Australian
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 95 comments are related to the topic:
Betfair boycotts Golden Slipper day and NSW racing
Betfair boycotts Golden Slipper day and NSW racing
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 95
|
By:
I am sure Betfair will provide the correct figures. For sure.
|
|
By:
correct barney .. something wil have to change
|
|
By:
Barney
The answer to your earlier question is $20 |
|
By:
turnover in the NSW legislation is "back bet turnover" so they only look at one side of it, which is good but still
$1.01's are shockers under the new rules $1000 on to win $10 - commission is a max of 50 cents, 1.5% of $1000 is $15 - Betfair out of pocket $14.50 |
|
By:
sorry Joel - u beat me to it
 |
|
By:
Sure I did, copycat from Ballarat
 |
|
By:
went to school and got the strap
|
|
By:
Castiron
so the turnover betfair display atr the top of the page are different from those they declare for product fee purposes?? |
|
By:
HOWEVER....is in play included, as it is a product no one else offers........
|
|
By:
so on a $1.01 chance, just to break even in the above scenario - Betfair would need to charge 150% commission
Wahoo - easy $10 win, Betfair - sorry commission on that is $15, so I'd owe them $5  Barney - the turnover the show is double the actual turnover |
|
By:
i think it would be Joel
|
|
By:
but which one do they pay the % on double or single??
|
|
By:
betfair is still making a profit although much less.
i dont think it is all doom and gloom. exterminate the traders and just have an exchange sorry....eliminate ! |
|
By:
Betfair will switch off NSW No risk
otherwise they will leave themself wide open for all other states to follow |
|
By:
bf can 'know' a trader ... after a race ... but not before
they cannot presume what a customer might do before ... & during a race |
|
By:
Barney
They only pay turnover on the amounts people are backing to win. They don't double up on the lay side. |
|
By:
Good debate fellas. Joel raises the point that needs massive clarification. If a bookmaker lays back a bet it's not T/O?? If so it's quite easy for betfair to work out who's traded after a race and net position etc. We have no dramas then! (waiting for a sledgehammer................)
|
|
By:
If they charge the fee on in running it shows they have absolutely no idea. B/f probably would lose on every in running race so would need to stop....1.50% of nothing is nothing, whereas 10 or 15% of profit would be OK on something they can't get anywhere else.
|
|
By:
this is from racing nsw
How will “bet backs” be treated for the purpose of determining fees? Unlike totalizators and betting exchanges, wagering operators’ laying fixed-odds bets (i.e. bookmakers’ odds) are “at risk” and can suffer a net loss (i.e. turnover is less than amounts paid to their wagering customers on winning bets) on an event based on the outcome of that event. A wagering operator laying fixed-odds bets is entitled to a “credit” (i.e. effectively a deduction on their turnover for the purpose of assessing fees) for a genuine bet back if, but only if, the bet back is made via an account (i.e. no “credits” for cash bets) with an Australian-licensed wagering operator who: • has a race field information use approval from Racing NSW; AND • is actually paying fees to the NSW racing industry in that financial year. The onus is on the wagering operator claiming the credit for a bet back to demonstrate that they are entitled to that credit (e.g. a bookmaker will have to produce the details of the relevant account with the other Australian-licensed wagering operator and be able to prove it was a genuine bet-back meeting the above requirements). If the wagering operator can not satisfactorily demonstrate that those requirements have been satisfied then the wagering operator will be assessed on the full amount of the bet without any “offsetting credit” for the bet back. |
|
By:
Doesn't betfair classify themselves as a bookmaker, and manage risk by betting back each bet with a corresponding bet....therefore their turnover is Zero as for every bet they lay they bet back.
|
|
By:
thanks for that Womble, found that in the PC report as well with the definition of T/O.
So therefore BF itself is the wagering operator. I wish I was the wagering operator! (Take your point Joel..) I'm sure smarter people than me have looked at this..:( BUT it raises a good point for mine...the tax isn't intended to mess around a bookie who lays off. Why shouldn't it be the same for us? |
|
By:
wasnt that what the whole court case was about and betfair lost
|
|
By:
Here's the operator page, with the tax rule:
http://www.racingnsw.com.au/default.aspx?s=approved-licensed-wagering-operators |
|
By:
the court case was on the leveling of a turnover tax...or whatever NSW saw fit. I'm just looking (i'm sure stupidly) at the definition of a T/O tax...
|
|
By:
good find Josh - i'm sure they would change the law pretty quickly if they tried that Joel, nice thinking though
|
|
By:
like I keep saying, I'm sure someone has looked at this...but if you have a law, with an intent that the wagering operator/provider get that credit..why wouldn't it apply within the operator's structure? IF that makes any sense. There's possibly another law that defines an exchanges turnover...but if not...
|
|
By:
Whilst this has been a popular topic on this forum I cannot see it got a mention on the General Betting forum.
Kicked out of France, kicked out of Spain, if I were a broker advising my pomme friends who hold Betfair shares, I would advise sell, sell, sell. |
|
By:
Sth Africa also???
|
|
By:
yep SA too (for its residents). it's racing's loss. we just have to evolve or die. I wish racing realised that too.
|
|
By:
I for one would boycott NSW personally.
This whole topic of intellectual property is ridiculous. It's a desperate greedy grasp to get money to pay for drunken teenagers who contribute nothing to racing. Who owns the field? Racing Club. Who owns the jockey name? The jockey. Who owns the horse name? The owner. So don't publish the field, race name, venue or barrier. Publish the horse name and jockey with an event ID. Give a percentage to the jockey and the owner and give the Clubs nothing, nada, zip. Because that's exactly what they deserve. |
|
By:
the major trouble is the industry (all codes) are top heavy. They want punters to pay the prize money for more and more horses and more and more races, There are too many venues and pools are too small, they will kill the golden goose.
all the codes fromall the states need a round table meeting to rationalise the number of meetings, breeders and buyers of blood stock need to have a good hard look at themselves. Singelton, harvey etc want to buy million dollar yearings and they want me and you to subsides them, Fck them. |
|
By:
The cause may be better served pursuing the advertisement on the price of punting , as Betfair does( or at least gives the option ).
Make all the TAB's print on the betting tickets the cost of the bet. Printed ticket will show on a $ 100 bet the take-out: ie $ 19 etc. Currently this is hidden ....would open some eyes |
|
By:
you are right there AP
doubt if many tab punters have a clue how their dividend is decided i also doubt if it would achieve anything though |
|
By:
geese i hope betfair dont go otherwise ill have to head back to work . but i hope they pull out of sydney and hurt em
|
|
By:
Sadly most punters have no interest in take out/ commission rates.
|
|
By:
we are guessing about how it proceeds but my guess will be they will approach Racing Nsw and ask for the 1.5% to be on charged on the total amount won on any race. I think if Racing NSW say no that will be it for Betfair betting on their races. I could worry about it but really wasting my mental energy doing that but hoping Betfair roll on in Australia
|
|
By:
didnt racing NSW knock back 10 % of gross profits craig
iam tipping they want want 1.5 % Just cut them off |
|
By:
top link josh ta ... re 'bet back' approvals
with bf a legitmate 'bet back' for corrs & books .. then layoffs and therefore liquidity ... on 'well fancied or backed' runners should remain intact ... as bf becomes THE medium outlet for this activity the court case was determined on 'protectionism' (fair play) ... regarding a perceived disadvantage to Interstate Operators ... but the judges could find no parrallel of interstate protectionism ... as most operators were gambling from computers which were determined as being 'non-state' relevant (as i read it) |
|
By:
they already bet back with Betfair Thebas - have been doing so for ages, the problem is to pay the 1.5% Betfair need to do something different, especially with traders - they can't have turnover they don't get commission on
got a little bit of a run on Racing Review today - Mark Sheen half got it in saying that Betfair generates turnover until he started talking about the industry setting up their own exchange Ritchie dumped Betfair pretty quick and he is meant to care about punters  |
|
By:
until he started talking about the industry setting up their own exchange
cheers womble it WAS written into the recent victab govt agreement ... that they can open an exchange if they choose ... as well as have their current suburban shop fronts if this exercise is just to get rid of bf ... to start up their own ... then that stinks of protectionism ... if not state based ... morally based lol ....... (no legal precedent for business morals tho i don't think) it's a changing landscape at the moment ... and the painting is still fuzzy |