs the horse, the dog or team to win, the other party backs it to be beaten, or in racing parlance, lays it. When someone lays a horse, racing's bosses are always keen to know why.

There could be something dodgy, or as Hong Kong Jockey Club director John Schreck put it yesterday: "There is something inherently wrong to back a favoured horse to lose."

You could argue that every bookmaker lays every horse in every race, but bookies are subject to the stringent rules of racing.

Not so internet operators who, in their defence, argue they are not the bookmakers, merely the conduit to two parties betting between themselves.

A major problem facing racing's judiciary is that exchange betting is anonymous. If someone today bet $2 million that an odds-on favourite was to be beaten, and it was, there is no way of identifying the bettor.

Schreck: "In the Fine Cotton case we caught the people after we followed the money trail. Had there been exchange betting it would have been nearly impossible to follow the money trail."

English Jockey Club delegate Christopher Foster said negotiations are in place with exchange betting agencies for access to information on punters who regularly lay horses.

Schreck made no excuses for his attack on exchange betting, describing it as parasitic, a cancer and its participants as conscienceless.

Which is why Wray said as he stood up on the floor late in the session: "Perhaps I should be doing this sitting down."

Wray said while he accepted there were probably unscrupulous exchange betting operators out there with no interest in operating in a regulated market, Betfair was keen to comply with all integrity issues. "That's why I'm here," he said.

Later he said Betfair was comfortable with the small gross profit tax applied by the British Government and was happy with a new tax expected soon, which he thought would be around 15 per cent.

Exchange betting is just starting to spring up in Australia and New Zealand and yesterday's wagering business session centred on how it could be contained before it blossomed.

Former prime minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer, in his governmental view speech, said it was crucial member countries agreed on a parallel policy, similar to civil aviation regulations, and encased the policy in law in each country.

It would be similar to the "good neighbour policy" signed between the Hong Kong Jockey Club and the Japan Racing Association late last year. "One sovereign country cannot achieve it alone," he said.

No authority has been granted for Betfair to operate in Australasia.

Wray said the interesting feature is that since Betfair had been operating a new vigour has been injected into gambling British horse races.

"All betting is going up and it's clear that what we are taking is new money. It's not from the same cake.

"Things are very vigorous and we seem to be the accelerator."

The boss of Thoroughbred Racing New Zealand, Murray Acklin, has been chairman of the 22-nation Asian Racing Federation for several years.

This week he passed that over to Lawrence Wong, CEO of the Hong Kong Jockey Club. Wong chaired yesterday's session.

To say Wong was against exchange betting is like saying the crew of Alinghi probably had hangovers yesterday morning.

Speaking on the issue of exchange betting operators being able to conduct business without a licence Wong looked exasperated when he said: "Every gambling operator in the world needs a licence, how come ... ?"

An Australian delegate asked the Devil's Advocate question: "When an Australian TAB bets on Pakistan playing India at cricket, does the TAB ask the cricketing associations of both countries for permission?"

This issue is not going away.

imaufo

04-03-2003, 11:12

Adobe Acrobat letter (http://www.racingnsw.com.au/newsitem.asp?parm=1254)

ARB's Letter Concerning Betting Exchanges [24/02/2003]

All Principal Clubs are working with the Australian Racing Board to deal with the issue of Betting Exchanges.

On 20 February 2003 the Chairman of the ARB, Mr Bob Charley AO, sent a letter to the race clubs giving details of the position.

To view text of the letter Click Here

Seabiscuit

04-03-2003, 12:14

The position outlined by the Australian racing authorities in the letter seems quite sensible and sane. Unlike the mad ravings of the HKJC monopolists.

It seems the real problem is the HKJC. They have some strange mental disease which causes them to froth at the mouth at the mention of betting exchanges/Betfair.

It is hard to understand HKJC's attitude as HK matched bets on Betfair are a drop in the ocean versus tote turnover in HK and a fair percentage of those betting would not have HKJC accounts I imagine.

Hopefully the Australian, British and other authorities will not catch the same affliction as the HKJC when near them at the conference. Other countries should then steam ahead while HK racing can wither away and die.

blackbeauty

04-03-2003, 13:22

It would be similar to the "good neighbour policy" signed between the Hong Kong Jockey Club and the Japan Racing Association late last year. "One sovereign country cannot achieve it alone," he said.
Good neighbour policy. Yeah right.
They continue to stick it to Macau. With the MJC losing Millions of $ a meeting there seems to be no help from their good neighbour who forced the position.
What has happened to all the promised meetings from the HKJC.

And again, as others have mentioned. They want to close punters accounts, and then shit themselves when Betfair comes into operation. Where do they think we will all bet. No other option - except of course the illegals.

The HKJC are arrogant, self righteous, ignorant, and DESERVE EVERYTHING THEY GET.

cheesebeast

04-03-2003, 23:21

There could be something dodgy, or as Hong Kong Jockey Club director John Schreck put it yesterday: "There is something inherently wrong to back a favoured horse to lose."

You can't be serious, John?

I guess he is only trying to do his job, Shreck seems very un-Australian throughout all this, what's the matter with him, doesn't he like a bet?

imaufo

05-03-2003, 05:45

Hasnt it always been bookmaker policy to take lay bets on horses? I seem to remember reading about this is Don Scotts books...do they still do this?

imaufo

06-03-2003, 07:09

Asia is somewhat larger these days than it appears on the map. The growing significance of Asian racing as a part of global racing has brought speakers and delegates from the US and the UK to the Auckland conference, too, and it was a chat by the secretary-general of the British Horseracing Board, Tristram Ricketts, that held both high hopes and dire warnings for Hong Kong and its good neighbours.

Ricketts explained the process which has seen British betting's structure altered from one that is turnover-based to one which is gross profits tax-based.

The result has been a massive increase in betting volume, in some cases up to 50 per cent a year, as the new deal removed the disincentives to bet legally. Governments all over have tended to regard punters with disdain and not as discriminating in any business sense. Yet once the nine per cent betting deductions were removed in the UK there were punters betting again in higher volumes than for the many years when betting was costing them nine per cent more.

This is the hopeful aspect. The Hong Kong Jockey Club at least has a significant racing model on which to base its own expectations that restructuring of its tax can bring an increase in turnover and eventually better returns to government and charities.

However, Ricketts did conclude his presentation with a much-needed touch of real-world truth by telling the 500 people assembled before him that differences between racing's administrative structure in Asia and Britain would make it impossible for Britain, one of the foremost racing centres of the world, to ever support or be part of the good neighbour policy .

He said part of the reason for the restructuring of the tax situation in British betting had been to make British bookmakers more competitive internationally, and his final word on the matter must have chilled many of the Asian good neighbours: "I have no wish to mislead you. We live in a highly competitive world. Betting operators in the UK will, with the full approval and encouragement of the British government, compete for international business, wherever it is legal to do so."

Seabiscuit

06-03-2003, 08:48

Good to see the British bulldog is alive and well.

Winston Churchill drew the line in the sand when Hitler was about and now the Brits are telling HKJC where to go. Great stuff!

Hopefully other countries will realise if there is no united front then the "Good Neighbour Policy" is likely to struggle to work and so will join the Brits.

"Good Neighbour" junk is just another phrase for price fixing cartel. I fail to see how it is legal under existing laws in most countries anyway. And then we have the HKJC screeching about the "illegal" betting operations. As someone said in Betfair press section, Betfair might be arguably illegal but is definitely not illegal for sure.

zeditave

06-03-2003, 12:37

has anyone ever explained to Schreck and Wong the difference between fact and fiction??

trigger

06-03-2003, 20:07

Might I also add that Schreck's position is so obviously dictated by his employer that he has lost all credibility. Likewise the former Prime Minister of New Zealand, who also spoke at the conference. Sir Geoffrey Palmer is a partner in a prominent New Zealand legal practice. His advice does not come cheap. Who paid for his time?
What a shame that Bob Charley got caught up in the hysteria. Should have expected more of an ex punter. Shame also if his incoherrent letter to the Australian principal clubs is the best he can do. Betting exchanges are here to stay. There are opportunities there for those who accept this. Those who deny it will commercially be destroyed.

Seabiscuit

07-03-2003, 03:42

Now here is an interesting piece by Chris Scholtz at www.aapracingandsports.com.au

It is interesting because when that pompous goose with the fancy name from the HKJC first attacked betting exchanges a few weeks back, Chris Scholtz reported his remarks and seemed to think the HKJC might have a point about exchanges threatening the integrity of racing etc. After having a few weeks to think about the issue, Chris has come to the view that these arguments lack merit. He thinks Australia should embrace a competitive approach and set up its own betting exchange to take on Betfair.

Good to see people are finally starting to speak out in favour of betting exchanges after the attack of the HKJC earlier in the week.

THE BETTING EXCHANGE DEBATE - COULD THIS BE THE ANSWER? -

Story By Chris Scholtz

Thursday, 6 March 2003: Chris Scholtz takes another look at the growth of betting exchanges and how Australia needs to change its thinking to benefit and beat the threat from overseas operators.

How does a major business ensure its survival?

If the first rule of good business is keeping ahead of your competitors, then sectors of the Australian racing industry have blindly chosen to ignore this maxim when it comes to accepting the challenge of competition for the betting dollar.

We have come to accept that racing is a “product” that has to be nurtured, groomed and presented as a commodity in its most appealing form.

Strong marketing generates the all-important betting turnover that keeps race clubs and TAB companies in business and delivers healthy returns to Governments through taxes.

To this end, it is hard to fault the marketing of the product by race clubs. They have switched on to the younger generation and are presenting appealing and entertaining campaigns aimed at enhancing the racing experience for the free-spending under 30s.

Some say these campaigns do nothing more than promote a racetrack booze party, but behind it all is the need to lure this age group into the betting net.

Once hooked these new age punters will contribute substantially to the betting revenue so vital to the bottom line of TABs, Governments and race clubs.

But these young punters are also at the cutting edge of technology and know a good deal when they see one. Which means their gambling interests – thanks to the internet- are quickly diverted when they find a better and more entertaining betting proposition.

They may not know horses, but they know value.

That in a nutshell sums up why those in command who continue to promote misguided beliefs about the gambling industry must quickly come to grips with the advent of betting exchanges and embrace them positively for the advantage of all concerned - or move on.

Unfortunately history, coupled with current perceptions, points to racing being blindly led up the wrong path yet again.

In the last 10 years many new betting mediums have arrived on the scene. The world, thanks to the internet, has shrunk to the click of a an electronic mouse that makes any punter, big or small, the master of his computerised domain.

The computerised punter is within easy reach of a myriad of global betting outlets that cater for his every whim.

If a certain operator – read TAB company – is not offering what the consumer/punter wants he simply finds an internet betting option that does meet his needs.

Sectors of the Australian racing industry – principally in NSW - lost the plot several years ago when ill-informed politicians, buckling to TAB pressure, chose to promote a “closed door” policy as a means of meeting the challenge presented by off-shore bookmakers.

Internet and off-shore bookmakers were branded the enemy by Governments and TAB companies. In a bid to protect the TAB monopoly, a farcical “law” was promoted and rightly treated as a joke by punters who knew it was impossible to enforce.

Yet some offshore bookmakers wanted to come in from the cold. Again the opportunity to embrace their business was ignored as no truck was given to the interlopers when they applied to legally obtain a foothold in the local market.

The coat tail race clubs, while the providers and promoters of the product but last in the financial food chain, had to accept the stern Government and TAB line despite many executives expressing privately that they were heading in the wrong direction.

Their fears were substantiated when “safe havens” for the offshore bookmakers emerged in Darwin and Canberra, where local Governments were more than happy to roll out the red carpet in return for the huge revenue to be made from betting taxes.

So attractive were the terms offered by the Darwin and Canberra Governments that they also succeeded in luring some of the biggest bookmakers from Sydney to set up shop in their domains.

NSW and other States suddenly found the “enemy” was well and truly at the door, and all the misguided could do was lament about even bigger losses in betting leakage to these forward-thinking bookmakers.

The bottom line for those Australian jurisdictions that attempted to ban or stifle foreign betting organisations from establishing a base in their domains is that they lost that battle big time.

Now we are into round two, which centres on how the three tiers of Australian racing administration – Government, TAB and race club - come to grips with the rapid expansion and popularity of betting exchanges.

First and foremost the authorities have to accept that despite some adverse publicity over instances of suggested “rorts” in the UK, a betting exchange is the purest form of gambling with no tax component dictating the odds.

It is a simple one-on-one transaction between two parties at their own agreed price and can be policed and regulated far more easily than established betting modes as any money trail is easily traced, as has already been shown in the UK.

The great appeal of a betting exchange for the Australian masses, once they become educated to the pros and cons, will be its representation as a “fair go” as the only tax payable will be five percent of winnings to the promoter/operator.

Unfortunately the noises coming from the Asian Racing Conference this week indicate little change to the attitude that anything challenging the off-course TAB monopoly is bad.

A “Good Neighbour Policy” is not worth the paper it is printed on unless it is supported by strong Government legislation that imposes and enforces heavy penalties on those betting with an offshore operator by phone or the internet.

That won’t happen because Governments have been down that track before and know that any attempt to harness the personal use of computers and the internet will create a storm of protest and cost votes at election time.

But why does it have to be that way?

Why does the industry have to sit back and let overseas promoters of betting exchanges capture the vast Australian market without any local competition.

Could it be so difficult for the Australian Racing Board, on behalf of all race clubs in Australia, to bring together the thee TAB companies (Tabcorp, TAB Limited and Unitab) and demand that an alliance be formed to run Australia’s own “super” betting exchange on the same terms being offered by offshore operators.

It may mean the TAB companies have to forsake their guaranteed cut from turnover, but such is the enormous potential of betting exchange business that accepting a portion of a five percent tax on winning bets for minimal overhead costs will prove to be a very handy “earner”.

Out of the five percent winning bet tax the three TAB companies (which may soon become two if the giant TABCorp/Jupiters merger moves on Unitab) share three percent, the ARB could take 1.5 percent for distribution to the racing industry and half a percent is paid as tax to the Federal Government.

Everybody gets a cut of the action and, above all, they have kept one step ahead of the competition.

It should be obvious that the volume of turnover through a betting exchange of this magnitude will also attract big investment from local and overseas bookmakers and nip in the bud the threat from all the business going to offshore competition.

As such the message is simple for Australian racing - dismiss the kneejerk reactions we have copped form the Asian Racing Federation (the majority of ARF jurisdictions have no licensed bookmakers) and get on with the business of providing the Australian punting public with what they want before they go somewhere else!

The authorities must realise that betting exchanges, at present, are only scratching the surface in Australia as their offshore promoters adopt a "softly, softly" approach in their attempts to gain official acceptance.

But as sure as night turns to day they will be a big thing once they become easily accessible to a wider audience, with or without official support.

Which brings us to another core business principle that should be heeded by our administrators - if you can’t beat them, join them!

zeditave

07-03-2003, 08:17

There are several different races in the HKJC chain of command, it's not a race thing Trigger, just the view of evil monopolies everywhere.....

hobbes

07-03-2003, 12:22

DUTCH JUDGEMENT SETS THE PRECEDENT -- Story By Chris Scholtz

Monday, 10 February 2003: The legal precedent peeved Australian authorities have been looking for to block the leakage of betting turnover to offshore and interstate bookmakers may have been found in Holland.

Governmemt and TAB officials, particularly in NSW, will rejoice in the knowledge that a Dutch court has ruled that UK bookmaking giant Ladbrokes must block Dutch residents from placing bets through the company's online sports betting site.

The court ordered that Ladbrokes be fined 10,000 euros per day if it did not comply to the judgement immediately.

The decision was handed down after De Lotto, the Dutch Government's lottery monopoly which has branched into sports betting, brought the case to court claiming unfair competition from Ladbrokes.

Labrokes intends appealing the court ruling but is also reported to be facing similar court actions in Italy and Sweden. De Lotto is also pursuing the same legal action against other internet operators in Holland.

The Dutch ruling was based on the court finding that Ladbrokes held no licence to operate in Holland and made no social or charitable contribution to the local economy.

That finding perhaps provides the precedent Australian authorities, particularly in NSW, have been searching for to move against bookmakers who operate on local racing and sports events while based outside their jurisdiction.

The much-publicised NSW opposition to bookmakers located in such places as Darwin, Canberra and Vanuatu has been based on the principle that they, like Ladbrokes, are accepting bets from NSW residents while making no financial contribution to the NSW Treasury or local racing industry.

Publicising the act of placing a bet with a bookmakers not licensed in NSW as "illegal" has been treated as a joke by punters big and small. They bet with interstate and offshore bookmakers of their choice secure in the knowledgeo that any attempt at prosecution has little hope of succeeding.

However the Dutch judgement suddenly makes the battle to stop the leakage of betting turnover a new ball game for the authorities, who will no doubt be calling for their lawyers to obtain manuscripts of the case from Holland as soon as possible.

The Dutch case has already been noted by the Hong Kong Jockey Club, which also sees its monopoly on local betting being eroded by UK bookmakers.

Hong Kong Betting Ordinance amendments last year were designed to prevent offshore operators from targeting local punters but have had little impact.

However the South China Morning Post reported that the HKJC has already predicted the Dutch court judgement will have far-reaching ramifications for internet bettors.

HKJC director of racing Winfried Englebrecht-Bresges told the SCMP's Alan Aitken that the Dutch ruling was a "significant step" towards restricting the scope of operation for online bookmakers.

"The case establishes a precedent and is going to impact on how internet operators are able to do business," he said. "This is a significant step in Europe and I expect other racing authorities will be looking at a similar solution."

In the UK the response from Ladbrokes was both predictable and very much in tune with the public view of global online betting.

"Our argument is there should be a single market, with freedom to provide services across national borders," Ladbrokes chief John O'Reilly told the Racing Post.

"We have an issue in European Union law, which, in our view, currently enables member states to protect their revenues, but only on social grounds.

"It may be reasonable if a country doesn't want gambling to proliferate, but we don't believe it's reasonable if they are protecting tax revenues from betting. It doesn't happen with other services."
************************************************** ******************

This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm

zawhead

07-03-2003, 13:18

Seems to me that if the arrogant Dutch are betting on sports that take place outside their boundaries, and they are not giving a percentage of turnover to say the US PGA tour for golf betting, then they are doing just what they accuse Ladbrokes of doing, and operating a cross-border business without regard to other local institutions.
If however they restrict their sports betting operations to purely and mostly uninteresting local Dutch sports then they may a have a leg to stand on.
The HK Jockey club is using similar arguments but is intending to bet on Soccer not held in the region. Where do these idiots get off?

Seabiscuit

07-03-2003, 17:51

Another betting exchange story from Chris Scholtz at www.aapracingandsports.com.au

Australian bookie is considering setting up an offshore exchange as he sees exchanges as the way of the future.

I also see them as the way of the future. I am not sure why you would want to set up an offshore exchange (unless you had no other choice). Best approach is to set up an exchange on local soil (Australia if you are an Australian). This means the government will be on your side as you will generating tax revenue for them and cases like the Dutch one will not arise. This is the reason the British exchanges have the support of the UK government (it seems). They bring in additional tax revenue from elsewhere so the government loves you.

Perhaps Eskander has no chance of setting up a local exchange. However the letter from the Australian racing authorities (see below) did leave the door open to them licensing an exchange.

ESKANDER ISSUES EXCHANGE CHALLENGE

Story By Chris Scholtz

Friday, 7 March 2003: Victoria's Michael Eskander may be the first Australian bookmaker to establish an offshore betting exchange agency.

Eskander said he was considering the radical move to establish an internet-based betting exchange due to the threat the new betting medium posed to Australian bookmakers.

Eskander told the Melbourne Herald Sun that the recent surge into Australia by betting exchange companies had the potential to erode turnover.

"It is the betting way of the future. It is tailored for the punter," Eskander said.

Eskander reveled he had been approached by a company in Ireland to establish a betting exchange for the Australian market.

"I have to if I want to survive,” Eskander said. “I'm frustrated and mad about the betting industry in Victoria. It's open for abuse from anybody.”

If Eskander does become the first Australian bookmaker to offer a betting exchange faclity it will send shock waves through TAB companies who know they cannot compete with the odds available on the internet.

UK betting exchange companies are already providing coverage of Australian racing and attracting massive turnover.

Racing and Sports subscribers cited the amount “matched” by punters using the UK exchange company Betfair on a race at Moonee Valley on Thursday night was equal to the win pool on the Victorian TAB.

The Herald Sun also reported that Betfair matched bets of $50,000 on the Victoria Gold Cup at Caulfield last Saturday compared to a TABCorp hold of $135,000 in win bets.

Betfair deducts only five percent from winning bets while every dollar invested with an Australian TAB is subject to a deduction of up to 20 percent.

TABCorp executives claim betting exchange agencies operating on Australian racing are in breach of the Gaming and Betting Act.

Seabiscuit

08-03-2003, 06:30

After all the ranting and raving by the HKJC during the week against betting exchanges it seems they might be giving ground. Perhaps they sense the people rising up against them in revolt.

John Schreck turned up at the Asian racing conference frothing at the mouth and red in the face as he claimed the participants in betting exchanges were conscienceless and he screeched about parasites raping the sport.

However, it seems he might not be 100% against betting exchanges. I cannot confirm 100% but rumour has it he appeared on a Sydney radio station Saturday morning and said he was not completely against betting exchanges but thought it was OK if the TABs ran them.

This is a bit of a concession from earlier in the week when it seemed he was against exchanges full stop.

The problem with Schreck's view is that the TABs are now fully privatised in Australia. If you think it is OK for the TABs to run the exchanges, then it should be OK for other private enterprises to run them.

I have no problem with TAB type bodies running an exchange but they definitely should be subject to COMPETITION from a non-TAB body. That is the whole point. I doubt the TABs are going to be the instigators of exchanges in any case. If you are currently raking in a fat and lazy 20% of turnover why take the risk of 5%? No I think the TABs will do all they can to stop exchanges. Even if the TABs brought one in they would want to up the rate every year to increase that old share price. All TAB executives belong to the cult of the shareholder.

Apparently $337000 Aussie dollars matched on race 1 at Moonee Valley the other night.

Definitely seems the monopolists are running scared. With a bit of luck the revolution might succeed in taking the money from the TAB tyrants and giving it back to the people.

Handy Harry

08-03-2003, 17:04

Posted @ 08:05:00 PST

Leading bookmaker Michael Eskander may set up an overseas-based online betting exchange agency. He says the emergence of betting exchange outlets threatens his and other Victorian bookmakers by eroding their turnover.

Betfair, the London-based Internet betting agency, is now operating on Australian racing and last weekend it matched bets of $50,000 on the Victoria Gold Cup, while the TAB held $135,000 in win bets.

Wednesday, March 5, 2003

10-03-2003, 09:33

Racing: Future of internet betting looms as racing's hottest topic

10.03.2003
By MIKE DILLON
If exchange betting had been the only subject raised, last week's Asian Racing Federation conference in Auckland would have been a raging success.

Of course, a lot more was achieved.

But exchange betting has suddenly become the No 1 issue facing horse racing whether you live in Perth, Eketahuna or Moscow.

You use the word suddenly because the English-based Betfair has put together a staggering £50 million a week turnover on exchange internet betting, 60 per cent of which is on horse racing.

It works like this: Joe Blow thinks Phar Lap can't win the English Derby, even though he's at $3 with the bookies.

Joe clicks into Betfair and posts a $4 dividend. Punters from anywhere in the world can take the $4 - they back Phar Lap to win the Derby, Joe is backing him to lose.

They may in turn post $6 against Kindergarten in the race after the Derby, therefore backing him to lose against anyone on the net who thinks he can win and likes the odds.

Anyone can be bookmaker or punter on any horse racing.

And Betfair is simply the conduit. The two punters are betting against each other and Betfair takes 5 per cent of the bet value.

Make no mistake, this is the future of race betting if, for no other reason, it is almost impossible to prevent.

There are few reasons why Betfair could not operate illegally if it wished, but it is currently paying gross profit taxes of something like 8 per cent in the UK and expects that to rise to around 15 per cent when the Exchequer declares its new tax laws in Britain later this year.

Betfair has offered the same deal to Australian racing bodies, but so far it's a stand-off. It's wait and see.

But there is no time to lose in embracing exchange betting.

This is much more important than the ramifications of the Racing Bill, which was passed on Friday.

Those who do not accept the value of exchange betting and/or those who are too slow to embrace it, will be swamped by it.

There is no mystery to its appeal and none to the fact that there is strong evidence the £60 million a week is new money to gaming, although that is difficult to prove.

The English delegates at the Asian Racing Federation all believe exchange betting has revitalised interest in betting in the UK.

Easy to see why. Traditionally the bulk of money invested on racing, certainly on this side of the world, has been on raceday.

Suddenly as soon as fields are declared you look up an exchange betting site and there are odds on runners you can take or you can post your own odds on horses you don't fancy to win.

It provides massively increased excitement potential.

There are jurisdictions deadly opposed to its introduction like Hong Kong and Japan, who signed a Good Neighbour Policy late last year to honour the protection of each other's intellectual property rights and to shore against what they see as poachers, such as exchange betting.

Inevitably though, punters bet with their feet.

If punters want exchange betting, someone is going to provide them with it - far better it be the owners of the intellectual property rights, in this case the racing clubs, than pirates.

Better to ensure a percentage of that betting is going back to the clubs and therefore to stakemoney, than to miss out altogether.

If the Asian conference threw up another gem it was that rationalisation and near-monopolies work best in horse racing.

The best results - despite the in-roads of sports betting - are still coming from countries like Hong Kong, Singapore and Korea, with one or two racetracks and only one racing club.

Forget your impression that Korean racing is a backwater because it has been sourcing its racehorses from New Zealand for 10 years with $5000 purchases.

Korea has two racetracks, one racing thoroughbreds, the other ponies.

They race only on weekends, have just 28 off-course betting shops and the annual turnover is US$6.37 billion.

Singapore turns over US$1.6 billion.

Tosser

11-03-2003, 05:01

For anyone who is wondering, Eketahuna is a small town in rural New Zealand used colloquially to illustrate that it generally is the last place to hear of earth-shattering news :)

cheesebeast

12-03-2003, 12:53

Wednesday, 12 March 2003: The Australian Racing Board has distanced itself from the proposed adoption of a “Good Neighbour Policy” as a means of harnessing the influence of internet and offshore bookmakers.

Australian Racing Board Chairman Bob Charley has stressed in a statement issued today that Australia is unlikely to adopt the policy put forward at last week’s Asian Racing Conference in New Zealand.

The GNP proposal was presented to the 20-member countries of the Asian Racing Federation by Lawrence Wong, CEO of the Hong Kong Jockey Club and newly-elected chairman of the ARF.

A “Good Neighbour Policy” calls for countries to not use another the racing product of another country for wagering without prior consent and bans a country from accepting bets from the citizens of countries that are party to the agreement.

A GNP currently exists between Hong Kong and Japan but Charley has stated Australia will not be supporting a wider introduction of the policy encompassing all members of the ARF.

Charley said the ARF Executive Council considerd the proposal at last week’s Auckland conference and had not been agreed to by Australia as previously repoirted.

“It was decided that the principles of the GNP would be recommended to the ARF member with each country to consider whether it wished to become a signatory to a multi-lateral agreement,” Charley said.

“I wish to reiterate this point – the GNP was recommended to all member countries of the ARF; it was not endorsed per se as reported by some media outlets.

“Turning to Australia’s position, it is readily apparent that our circumstances are very different to Hong Kong and Japan.

“In those countries, the racing industry controls everything - wagering, the racecourses and racing – whereas in this country, those functions are spread over myriad players.

“This immediately raises the question – how in a practical sense could Australia become a signatory to an ARF Good Neighbour Policy?”

“Looking beyond this to the concepts of the GNP, the underlying concern that illegal operators should not be permitted to pirate racing’s product is one which racing authorities across the world share.

“However, Australia must make a realistic assessment of the prospects of an international agreement between racing authorities becoming an effective solution to that problem.

“That analysis must also include an assessment of whether it is feasible to hermetically seal wagering markets so that only domestic operators can offer services and, indeed, whether this is consistent with the Australian industry’s need to meet its competitors head-on and internationalise our racing.

“The Australian Racing Board recognises the real concerns held by the Hong Kong Jockey Club and the Japan Racing Association but whether we can agree with them on the right way to resolve these concerns is something we must seriously assess.

“Australia’s position on the ARF Good Neighbour Policy will be formally communicated to Dr Wong following the Australian Racing Board meeting on April 7.”

Handy Harry

12-03-2003, 13:27

Such diplomacy from the Aussies. Sounds like they are thinking of setting up their own version of betfair. Wonder if they will be betting on Hong Kong?

hobbes

12-03-2003, 14:22

Such diplomacy from the Aussies.

yes indeed -- i have rarely read such a bunch of bullshit waffle.

Seabiscuit

12-03-2003, 15:14

It would seem then that the Australian position is probably the one outlined in Charley's letter (posted below on this thread). That position was to allow an exchange or exchanges and to only disallow unlicensed exchanges.

What would be very interesting would be UK, Aust, NZ and USA all taking the free market type route and Hong Kong and Japan taking the protectionist/isolationist approach.

I think Charley is correct. Australia is in a different position to HK. It is more likely to attract outside interest especially from a place like the USA. Timezone OK as Aust races come on in USA evening. Australian racing already has quite a good following in the USA. How about a bilateral trade deal between Australia and the USA on betting exchanges?

HK is more likely to attract interest from those who already bet there or have bet there in the past. A "Good Neighbour Policy" makes more sense to them. They have more to lose from open competition as their people have never had legal gambling options other than racing. Some people might be diverted away from HK racing.

Scarper

13-03-2003, 10:59

i imagine that australia will go the same way as the uk - allow exchanges and try to regulate them some how and have them contribute to racing (as betfair does in the UK). and of course these nations will do well and HK will continue to suffer.

24-03-2003, 20:13

Jockey Club rejects betting exchange firm's 10pc offer
HK body says that the Internet gaming system threatens the integrity of racing

KEVIN SINCLAIR

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Post broke the news last week.

The British gambling firm that has alarmed the Jockey Club and the government with the global success of its high-technology betting exchange system has offered to pay a 10 per cent levy on profits from Hong Kong bets.
Mark Davies, Betfair's communications director, Mark Davies, said in Hong Kong last week that if laws were changed and Hong Kong-based punters were allowed to lay wagers with Betfair, it could even boost Jockey Club profits. But he stressed the firm was rejecting bets from Hong Kong residents as it wanted to stay within Hong Kong law.

"We're a registered bookmaker and a limited company. We're open and transparent and we want to work with sporting authorities all over the world," he said.

"We're not out to steal Hong Kong revenue. We're not freeloaders. If we do increasing business on Hong Kong sports, then the turnover increases and the profits that we pay in a levy to Hong Kong - either to a government agency or the [Jockey] Club - will increase."

But the offer was rejected by the Jockey Club.

The club's chief executive, Lawrence Wong, maintains the club's long-held policy of opposition to offshore gaming.

"It is not in Hong Kong's interest because it channels the money away from the government's tax system," he said.

The Jockey Club has said that the betting exchange system is problematic as it allows a punter to bet to lose. This has obvious implications in a sporting business like racing, where insiders may have an influence on honest outcomes.

Mr Wong added: "We fundamentally object to betting exchanges because they threaten the integrity of racing. It provides opportunities for insiders with privileged information - such as owners, trainers and stable staff - to bet against their own horses. This poses a global threat to legal and clean racing operations."

Under the Gambling Ordinance, it is illegal for punters in Hong Kong to gamble overseas using the Internet or telephone.

The system used by the company is radically different from traditional bookmaking. Instead of betting on an event with a bookmaker laying the odds, Betfair acts as a middle man. One punter uses his Internet account to outline his bet, saying how much he wants to wager and at what odds. Another customer who wants to bet the other way also lodges his offer with Betfair. The company's sophisticated computer system then marries the two customers and takes a small commission, - typically between 1 and 2 per cent, from the winnings.

Government officials did not answer e-mailed and faxed questions on the issue. But the government had asked police to investigate the betting exchange system.

zeditave

24-03-2003, 21:12

so Betfair are not allowing HK accts yet it is depriving the HK govt of tax revenue - how the hell does that work????

HK racing has horses, jockeys, trainers, officials etc from all over the world - why should punters around the world be deprived of the opportunity to follow Shane Dye, Douglas Whyte, John Size etc?

cheesebeast

26-03-2003, 13:56

ON THE RAILS
Jockey Club playing the man, not the ball, in an ever-changing world

MURRAY BELL

One of the most basic concepts of modern business is understanding the nature of change. It's a challenge facing the Hong Kong Jockey Club as it struggles with the "double invasion" of overseas bookmakers and betting exchanges. And it has to be said the evidence that the Club is adequately handling the challenge is far from convincing.
My radar is always triggered when I see or hear someone, to borrow a football term, playing the man rather than the ball. It unfailing tells me the attacker is short on logic and answers, so that discrediting the new player has become the strategy until something more appropriate comes to mind.

And that's exactly the way Jockey Club spokesmen are playing at the moment regarding betting exchanges, whose leaders have been variously described as evil, insidious and potentially representing the end of the world as we know it.

What these overseas operators actually represent is the real world knocking at the door. Hong Kong racing has created the world's number one racing-wagering product and, for that reason, has every reason to feel proud. But it's only natural, with something so good, that the rest of the world will want to take some level of interest.

It must be remembered we are living and working in the era of affordable and easy global travel and of a free information exchange called the Internet. People now move effortlessly, both physically and mentally, across seamless international barriers. The old rules no longer apply.

The advancements in IT mean the world has changed and the old ways won't be returning. It's not a cyclical change like fashion, which sees hemlines high one year and low the next - it's a structural change which will be with us forever, with no turning back.

So fighting the arrival of the commercial outside world with insults is definitely not the answer. In fact, it's so unsophisticated that it's altogether unbecoming. The finances of Hong Kong racing are unique in the world because the vast fortune it gives back, via taxes (some 10 per cent of government revenue) and profit distributions to the worthwhile elements of society - hospitals, charities, scholarships etc.

The Jockey Club has watched total turnover diminish by 22 per cent over the past five years but the actual slippage is greater when viewed on a per race basis, because the number of annual race meetings is much greater now than it was five years ago.

And betting exchanges haven't been a factor there. Overseas bookmakers who have begun operations on Hong Kong racing report limited betting turnover and minimal profits because, largely, they are playing fairly serious punters and they don't have enough uneducated money padding out their books. So they haven't really been a factor, either.

The Jockey Club has spent inordinate amounts of time making high-volume professional players unwelcome over the years, with strict laws about giving telephone and Internet account to non-residents and those legendary account closures when big punters happen to strike a high per-day turnover figure.

But over the past two years, a number of professional expat players have closed up shop and gone home to America, England, Australia or wherever. They say the pools have lost a quarter of their volume and, largely due to advances on information technology, the market is around 25 per cent smarter. That's a big factor.

Now the Jockey Club wants them back, realising (perhaps too late) its past attitude has been a cardinal breach of another of the most basic of business laws - that 80 per per cent of your business will come from 20 per cent of your clients. No other business treats their major customers so indifferently.

The other reality is that Internet bookmakers and betting exchanges are only looking for some action on the win and place markets. They cannot, and will never, compete for the "real money" in racing - the exotics.

The win and place component of the tote represents somewhere between 20 and 25 per cent of turnover - the other 75-80 per cent is secure. So, of the 20-25 per cent of the market the new-generation competition may aim at, what's their potential reach - say 15 per cent? That means between three and four per cent of the total horse wagering market, and there is still the potential for the Jockey Club to generate rights fees off the interlopers anyway.

The major issue facing Hong Kong is the high rate of taxation, which might have been OK in less sophisticated times but it now means the product (ie, wagering) is overpriced and is becoming less attractive in commercial terms to other forms of gambling.

And that's what's fuelling the biggest leakage - to the local, illegal market which offers 10-12 per cent discounts on the tote and therefore boasts a win-place turnover that's bigger than the Jockey Club's.

26-03-2003, 14:31

Yes great article - the HKJC have clearly mishandled this situation - actually if u measure mistakes the HKJC have made some of the biggest in gambling history - cant understand why the Government keeps them on ?

Scarper

26-03-2003, 17:02

yeah the government should have sacked all HKJC officials when they closed your account JB!

26-03-2003, 17:15

Not my account Scarper but when they closed down someone elses it should be recorded as one of the greatest errors in gambling history - i`m sure if Tung Che Wah had have heard about it he would have done a bit of sacking ?

cheesebeast

30-03-2003, 19:34

From: Trigger (Original Message) Sent: 30/03/2003 8:32 AM
Fast approaching his use-by-date?

Was Simon trying to change the subject or was he just asleep?

Reply
Recommend Message 3 of 11 in Discussion

From: happy 2 Sent: 30/03/2003 8:40 AM
what more did you expect from a tab owned program trigger

Reply
Recommend Message 4 of 11 in Discussion

From: gintara™ Sent: 30/03/2003 9:20 AM
I loved his big gaffe - did anyone else pick up his bit about betfair with "say they take 5% on turn-over"

I thought you only paid commission on your profit ??

Reply
Recommend Message 5 of 11 in Discussion

From: Trigger Sent: 30/03/2003 9:41 AM
"they've been trying to ban prostitution for as long as any of us can remember"

"yuppie types, those new age people who like computers" or something like that

Maybe he's trapped in a time warp. Unlike that guy who came back from the future to make a killing on the stock exchange, Schreck has travelled back from the past to make a pest of himself.

Reply
Recommend Message 6 of 11 in Discussion

From: Ima ufo Sent: 30/03/2003 9:58 AM
Yes he did make the blunder re the commision structure.

It was also very untruthful of John Shreck to say that Betfiar isnt willing to put something back into Australian racing ( or USA racing or HK racing) Betfair are willing to give back a certain percentage of their profits to the industry. It just hasnt been accepted yet. And as a lot of this extra money would come from overseas by the Brits etc betting on Aussie racing ( which could rise enormously if there was live racing telelcasts) then that can only provide an avenue of revenue to the raceclubs that at present they dont possess!!!!!!!!!!!

The old crap about jockeys laying thier horses on Betfair is all sensationalist stuff.
If a trainer has an unfit horse that cant win, well, so what if he dcides to make some money out of it? Its up to the punter to make sure that he knows what he is betting on. And if a jockey makes a deliberate mistake in a race, then the stewards have all the amo that they need to give him an extended holiday or ban him for life. Is the crime worth the time?

John Shreack failed to mention that there is no intrusion of betfair into the exotic markets, of which the TAB has a stranglehold. This is highly unlikley to change as it would be too complicated to have quinella and trifecta exchanges. Most people dont hold large betting accounts.

From all of that hoewever was that Betfair and co are here to stay. Now we can all get stuck in and start making some serious money. Stuff the greedy TABS.

Reply
Recommend Message 7 of 11 in Discussion

From: happy 2 Sent: 30/03/2003 10:14 AM
is betfair here to stay? Haven,t they already stopped it in hong kong

Reply
Recommend Message 8 of 11 in Discussion

From: Ima ufo Sent: 30/03/2003 10:17 AM
Not as far as I know.
Its just illegal to bet with them if you are a HK resident. And I guess that the HK secret police are a bit scarier than ours.

Reply
Recommend Message 9 of 11 in Discussion

From: happy 2 Sent: 30/03/2003 10:24 AM
i,ve heard that any banking transaction within hk to a betting exchange has to be reported by the bank to the police

Reply
Recommend Message 10 of 11 in Discussion

From: Ima ufo Sent: 30/03/2003 10:26 AM
Yep, that sounds about right. Then you quietly dissapear...

Reply
Recommend Message 11 of 11 in Discussion

From: gallopers Sent: 30/03/2003 7:30 PM
i can see it now A.S.I.O. dispatching a couple of there best to pay a friendly visit to aunty marge at bourke as the local A.N.Z. has reported a $20 deposit into her betfair account.
she screams bugger as she's led away in handcuffs (i was going to lay northerly on saturday and get enough for a flaggon ) you bastards

zeditave

31-03-2003, 13:32

didn't see the show - was anyone there to speak up for Betfair or the punter, or was in simply Schreck sprouting his poorly researched, doomsday-seer crap full of more holes than fishnet stockings?

imaufo

01-04-2003, 10:57

http://images.animfactory.com/animations/money/bills_coins/falling_bills_md_wht.gif

"The Hong Kong Jockey Club has decided that as other major racing countries such as the UK and Australia are heading down the betting exchange path, it has no choice but to do the same. A HKJC spokesman said "If we just sit back and allow other countries to get an inside running on this, Hong Kong We want to maintain our place as the preeminent racing centre in the world.

We are happy to at least trial the concept for a season. At the end of the season a review will take place into the costs and benefits of the exchange and a longer term decision will then be made".

It is believed that recent reports of Betfair being well received by the Australian Racing Board and RVL sparked the HKJC into action. No decision has been made yet on rates of commission but it is believed they will be competitive with those offered by Betfair and other exchanges. It is expected that the exchange will allow soccer betting as well as horse race betting."

http://images.animfactory.com/animations/money/bills_coins/falling_bills_md_wht.gif

Read all abou the HKJC decision (http://www.asianracing.nu/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=8152#post8152)

Seabiscuit

01-04-2003, 11:07

Sounds like an April Fool's Day joke to me

Scarper

01-04-2003, 11:27

maybe the americans took out the evil dictators at the HKJC to help boost moral.

imaufo

22-04-2003, 18:41

Betfair is proud to announce that it has won a Queen's Award for Enterprise, in the Innovation category, for 2003.

The award is the latest and most significant endorsement the company has received, and will allow Betfair to carry the Queen's Award emblem on its site for the next five years.

A Queen's Award is given (as its name suggests) by the Queen, on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, and following a full assessment by the Department of Trade and Industry. .

http://www.royal.gov.uk/files/images/Royal_F1_1b_background.jpg

"I love Betfair...John Shreck is a silly goose and treasonous...I am always backing my ponies whenever I have a " good thing " at Ascot..."

Scarper

25-04-2003, 09:29

By Alan Lee.
24 April 2003
The Times
(c) 2003 Times Newspapers Ltd.

THE big bookmakers must be grinding their teeth at the latest recognition for the march of the betting exchanges. Traditional fixed-odds firms would like nothing better than to shut down the pesky newcomers whose bold ideas have taken so much of their business - at the very worst, they want to see them taxed punitively.

Imagine the fury in bookies' boardrooms yesterday when it was announced that Betfair, launched on a laptop in a back room by two university mates and now the burgeoning pioneers of the exchange revolution, has won a Queen's Award for Enterprise.

i just cant imagine anyone feeling that much sympathy for the bookies - what they should expect after years and years of ripping people off

http://www.royal.gov.uk/files/images/Royal_F1_1b_background.jpg
'Off with their heads'

imaufo

25-04-2003, 09:32

i just cant imagine anyone feeling that much sympathy for the bookies - what they should expect after years and years of ripping people off

Certainly nobody is feeling any sympathy for the TABS in Australia after ripping people off for years and years. Most people are happy to see the greedy get their come-uppance.

25-04-2003, 09:57

What a Huge rap for Betfair .

cheesebeast

30-04-2003, 13:28

ON THE RAILS
HK stands to benefit from all this 'badness'

MURRAY BELL, Racing Editor

A news story in the Business section of the Post caught my attention the other week. It featured a doctor who had gone beyond prescriptions and pathology and successfully learned the art of trading shares and futures. He would log on to the Internet around 5am each day to check his investments on the international markets and acquire relevant information before making critical buy/sell decisions.
This simple process, acted out by thousands of people all around the world every day, begs a number of questions: How does this doctor's thoroughly legitimate use of his intellect and training for profit on the markets differentiate him from educated players on horse racing? Why is he an investor-trader but one who attempts to capitalise on price vagaries in racing is a "gambler"? Why is he "astute" when he gains an edge while a punter looking for a similar advantage in horse racing is "greedy"?

Why can our medico friend freely trade on the New York, Tokyo, Sydney or London exchanges while racing traders are guilty of some vague form of criminality if they do the same thing?

What makes it legal and admirable for the good doctor to click his way to a profit on foreign exchange markets while a bet in any form on Saturday's Kentucky Derby - one of the world's great horse races - is illegal?

And finally, how would our doctor feel if the government took 18 per cent off the top of his transactions? Do you think it might make a wee bit of difference to his bottom line?

Of course, any mainstream investor who had to pay an 18 per cent transaction tax would think twice. But punters are forced to live with this level of taxation, week in, week out - and when they even think about doing something about it, they are branded "greedy" by certain racing authorities (who are almost always non bettors).

Wagering on Hong Kong racing has been in decline for five years. Turnover has contracted 22 per cent during that time, but the per-race contraction is even greater because there are more races to bet on now.

This season, the decline continues, with turnover each meeting somewhere between 10 and 20 per cent lower than the equivalent meeting last year. The government's response to an industry in decline, as semaphored in Financial Secretary Antony Leung Kam-chung's Budget, was to raise the tax on exotic bets. They called it a one per cent increase, which is actually a lie because going from 18 per cent tax to 19 per cent is a 5.6 per cent increase in anyone's ledger.

While Jockey Club chairman Ronald Arculli, the consummate politician, was positioning his organisation to educate all levels of government on the very real need for tax relief on wagering, Leung blew it by going for an increase instead. Was that arrogance or ignorance?

The Jockey Club is one of the great institutions of the world, not just Hong Kong. It already contributes over 11 per cent of gross taxation to the SAR and is the biggest single benefactor to hospitals, charities, scholarships and worthwhile causes. Its stewards and top 200 members represent the upper elite of Hong Kong society. And its business is wagering.

The government needs to get over its sadly outdated and (it has to be said) cynical view that gambling is inherently bad, but getting so much money from this "badness" is inherently good.

It needs to understand that top-quality racing, as Hong Kong showcases every week at Happy Valley and Sha Tin, is actually an international business and a legitimate trading vehicle, because of its high level of predictability.

Just look at Queen Elizabeth II Cup day, where all three feature races were won by favourites - a magnificent showcasing of Hong Kong's leading edge racing-wagering product.

And the Hong Kong government needs to understand this truth: that if the racing-wagering market opens up to the greater world like mainstream financial markets have done, Hong Kong will ultimately be a substantial net beneficiary.

Scarper

30-04-2003, 13:44

i couldnt agree more. but the HK gov needs cash so its going to take it now and pay the price later.

cheesebeast

10-03-2004, 11:47

Courtesy South China Morning Post

Fallon furore fuels betting exchange row

'Someone with inside information can gain substantial financial benefit' - Club

MURRAY BELL

The Kieren Fallon case in England has further amplified the case against betting exchanges, vociferous critic the Hong Kong Jockey Club said yesterday.

"The betting exchange is a tool where someone with inside information can gain a substantial financial benefit," executive director of racing Winfried Engelbrecht-Bresges said after Fallon, 39, was suspended for 21 days by the Jockey Club (UK) disciplinary committee. The champion jockey failed to ride Ballinger Ridge all the way to the line at Lingfield last week, resulting in defeat at the hands of heavily backed favourite Rye.

"I have had many discussions, with a number of very senior jockeys from both England and Europe and they all tell me the same thing - that betting exchanges are the worst thing to happen to horse racing over there," Engelbrecht-Bresges said, confirming the HKJC's expressed view that betting exchanges represent "the biggest threat to racing's integrity, worldwide".

"They tell me it is becoming more and more common for owners to hint to them that their horse will not be placed. They take this as a clear indication that this is owner's preference, to lose rather than win. For a top jockey, for any jockey, this is surely the worst thing that can happen to them."

Engelbrecht-Bresges forecast that racing's major global bodies - the Asian Racing Federation and the International Federation of Horse Racing Authorities - would be asking member countries to lobby their politicians to make betting exchanges illegal. Hong Kong has very real influence because HKJC chief executive Lawrence Wong Chi-kong is chairman of the ARF and one of two deputy chairmen of the IFHRA.

A betting exchange allows punters to establish cash accounts and then offer each other odds via the exchange's website. It acts as a go-between to match the backer with the layer at whatever odds they agree and then takes a small percentage from the winning side of any matched bet.

The British Jockey Club said its disciplinary panel had only considered Fallon's riding offence and had taken legal advice that the charge against the jockey, and the resulting penalty, would not prejudice any further investigation or inquiry into the betting and other circumstances surrounding the controversial defeat.

Engelbrecht-Bresges said that while the betting exchange might already be a significant problem for British racing, it would be a nightmare in Hong Kong, where every ride on every horse is subject to near microscopic inspection by the media and the public. "Besides the integrity question, the other problem is the perception issue and, for Hong Kong racing, it would create a [negative] perception which I fear the game could not handle."

The pro-exchange lobby will undoubtedly argue that, in the Fallon case at Lingfield last week, it was one of their number - leading British-based exchange Betfair - which phoned the track before the race in question and advised of a suspicious betting pattern, from players which had allegedly been involved in suspicious betting patterns beforehand.

But Engelbrecht-Bresges argues the alert mechanisms don't really help a race club. "Even if they do alert you, the problem is the damage has been done - you cannot prevent it. The other thing is that even with the information about who has been backing certain horses, it is very easy to have two or three people in front and the identity of the real offender well hidden.

"The other aspect of having this information is one of jurisdiction. We may wish to question a person in another country, but have absolutely no authority over them."

However, even if the philosophical objections to betting exchanges did not exist, Engelbrecht-Bresges said the finances of wagering through betting exchanges would spell doom for horse racing.

"The exchanges are offering us 0.3 per cent of their turnover as a product fee. But we [Jockey Club] cannot run this business on that sort of commission. Zero point three per cent is not an appropriate remuneration for the organisation that is running the business of racing - how does any jurisdiction cope with such a negative impact in its finances?"

zeditave

10-03-2004, 12:11

The fact is this was a race where there were two horses in the betting (effectively 100%), the rest were 25/1 plus. Any betting establishment could have had the same problem because

Backing one of the pair was effectively laying the other.

With another bookmaker, or a tote, the other mules (a maiden at Lingfield is about as low as you can go in the UK) would make up the 15-20% in their market.

Only Betfair's stringent audit trail, reporting system and relationship with the UK Jockey Club is capable of catching the crook(s) in this case. The fluctuations for the race are nothing unusual - a horse going from 6/4 to 3/1 back into 5/2 is fairly common, and it wasn't why the stewards were notified 10 minutes before the race. It was because a couple of 'marked' accounts were active on this race. They had been noticed previously and flagged because of suspicious activity.

If the horse won, or looked like it was genuinely beaten, then I doubt there'd have been an issue. The fact was the ride looks suspicious at best and despite the margin, a racecaller has told me from the video he saw (I haven't seen the footage), he thought it was almostly perfectly done by Fallon - without the betting information, he would have got away with it scot free, or with just 21 days, which is just about the same thing in my book.

If it is Betfair that has provided the data to catch this guy and bring down a history of suspicious events, then we should be hailing the company, not stepping up attempts to ban them.

cheesebeast

10-03-2004, 14:14

A bit more balance from Alan Aitken - after reading EB's propaganda I had to reach for the bucket.

http://atypically.net/smilies/vomit.gif

Courtesy South China Morning Post

Fallon ban stirs row on exchanges

Alan Aitken

It is some 14 months now since the Jockey Club's executive director of racing, Winfried Engelbrecht-Bresges, described betting exchanges as the "biggest threat to racing's integrity" worldwide and called on all racing jurisdictions to lobby governments for the banning of betting exchange operations on racing.

It is almost exactly a year since former chief steward John Schreck described them as "a cancer that threatens to ruin the horse racing industry" while betting exchanges became the hot topic of the Asian Racing Federation Conference in Auckland.

For all of that, the exchanges' weapons of mass destruction have not been discovered in the interim and it has taken this latest episode with England's champion jockey, Kieren Fallon, at Lingfield to reawaken the debate.

Fallon sat up on his mount well before the end of a race and has apologised for being the cause of defeat for an otherwise undistinguished horse, Ballinger Ridge.

While Fallon's actual offence in losing on Ballinger Ridge is no more than a curiosity to Hong Kong racing fans, it does seem to have been a shocking lapse in judgment from the undisputed champion rider in that part of the world.

It does happen elsewhere, but not that often and never when someone touted as the champion jockey leads by four lengths at the 200m and on a horse described by all concerned with it as something of a non-chaser - of the sort which should surely be kept going regardless of the margin. For this offence, he was handed a 21-day ban - the maximum allowable under the very gentle racing controls the British appear to have shepherded almost untouched through centuries of the sport.

We would hope, in the most unlikely event of a similar instance here that the rider would be looking at a rather longer time on the bench. (Anyone seeking a further giggle at the expense of British racing might note Fallon's counsel was quoted, saying the jockey has "agreed" to the 21-day ban - jolly decent of him really. In more serious jurisdictions, penalties are merely imposed but in the UK there is apparently some arbitration.)

Anyone who would oppose the existence of betting exchanges will see ready ammunition in the wider Fallon case yet to come, as an inquiry is pending into what were described in the Racing Post as "suspicious" betting movements on the race with betting exchanges.

The obvious implication of that inquiry is that someone, whether associated with Fallon or not, was laying heavily against Ballinger Ridge on the exchanges.

Why anyone would not be laying against the noted goat at short odds in anything would be the real question, given the horse's record. However, subsequent reports have suggested that the same people have been involved on the exchanges in unusual betting patterns on other races.

The chief executive of the Association of British Bookmakers weighed in quickly with the usual toilet paper, saying exchanges - where anyone can be a bookmaker and with some degree of anonymity - were "a recipe for disaster" about which his association had been warning the government for some time. According to the association's man, there has been a spate of races in which horses drifted on the exchanges and ran "inexplicably badly".

That, of course, never happened before exchanges came along - in the days when the beneficiaries of any skullduggery were card-carrying members of the association. On the face of it, the existence of exchanges offers someone associated in some way with a horse the path to gain by it losing and that is what so upsets officials in Hong Kong racing.

But though Hong Kong punters have had this yawning opening to make some easy bucks by betting against horses which are not trying, carrying an injury or just not fancied by their connections, they have failed to take the run. Whether because exchange betting is illegal under the Betting Ordinance Amendments of 2002, or they are unfamiliar with the language, technology or concepts involved in exchanges, Hong Kong punters have not taken to them at all, despite their popularity in the UK and, to a lesser extent, the US and Australia.

The exchange holdings on Hong Kong racing are minor and have not gone forward since the early days of their operations. Perhaps Hong Kong punters are scrupulously honest. Perhaps there aren't enough dead 'uns in racing here to keep them interested. Any way you slice it, this apparently obvious invitation to corruption has been refused by people in Hong Kong racing.

We can understand the Jockey Club, or any other administrations choosing not to come to agreements on licensing with the exchanges on the basis of revenues but the argument on integrity has been and will continue to be a red herring. And beside anything to be taken from this Fallon episode, the better for flogging exchanges, this is the chance for the positives to emerge just as strongly.

On the day of the Lingfield race, stewards officiating at the meeting did not immediately ban Fallon under any rule as they had been alerted to these unusual betting patterns on the exchanges. Such moves may not have been as obvious in the days when stewards' money trail information was based on bookmaker betting.

In the pending inquiry, investigators will have access to the money trail, to the (hopefully) actual identities of those involved in laying against the horse, whomever they may be. That certainly would not have happened in the pre-exchange days when such wagering was cash business or occurred under some pseudonym with one's friendly turf accountant.

And certainly, in the pre-exchange days, the stewards there would not have had the facility to tie unusual patterns in one race in with unusual patterns in other races.

Only the betting exchange technology allows this so readily.

Betting exchanges allow anyone at all to sign up, deposit money to their account and become bookies or bettors as they wish. It is simple and it works and it is here to stay.

http://racing.scmp.com/english/images/news/lead10032004d.jpg

imaufo

12-03-2004, 11:48

Betting exchanges making our lives hell, says Dwyer

http://racing.scmp.com/english/images/news/lead12032004c.jpg

Martin Dwyer and Ballinger Ridge
ALAN AITKEN

English jockey Martin Dwyer has waded into the storm over Kieren Fallon by claiming that riders are under added pressure these days and that betting exchanges are to blame.

Dwyer was aboard Ballinger Ridge on Tuesday as the horse won his first race, just days after being controversially beaten at Lingfield. That defeat cost English champion Fallon a 21-day ban for failing to ride the horse out to the line. Ballinger Ridge had held a significant lead with 200 metres to run but was caught on the line by favourite Rye. Authorities were alerted to unusual odds movements on betting exchanges leading up to the race, with Fallon's ride easy in the betting before the sensational defeat.

Dwyer had been the regular rider of Ballinger Ridge but was unavailable last week and Fallon stood in for that one race. Fallon told Britain's Racing Post: "I'm sure Kieren will bounce back. To me he thought he had the race in the bag last week, but when you stop riding [Ballinger Ridge] he stops dead. You have to keep him going."

Dwyer said he believed exchange betting on the internet had changed the degree of scrutiny on jockeys.

"There is a lot of pressure on all of us. You get stick walking into and out of the racecourse. It wasn't like this when I started out, and it's down to this internet betting," he said. "I'm afraid to answer the phone these days. I just hope people keep the faith and ride out the storm. It's a very clean sport and I hope people continue to support us."

After Ballinger Ridge's win on Tuesday, his trainer, Andrew Balding, again defended Fallon's effort.

"Looking back at the circumstances of last week's defeat, I can't believe Kieren deliberately threw the race - it doesn't make any sense to me. I can't see any evidence that he accepted money for getting beaten on the horse," he said.

"Kieren's under immense pressure, but he's the best jockey in the country, possibly the world. He should have won, but everyone's fallible and he made a mistake. I'm sure the Jockey Club investigation will find the truth. So long as it's cleared up I hope one day he'll be riding for us again."

The on-track fallout from Fallon's 21-day suspension has begun, with the rider losing the mount on big-race contender Fremen to his biggest rival, Darryll Holland.

Fellow rider John Egan, who has been linked with Fallon in News Of The World stories alleging corruption in racing, said he had "nothing to answer for" after also winning a race at Lingfield on Tuesday.

"These tabloid papers will change and twist things and manipulate people's minds. I've nothing to answer for. I conduct myself in a professional manner," he told UK television in reference to the "Fake Sheikh" undercover reporters who wrote damaging stories about both riders. "I was led to believe they were big sheikhs, who would be sponsoring races and so on and would be good for racing, but unfortunately they were just trampsters. It was all just a set-up, but there's nothing I can do about that now."

Scarper

12-03-2004, 13:07

Betting exchanges making our lives hell, says Dwyer

the racing industry needs to get a grip on reality.....

Seabiscuit

22-06-2004, 19:26

http://www.bettingmarket.com/betfairinthenews.htm

Story about Betfair in Asia.

Just_for_profit

23-06-2004, 20:15

Did you guys notice the comment by the BF bloke in Asia (Levenge or whatever) to the effect that BF is assessing the betting bussiness it is doing on HK and - presumably - may cease operations on HK?

Of course, it might have been a gesture to help it open talks with the HKJC.

cheesebeast

25-05-2005, 11:10

ARC Panelists Debate Betting Exchanges
by Amy Whitfield
Date Posted: 5/24/2005 1:24:23 PM
Last Updated: 5/24/2005 6:07:18 PM

Betting exchanges were a hot topic at the 30th Asian Racing Conference Tuesday as representatives from Australia and the United Kingdom went head to head on the issue of online betting sites and their impact on the future of horseracing.

Candid opinions, mostly critical of the UK's allowance of the betting site Betfair.com, sprung from a 15-member panel arranged to discuss the future relationship between wagering and racing in Asia and across the world. Twenty Asian countries are represented at the conference being held in Seoul, Korea this week.

The heated discussion resembled a similar debate on betting exchanges during the Symposium on Racing in Tucson, Ariz., last December, between those viewing betting exchanges as inevitable competitors to current wagering systems, and those who view them as an imminent financial and integrity threats to the sport.

Peter Fletcher of Tabcorp, an Australian gaming and wagering company, escalated the conversation Tuesday morning when he said the allowance of Betfair "is clearly the worst mistake in the history of government racing administration and the second worst mistake has been the refusal of the British administration to admit they actually made an error."

Fletcher's comment met a burst of applause from the audience.

Internet betting exchanges, which allow handicappers to bet on or against a horse to win or lose, are considered illegal in the U.S. and most countries besides the UK and Ireland. Betfair is the most popular of such Internet exchanges, which have been accused of accepting wagers from people in countries where exchanges are illegal and in some cases taking data and simulcasting signals without authorization. The main concern is these illegal sites don't financially contribute back to the industry.

Fletcher maintained betting exchanges pose a severe and direct threat to the wagering market, betray customer confidence in the product, and threaten the image of the racing industry.

Tristram Ricketts, secretary general of the British Horseracing Board, was the sole betting exchange advocate on the panel,who, minutes before Fletcher's inciting comment, said betting exchanges "were popular with the British punters, they're seen by the United Kingdom government at least as a form of competition to the bookmaker and they are here to stay."

Betting exchanges may have staying power in the UK if they are properly regulated, equitably taxed, and contribute adequately to the horseracing industry, as Ricketts pointed out they should, but the idea of sanctioning the sites elsewhere, like Australia, has been and will be met with much opposition if the ARC panel is a true representation of global interests.

Hong Kong journalist and panel member Murray Bell said he thinks the betting exchange debate is more about economics than the integrity issue.

"I think the integrity issue is much more a scare tactic," Bell said.

Maurits Bruggink, executive director of the International Federation of Horseracing Authority said that his organization is continuing its efforts to protect intellectual rights and the integrity of the sport through a three-prong action plan, including a racing trust mark.

"This racing trust mark aims to encourage betting Web sites to make contributions to racing," Bruggink said. "It gives those sites a tool to market their sites as ones that support the racing industry and respect our Good Neighbor policy. And it also shows consumers, the punters, that they are paying for an unpirated product. We hope to present this trust mark in October this year."

Last October Japan became one of the horse racing authorities of 50 countries which agreed with the IFHA's basic principles concerning the provision of cross-border betting services.

The provision on wagering is referred to as Article 28 or the Good Neighbor Policy. The two basic principles are: no one should be permitted to offer betting possibilities on races without having the express agreement of the racing authority staging those events or the rights holder of the racing data and pictures. Secondly, no one should offer betting possibilities to people living in countries where it is forbidden by law.

"It's difficult to enforce the Good Neighbor Policy on the Internet, but it's not impossible," Bruggink said.

Japan, like America, has taken other measures to prevent illegal betting exchanges by working with major credit card companies, like Visa, to notify bettors not to use credit cards on questionable betting sites.

When asked by an audience member what measures Asian racing countries could take toward protecting their wagering products, Bruggink suggested racing authorities should continue to work with credit card companies and representatives should educate their governments and racing authorities about new technologies like geo location software that could simply identify where bets are coming from and stop transactions accordingly.

Copyright © 2005 The Blood-Horse, Inc. All Rights Reserved. http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=28289

cheesebeast

25-05-2005, 11:13

Flat earthers' conference?

Conference explores protection from illiegal operators 24 May 2005Hong Kong Jockey ClubWays to deal with the omnipresent threat of unlimited, unregulated and uncontrolled (3U) wagering on horseracing formed the principal message at Tuesday's business sessions at the 30th Asian Racing Conference in Seoul.

Mr Lawrence T Wong, Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Jockey Club (HKJC) and Chairman of the Asian Racing Federation (ARF), called for government support for betting tax reform and stronger legal protection to make horseracing more competitive against illegal and unauthorised operators.

"Only with such government backing can we continue to generate tax and provide community support," Mr Wong said.

Mr Wong also praised the successful united front by ARF members in adopting the Good Neighbour Policy where the use of racing data or images for wagering purposes is only allowed with the express consent of the organisation staging the events and/or the relevant rights holders.

Opening the day's business, Mr Bob Charley, Vice Chairman of the ARF, described the free-riding, unlicensed betting operators as "the scourge of our age" and betting exchanges came in for particular criticism.

Mr Peter Fletcher of Tabcorp, Australia's leading Tote operator, described the UK's legalisation of the exchanges as "the worst mistake in the history of international racing administration."

The second worst mistake, he said, "was not to admit that they had made a mistake in the first place."

"Betting exchanges fail the test in terms of integrity and fail the test in terms of funding the sport. They will not enhance racing," Mr Fletcher added, drawing spontaneous applause from the large attendance.

Mr Peter V'Landys, the Chief Executive of Racing New South Wales, also issued a broadside to the exchanges in terms of how racing is funded.

V'Landys said the exchanges had offered only A$0.27 cents of funding compared to A$4.50 cents earned from the Tote for every A$100 bet on Australian racing.

"The level of success of the racing industry equals the level of success of the funding it receives. There will be no racing industry with these kinds of contributions from betting exchanges," he warned.

Mr Henry Chan, the HKJC's Executive Director of Betting, addressed the conference on how the Hong Kong government's provision of a flexible regulatory framework in the sphere of football betting had helped the HKJC combat the illegal market.

Mr Chan said a similar preliminary framework had been agreed for racing in Hong Kong - a sport that has been too rigidly regulated for too long - and he hoped that the necessary legislative changes would be effective by the end of the year.

Such revisions would enable the HKJC to modernise Hong Kong's betting duty structure to enhance competitiveness of its racing product against illegal and offshore bookmakers. This move would also enable the Club to introduce new bets types, to stage more meetings and to simulcast more races from overseas, Mr Chan concluded.

Mr Maurits Bruggink, Commercial Director of the International Federation of Horseracing Authorities (IFHA), outlined an action plan to deal with the problem of illegal wagering on racing.

Bruggink said IFHA members needed to co-operate with the World Intellectual Property Rights Organisation (WIPO), a subsidiary organisation within the umbrella of the United Nations, to inform their respective governments on the extent of the illegal market and then tackle this leakage in revenue.

A 'Racing Trust Mark' is on course to be established later this year whereby websites in compliance with the Good Neighbour Policy (also adopted as Article 28 of the IFHA) would receive a seal of approval as contributors to racing, unlike the illegal operators, Bruggink added.

Finally, Dr Kenji Kominami, Executive Counsellor Foreign Affairs of the Japan Racing Association (JRA), said international co-operation between ARF and IFHA members was of paramount importance in tackling illegal wagering.

Dr Kominami cited a recent a ruling last month where the World Trade Organisation ruled in favour of the United States' attempts to restrict unregulated Internet gambling, a move that had been supported by the JRA.

http://www.thoroughbrednews.co.nz/international/Default.asp?id=18321&page_no=0&trainer_id=0&stud_id=0

Seabiscuit

25-05-2005, 11:21

Peter Fletcher of Tabcorp, an Australian gaming and wagering company,
escalated the conversation Tuesday morning when he said the allowance of
BetFair "is clearly the worst mistake in the history of government racing
administration and the second worst mistake has been the refusal of the
British administration to admit they actually made an error."

I reckon Peter's bottom lip would have quivered as he made these comments.

Anyway good to see that old Pete is still gainfully employed with Tabcorp. I feared he might never get another job after TAB Ltd disappeared.

Tosser

26-05-2005, 11:12

I stopped reading the first article after:

Internet betting exchanges, which allow handicappers to bet on or against a horse to win or lose, are considered illegal in the U.S. and most countries besides the UK and Ireland

Clearly the broad has no idea what she is talking about. Good to see Fletcher and V'Landys opening their trap outside of Australia away from the prying eyes and ears of Packer's lawyers...

I really fear for the future of racing in this part of the word (NZ and to a lesser extent Oz). Quite apart from the lemmings running it, it seems obvious to me Hong Kong are hell-bent on becoming a racing centre of excellence and that includes punters.

The Good Neighbour Policy is a bunch of crap as I suspect what HK are really after are their exotic pools opened internationally, and thus creating "THE" best, biggest and brightest betting product worldwide. Watch the international money pour into Hong Kong (and the HK government getting their take) if this ever eventuates. Watch the effect on other horse racing jurisdictions. Why they spend so much breath on Betfair is beyond me as I will be a very old man when the day arrives that a betting exchange can compete with totes on exotic bets.

I look at my own country's horse racing industry which is fast going to the dogs. Hong Kong owners are basically raping us when it comes to horse flesh, any punter with intelligence doesn't bet on NZ racing because the pools (on NZ racing) are now too small, and we have a government who doesn't really care about the industry - NZ's racing industry will become a breeding industry and not much else.

The Fletcher and V'Landy's of this world should spend a bit of time waking up and thinking about the (long-term) future of horse racing in their neck of the woods and what are the real threats. They should be asking themselves the following questions:

What government depends most on racing industry turnover to help fund taxation income?
What country has the most to gain through increasing racing industry turnover? If they can't increase it domestically (in fact, if it has been falling at alarming rates over the past 5+ years), how do you think they will reverse the trend?
In 10 year's time, who will be the major competitor(s) to their racing industry in repect of the turnover provided by their domestic customers?

I keep coming up with the same answer to all 3 questions. Thanks to the internet, governments are pushing sh1t up hill if they think they can ringfence their citizens they are supposed to represent when it comes to commerce, and gambling in particular. To some (e.g. UK, HK?) that represents an opportunity. To others (NZ, Australia?), I wonder how far the ostrich has its head buried.