General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
add your views here
Show More
1. International bookmakers who offer decent odds, e.g. SBOBET, are driven from the market giving punters worse value.
2. UK players will now all be protected by the UK Gambling Commission. Is this organisation fit for purpose? e.g. Betbutler.
Ultimately will UK customers end up better or worse off as a result?
2. UK players will now all be protected by the UK Gambling Commission. Is this organisation fit for purpose? e.g. Betbutler.
Ultimately will UK customers end up better or worse off as a result?
We know that UK players are not protected by the UK Gambling Commission. Their goals are as follows;
Through effective regulation and public engagement we permit gambling and
ensure:
• it is crime free
• it is fair and open
• children and vulnerable people are protected
They fail horrendously on every single level.
How can you permit FOBTs and for one moment think it will be crime free?
How can you have bookmakers restricting accounts as they have been and think it is open and fair? How can it be fair that I could place two bets on an account and have it closed, yet on another you could lose £250k. How can it be fair that you do not have a realistic chance to win what you could lose?
How can you honestly go into a selection of bookmakers and tell me that the vulnerable are being protected. How on earth are online casinos allowed to advertise on tv.
The industry is in a complete mess with so much of it stemming from pathetic direction from the UK Gambling Commission.
Through effective regulation and public engagement we permit gambling and
ensure:
• it is crime free
• it is fair and open
• children and vulnerable people are protected
They fail horrendously on every single level.
How can you permit FOBTs and for one moment think it will be crime free?
How can you have bookmakers restricting accounts as they have been and think it is open and fair? How can it be fair that I could place two bets on an account and have it closed, yet on another you could lose £250k. How can it be fair that you do not have a realistic chance to win what you could lose?
How can you honestly go into a selection of bookmakers and tell me that the vulnerable are being protected. How on earth are online casinos allowed to advertise on tv.
The industry is in a complete mess with so much of it stemming from pathetic direction from the UK Gambling Commission.
With regard to the new consumption tax UK players options will definitely become more limited. However, people are taking huge risks with some of these other bookmakers anyway so in theory it should be safer. Having said that we have seen plenty of bookmakers pass by the wayside over the years. I am not sure this will prevent that.
The tax is simply a money grab and unfortunately the incentives are wrong for the players involved. The Govt obviously wants to generate greater tax receipts from Gambling. It is in their interests for the gambling companies to be making bigger profits. Therefore the bookmakers are going to be desperate to ensure profits are increasing all the time. That means any profitable punter will be marginalised and the less informed preyed upon to an even greater extent.
I fail to see how the UK punter will be getting a better deal out of it.
The tax is simply a money grab and unfortunately the incentives are wrong for the players involved. The Govt obviously wants to generate greater tax receipts from Gambling. It is in their interests for the gambling companies to be making bigger profits. Therefore the bookmakers are going to be desperate to ensure profits are increasing all the time. That means any profitable punter will be marginalised and the less informed preyed upon to an even greater extent.
I fail to see how the UK punter will be getting a better deal out of it.
I'm guessing that the PoC tax means the bookies will have to take their bets from UK customers through a UK-based and UK-licensed subsidiary, rather than through a Malta or Gibraltar or Channel Islands one? That means they won't be able to evade paying levy on their on-line Racing bets, I hope, which will funnel some money in Racing.
I know Betfair have made a point of voluntarily paying an amount equal to what their Levy contribution would have been during the years they've been offshore, but all the other bookies have just trousered money that should be going into Racing.
I know Betfair have made a point of voluntarily paying an amount equal to what their Levy contribution would have been during the years they've been offshore, but all the other bookies have just trousered money that should be going into Racing.
From later this year, 15% levy on the profits attributable to bets taken from UK punters.
For Betfair will it simply be as it was pre Feb 2011 (or whenever it was) that it went to foreign climes to avoid paying the tax?
Its 15% of Gross Profits now for UK based firms on all bets. It will be 15% for all bets placed by people living in the UK. To take bets from people living in the UK you will need a UK license.
Sounds fine in theory as long as the Gambling Commission is held accountable and does its job.
In theory if a 'collective' peer to peer exchange with zero commission was started there would be no tax to pay as the tax is on companies not punters.
Sounds fine in theory as long as the Gambling Commission is held accountable and does its job.
In theory if a 'collective' peer to peer exchange with zero commission was started there would be no tax to pay as the tax is on companies not punters.
sounds like there might be some UK punters looking for bowlers from OS
This is interesting question. In general terms low tax environments are good for consumers and free trade and value pricing, so punters have had it reasonably good betting with compettitive offshore bookmakers.
Obviously the main intent of the law change is to increase tax revenues for the UK Exchequer. Higher taxes are not necessarily bad if they go to fund excellent public services which are used by the same people who enjoy a punt. However this is not the nature of taxation in the UK at present. Insufficent tax revenues is not the HMG's main problem in fiscal terms , it is excessive spending. The UK government is still spending more than it has ever taken in tax receipts in its best ever year for a record 10th year in a row. Selective public spending on things that are excellent and pruning what is bad value is noticeably absent from the current governments spending, as it was the one before.
As a result the increased tax revenue will gloss over the fundamental problem of govt overspending, and it will be bad for punters as competitive bookies clear off.
It will also be bad for betfair as the Gambling Commission will start to look more closely at betfair closetly permitting courtsiders to operate here, in blatant contravention of betfair's own rules about betting in good faith, and contrary to the principles of fairness and openness as mentioned by Tom in the 3P.
Obviously the main intent of the law change is to increase tax revenues for the UK Exchequer. Higher taxes are not necessarily bad if they go to fund excellent public services which are used by the same people who enjoy a punt. However this is not the nature of taxation in the UK at present. Insufficent tax revenues is not the HMG's main problem in fiscal terms , it is excessive spending. The UK government is still spending more than it has ever taken in tax receipts in its best ever year for a record 10th year in a row. Selective public spending on things that are excellent and pruning what is bad value is noticeably absent from the current governments spending, as it was the one before.
As a result the increased tax revenue will gloss over the fundamental problem of govt overspending, and it will be bad for punters as competitive bookies clear off.
It will also be bad for betfair as the Gambling Commission will start to look more closely at betfair closetly permitting courtsiders to operate here, in blatant contravention of betfair's own rules about betting in good faith, and contrary to the principles of fairness and openness as mentioned by Tom in the 3P.
The Gambling Commission already gave courtsiders the green light after the last investigation before Betfair went offshore. Betfair produced analysis on it showing it was 'fair' but unfortunately did not provide the raw data for this to be independently analysed.
http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/pdf/09%20Consultation%20response%20from%20Betfair.pdf
http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/pdf/09%20Consultation%20response%20from%20Betfair.pdf
ok thanks.
thats the key bit then.
no real change and these sh1ster companies will just be handing over clients to the bigger firms.
still the punter needs an arm in the gambling commision.
its simply not right that they can advertise prices and that everyone who legally can bet cant actually all have that price.....trades description ffs
thats the key bit then.
no real change and these sh1ster companies will just be handing over clients to the bigger firms.
still the punter needs an arm in the gambling commision.
its simply not right that they can advertise prices and that everyone who legally can bet cant actually all have that price.....trades description ffs
Some rumours Pinnacle will be closing all UK accounts by the end of the month. How is anyone going to get a bet on with no Pinnacle, no Sbobet and no 12bet. Game over for many gamblers.
I have a place in gibraltar, would I be able to get a bet on at pinnacle if I use my gibraltar address? and set up a VPN network so I can still bet while in the UK.
as far as i understand you would need a non UK bank account as well.ie youve got santander in the uk you tell them im moving to the rock they say you can still bank with us through our sub in the rock trouble is gibraltar is a crown dependency and therefore part of the UK
the only way round it at the moment would be an irish address and bank account but thats euros.the residency rules in the isle of man alderney jersey gibraltar etc mean you wouldnt qualify
Where does the point of consumption tax stand with the use of an agent for those books?
Its not the tax, the agent would be taking an unlicensed bet. If it was small time you would run the risk of being defrauded and a bigger operation would be targeted, funds seized etc.
I wonder if this could increase liquidity on here? I imagine it almost certainly would if Pinnacle were to stop taking UK business.
Anything that increases liquidity can only be a good thing.
Most of the business is done on Asian handicaps which are poor on here. Commission and Premium Charge makes them too expensive on BF.
These are international markets for gamblers all round the world. I cannot see the big English soccer based syndicates not using them after the point of consumption tax comes in.
Will it be against the law for a punter to use a firm licensed elsewhere or just against the law for foreign firms to take the bets?
These are international markets for gamblers all round the world. I cannot see the big English soccer based syndicates not using them after the point of consumption tax comes in.
Will it be against the law for a punter to use a firm licensed elsewhere or just against the law for foreign firms to take the bets?
Sep 11, 2014 -- 4:28AM, cdog wrote:
Anything that increases liquidity can only be a good thing.
Not if it is at the expense of competition imo
Sep 11, 2014 -- 5:02AM, frog2 wrote:
Most of the business is done on Asian handicaps which are poor on here. Commission and Premium Charge makes them too expensive on BF. These are international markets for gamblers all round the world. I cannot see the big English soccer based syndicates not using them after the point of consumption tax comes in.Will it be against the law for a punter to use a firm licensed elsewhere or just against the law for foreign firms to take the bets?
I think it will be technically illegal to take a bet from a UK resident without paying tax on it, but can't see how it would be enforced; ie the UK gov won't/can't chase after Costa Rican companies?
The only thing that the licence seems to grant you is the ability to advertise in the UK, but this wouldn't be important to the likes of Pinny, 5Dimes, Bookmaker etc who don't do it anyway.
SBO and 12Bet have/had Premier LEague sponsorship deals, so presumably these will contradict the new law if they have not decided to renew their UK licence.
The bets laid on AH and on European handicap are layed by betfair bots. Who are they going to hedge with if they are unable to use Pinnacle and the Asian bookmakers?
^^
ffs the tax is an entirely separate law.
Its illegal to take a bet from a uk resident without a UK license from Oct 1st (planned)
visa/mastercard have agreed to ban deposits on non-licensed sites. E-wallets are all regulated in some way so will be pressured to stop dealing with non-licensed sites. You will prob get your bank account shut if they notice that you are depositing/withdrawing from an illegal site.
As I said above there are ways around it but if it goes pear shaped don't expect any sympathy.
ffs the tax is an entirely separate law.
Its illegal to take a bet from a uk resident without a UK license from Oct 1st (planned)
visa/mastercard have agreed to ban deposits on non-licensed sites. E-wallets are all regulated in some way so will be pressured to stop dealing with non-licensed sites. You will prob get your bank account shut if they notice that you are depositing/withdrawing from an illegal site.
As I said above there are ways around it but if it goes pear shaped don't expect any sympathy.
Will it be against the law for a punter to use a firm licensed elsewhere or just against the law for foreign firms to take the bets?
as far as im aware only germany have a law in the eu which makes it illegal to try to bet with an unregulated (in that country) bookmaker/exchange.
as far as im aware only germany have a law in the eu which makes it illegal to try to bet with an unregulated (in that country) bookmaker/exchange.
most countries dont see it as a major issue and some already have taxes in place of which if you avoid after winning a lot your in trouble if you dont pay and get found out
I seriously think there is a small chance that Pokerstars will pull out of the UK. It seems that the UKGC are being extremely picky about activity in grey markets, hence the withdrawal of the sportsbooks. Stars operates in grey and illegal markets and Amaya just paid a fortune to buy them, with a view to expansion particularly in grey markets, I can really see a chance of them pulling out.
pinnacle sbobet and 12bet gone, what the fu ck we got in the uk? nothing.
pinnacle gone....nooooooooooooooooooooo
Sep 10, 2014 -- 12:36PM, RichardHughes wrote:
I have a place in gibraltar, would I be able to get a bet on at pinnacle if I use my gibraltar address? and set up a VPN network so I can still bet while in the UK.
Pinny statement suggest you prob be ok
Sep 11, 2014 -- 10:53AM, G1_Jockey_4 wrote:
why would pokerstars pull out of the UK?
because they can't get a license unless they abandon Russia and other grey/illegal markets
take it thats to do with sanctions and nothing else??
No - there are either laws prohibiting gambling or no laws permitting it in various parts of the world. UKGC views high volume participation in grey markets as a risk to the operator, so won't give a license.
Here is a long-winded article about it
http://www.onlinepokerreport.com/13119/
uk-regulation-shifts-center-of-online-poker-industry/
Here is a long-winded article about it
http://www.onlinepokerreport.com/13119/
uk-regulation-shifts-center-of-online-poker-industry/
This is bad news for punters. Not worried by Betfair in isolation because the tax is relatively sensible compared with most EU countries.
This is going to eat margin though, just a question of what I have to play with after. I would expect some reasonably big jumps in matched volumes here but undoubtedly this favours the bigger players with continued access to international funds.
Have to agree with bongo on most points. It won't improve anything for punters BUT, then, which industry benefits from the taxes on active corporations? At least as a UK citizen you can be happier that gaming companies will find it very difficult to hide tax for the first time in god knows how long. Would be good to see it enforced like this in more industries to be honest. But still agree with bongo, tax revenues aren't falling, public spending is soaring.
This is going to eat margin though, just a question of what I have to play with after. I would expect some reasonably big jumps in matched volumes here but undoubtedly this favours the bigger players with continued access to international funds.
Have to agree with bongo on most points. It won't improve anything for punters BUT, then, which industry benefits from the taxes on active corporations? At least as a UK citizen you can be happier that gaming companies will find it very difficult to hide tax for the first time in god knows how long. Would be good to see it enforced like this in more industries to be honest. But still agree with bongo, tax revenues aren't falling, public spending is soaring.
Is there a list of which books have applied for the new license ? Presumably it applies to those in Gib, Malta , Ireland, IOM etc ?
What does the Pinny email say about account balances? Don't seem to have mine yet.
I thought quite a few firms would have high rollers in grey markets. Can umbrella companies own an offshore firm for grey markets and a UK firm to operate here under a license here?
Is India classified as a grey market?
Is India classified as a grey market?
http://www.pinnaclesports.com/gb-notice.aspx?
Funds remaining in your Pinnacle Sports account may be withdrawn at any time free of charge. Accounts that withdraw their funds prior to September 30th, 2014 will be disabled from making further deposits.
Funds remaining in your Pinnacle Sports account may be withdrawn at any time free of charge. Accounts that withdraw their funds prior to September 30th, 2014 will be disabled from making further deposits.
^^^^
My email went to spam folder
^^
India def grey
I though subsidiaries would be a way round the problem, but apparently not
My email went to spam folder
^^
India def grey
I though subsidiaries would be a way round the problem, but apparently not
So will firms like Betvictor get a UK license. I was reading an article on it from last year...
'But it wasn't until 20 years later that Chandler's biggest break came – In 1996 and 1997 Chandler jumped on planes to China and Singapore and started recruiting high rolling betters. In these regions, bets were often limited – Chandler's unique service proposition was he would accept large bets.
Many of these wealthy customers had been frustrated by their inability to lay sizeable bets on the 1994 football World Cup, he told HuffPost UK. They were also frustrated by having to pay tax, something which was to lead to Chandler’s next big break – moving offshore.
Ahead of the rest of the bookie peers – and unhampered as a private company unlike his listed rivals such as Ladbrokes, Chandler started a search for an offshore base from which to run his business tax-free.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/08/betvictors-victor-chandler-on-the-future-of-betting_n_2838519.html
'But it wasn't until 20 years later that Chandler's biggest break came – In 1996 and 1997 Chandler jumped on planes to China and Singapore and started recruiting high rolling betters. In these regions, bets were often limited – Chandler's unique service proposition was he would accept large bets.
Many of these wealthy customers had been frustrated by their inability to lay sizeable bets on the 1994 football World Cup, he told HuffPost UK. They were also frustrated by having to pay tax, something which was to lead to Chandler’s next big break – moving offshore.
Ahead of the rest of the bookie peers – and unhampered as a private company unlike his listed rivals such as Ladbrokes, Chandler started a search for an offshore base from which to run his business tax-free.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/08/betvictors-victor-chandler-on-the-future-of-betting_n_2838519.html
dave
thanks....havent read it but i can tell where your coming from.
the government may have a legal point re players playing v russians but in reality that bull.
they may sit 3+ to a room using vpns and managing to get ont he same table coluding but im sure coluders would get spotted very easily by other players and would get out quickly.
who seriously makes the regulations up???
do they seriously think people would stay with stars if they thought something iffy???
wonder how much they are trying to get them to pay?
i know spain and italy isoalated their players (thats daylight robbery).
think if ther government did ban stars there could be more chance fo a backlash because of numbers who play with them compared to isolated bookies
thanks....havent read it but i can tell where your coming from.
the government may have a legal point re players playing v russians but in reality that bull.
they may sit 3+ to a room using vpns and managing to get ont he same table coluding but im sure coluders would get spotted very easily by other players and would get out quickly.
who seriously makes the regulations up???
do they seriously think people would stay with stars if they thought something iffy???
wonder how much they are trying to get them to pay?
i know spain and italy isoalated their players (thats daylight robbery).
think if ther government did ban stars there could be more chance fo a backlash because of numbers who play with them compared to isolated bookies
btw I think it is thoroughly ironic that the UKGC who haven't been very good at all at doing their job are telling businesses with turnovers of billions how to do theirs.
Any chance that Betfair will raise commission and/or Premium charge to pay for the increased costs of the 15% tax??
Maybe a raise to 6.5% basic commission rate as they continue to harvest the exchange business.
They might quietly forget that until 2011 they happily were based in the UK paying tax and making still making huge profits. Now that the competition from the professional sportsbooks is out of the way they might try it on.
Maybe a raise to 6.5% basic commission rate as they continue to harvest the exchange business.
They might quietly forget that until 2011 they happily were based in the UK paying tax and making still making huge profits. Now that the competition from the professional sportsbooks is out of the way they might try it on.
Actually moved 2011. Starting complaining about the tax in 2009 a year after the first Premium charge and the stunting of growth.
there isnt increased tax though.....
agree dave.
not sure how they can tell companies they cant operate here if you operate in another country....if it was an eu country then they would have to think again
agree dave.
not sure how they can tell companies they cant operate here if you operate in another country....if it was an eu country then they would have to think again
If you are already licensed and operating in the UK can you take bets from Countries like India? Is it only new applicants that need to pass the test?
I would guess they have to report regularly and if the amount of business was significant, justify the legality.
What I can't understand is how, if a company sets up a ring-fenced uk subsidiary and has other companies to deal with other countries, the UKGC thinks it can tell the holding company (which it wouldn't regulate), how to run businesses completely unrelated to the UK.
What I can't understand is how, if a company sets up a ring-fenced uk subsidiary and has other companies to deal with other countries, the UKGC thinks it can tell the holding company (which it wouldn't regulate), how to run businesses completely unrelated to the UK.
does seem like they want to know how much business these firms are doing and if their "other" lists are high in numbers they will threaten to revoke their licence .
now why would any regulator seriously do that other than to extort money from such companies?
the shady world we live in eh
now why would any regulator seriously do that other than to extort money from such companies?
the shady world we live in eh
This has completely killed my career as a professional gambler overnight, after 13 successful years. Some very good points made here. The way the Gambling Commission has managed the betting industry has been nothing short of shambolic from the very beginning.
What amazes me is that SBOBET is licensed by the Isle of Man. Big building on the Island. Sponsored EPL teams. Not going anyway. Pinnacle been around since 1998 and always the fastest to payout.
some of the GC's approach stinks and doesnt sit right.
they are basing whether to hand out licences on percieved thoughts on what countries are like betting wise....who cares if russia is unregulated ffs....and whats the difference if they have 100 russian clients or a million?
that just make sit look like "your making a sh1t load off them" so your not getting a licence now....
seriously....that looks wrong very wrong and imo the GC needs to be investigated.
re pstars....see the yanks are gonna be let back in now so maybe they will ditch the ruskies for the time being
they are basing whether to hand out licences on percieved thoughts on what countries are like betting wise....who cares if russia is unregulated ffs....and whats the difference if they have 100 russian clients or a million?
that just make sit look like "your making a sh1t load off them" so your not getting a licence now....
seriously....that looks wrong very wrong and imo the GC needs to be investigated.
re pstars....see the yanks are gonna be let back in now so maybe they will ditch the ruskies for the time being
on the tax side of things....these companies dont have a leg to stand on and should pay up if they want business.
see pinnacle pulled out of spain and i presume italy???a while ago
see pinnacle pulled out of spain and i presume italy???a while ago
Looking at the GC website , it appears thar neither Boyles or VCee are applying for a licence. Marathon and PaddyP are. Not going to be much choice come Oct 1st.
Sep 15, 2014 -- 8:17AM, IanP wrote:
Looking at the GC website , it appears thar neither Boyles or VCee are applying for a licence. Marathon and PaddyP are.
Sep 15, 2014 -- 4:33PM, Woodshires wrote:
Sep 15, 2014 -- 2:17PM, IanP wrote:Looking at the GC website , it appears thar neither Boyles or VCee are applying for a licence. Marathon and PaddyP are.
...
ffs, daft forum....
Ianp, can you pop a link up, cheers.
Ianp, can you pop a link up, cheers.
You have to search individually I think. Poor show from the GC really.
This is the link when you search for Paddy Power - remote license Pending.
https://secure.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/gccustomweb/PublicRegister/PRAccountDetails.aspx?accountNo=38939
This is the link when you search for Paddy Power - remote license Pending.
https://secure.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/gccustomweb/PublicRegister/PRAccountDetails.aspx?accountNo=38939
Can't believe VC aren't applying - today is the last day to apply or they have to stop taking uk bets on the 1st Oct, so maybe a few have left it to the very last minute legal/compliance people like to do that, I think it gives them a little thrill.
I have asked the GC for a full list of remote companies we will be able to use. So far only SBO and Pinnacle have emailed about closing accounts so its up to us to find out who on oddschecker.co.uk we can still use from the end of the month. Not much time to sort it out
Will post if they send the list.
Will post if they send the list.
cheers Ian.
1bet pulling out now, from 1st October...
1bet pulling out now, from 1st October...
who knows - its absolutely redic. The Gambling Commission are def putting peoples funds at risk.
Saw the "Maurice" VCbet TV advert a day or two ago. That surely wouldn't be on TV if they were pulling out.
if people on here are unsure who they can bet with how is the man on the street supposed to know??
It know appears that Victor Chandler International (Betvictor) has an application in progress. Was not on the Gambling Commission website yesterday.
It know appears that Victor Chandler International (Betvictor) has an application in progress. Was not on the Gambling Commission website yesterday.
Another thing - I thought all UKGC licensees (from last month) had to have at least a separate account for client funds and notices making it clear the level of protection eg full trust or just separate sccount, but eg Skybet (who come up as ukgc regulated) has no notice or info about this
Skybet's application is pending. Currently regulated by Alderney.
Amazing how many of these big companies have their applications pending. Why did they not apply either.
Any word on Matchbook?
Any word on Matchbook?
From SBR
Matchbook to continue servicing United Kingdom; obtain license09.14.2014
Sources familiar with sports betting exchange Matchbook (SBR rating B+) tell SBR that the company has no plans to discontinue servicing sports bettors in the United Kingdom ahead of October 1st when the new UK Gambling Law will be in effect. The same sources also said that Matchbook will obtain official licensing ahead of the deadline. Sportsbook Review will continue monitoring the whos-in-and-whos-out as the deadline nears. SBR also expects bookmakers who hold licenses to decide early next year if operating with the hefty new overhead is viable.
Matchbook to continue servicing United Kingdom; obtain license09.14.2014
Sources familiar with sports betting exchange Matchbook (SBR rating B+) tell SBR that the company has no plans to discontinue servicing sports bettors in the United Kingdom ahead of October 1st when the new UK Gambling Law will be in effect. The same sources also said that Matchbook will obtain official licensing ahead of the deadline. Sportsbook Review will continue monitoring the whos-in-and-whos-out as the deadline nears. SBR also expects bookmakers who hold licenses to decide early next year if operating with the hefty new overhead is viable.
Looks to me like the UKGC must have backed off on the grey/illegal markets issue. Stars (Rational) have applied for a license and presumably have been allowed to continue with their worldwide operations - perhaps these have been moved to the parent company Amaya?
IanP - you are correct, I seem to have just looked at the word "active" and not the "pending" further down.
btw can't see BwinParty or 888 anywhere.
IanP - you are correct, I seem to have just looked at the word "active" and not the "pending" further down.
btw can't see BwinParty or 888 anywhere.
39028 888 UK Limited Olswang 90 High Holborn LONDON WC1V 6XX
...
If you download the entire register it says this about 888. If you search '888' nothing comes up.
For Bwin the same is the case. But when you download the entire list an outfit called ElectraWorks Limited comes up:
39011 ElectraWorks Limited Bwin Party Digital Entertainment 1 New Change LONDON EC4M 9AF
An application for them is pending.
...
If you download the entire register it says this about 888. If you search '888' nothing comes up.
For Bwin the same is the case. But when you download the entire list an outfit called ElectraWorks Limited comes up:
39011 ElectraWorks Limited Bwin Party Digital Entertainment 1 New Change LONDON EC4M 9AF
An application for them is pending.
To be fair the whole thing is a disgrace.
The policy change has been sold as a package to protect UK customers yet there is no list on the Commission website starting which URLs are licenced.
An enquiry to the Commission takes 2-3 days for a reply and recieves a link to the webpage where you can check licenses. No explaination as to what happens if a license is pending. If a brand name is owned by a holding company good luck finding its license details.
How are punters supposed to know which firms are 'safe' ????
The policy change has been sold as a package to protect UK customers yet there is no list on the Commission website starting which URLs are licenced.
An enquiry to the Commission takes 2-3 days for a reply and recieves a link to the webpage where you can check licenses. No explaination as to what happens if a license is pending. If a brand name is owned by a holding company good luck finding its license details.
How are punters supposed to know which firms are 'safe' ????
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539