Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
29 Jun 12
21:35
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Jan 10
William Hill, the country’s biggest bookmaker, will go to court next week in a bid to force customers of Betfair, the ambitious betting exchange, to pay money towards horse racing in Britain.
By Nathalie Thomas telegpah.co.uk 29 Jun 2012
The bookie and the British Horseracing Authority are challenging a ruling by a government body, which collects money to fund the sport, that customers of betting exchanges such as Betfair should not be subject to a levy.
The judicial review is the latest episode in a long-running battle between traditional bookies and Betfair.
All bookmakers that hold UK licences are required to make a financial contribution to support horse racing here.
Betfair’s opponents argue that its unusual business model — where punters place bets with other users who hold the opposing view — attracts professional gamblers who are betting in such volumes that they should be licensed and taxed in the same way as traditional bookies.
Betfair is licensed in Gibraltar, but makes a voluntary contribution towards British horse racing.
It argues that its customers are individuals and not businesses.
Stephen Morana, Betfair’s interim chief executive, said he is confident that the ruling by the Horserace Betting Levy Board last year would be upheld.
Betfair has had a rocky ride since it floated in 2010 at £13 a share.
But yesterday it reported a 56pc rise in full-year profits to £41.6m pre-tax, despite a 1pc dip in revenues to £389.7m after cancelling a telephone betting programme for high-rollers.
Profits were boosted by record bets placed around events such as the Australian Open Tennis Championships, and strong growth in punters using their smartphones to gamble.
Betfair, which makes its money by collecting commission from gamblers who win their bets, said customers had so far bet more than £1bn on Euro 2012.
By Nathalie Thomas telegpah.co.uk 29 Jun 2012
The bookie and the British Horseracing Authority are challenging a ruling by a government body, which collects money to fund the sport, that customers of betting exchanges such as Betfair should not be subject to a levy.
The judicial review is the latest episode in a long-running battle between traditional bookies and Betfair.
All bookmakers that hold UK licences are required to make a financial contribution to support horse racing here.
Betfair’s opponents argue that its unusual business model — where punters place bets with other users who hold the opposing view — attracts professional gamblers who are betting in such volumes that they should be licensed and taxed in the same way as traditional bookies.
Betfair is licensed in Gibraltar, but makes a voluntary contribution towards British horse racing.
It argues that its customers are individuals and not businesses.
Stephen Morana, Betfair’s interim chief executive, said he is confident that the ruling by the Horserace Betting Levy Board last year would be upheld.
Betfair has had a rocky ride since it floated in 2010 at £13 a share.
But yesterday it reported a 56pc rise in full-year profits to £41.6m pre-tax, despite a 1pc dip in revenues to £389.7m after cancelling a telephone betting programme for high-rollers.
Profits were boosted by record bets placed around events such as the Australian Open Tennis Championships, and strong growth in punters using their smartphones to gamble.
Betfair, which makes its money by collecting commission from gamblers who win their bets, said customers had so far bet more than £1bn on Euro 2012.
Show More
maybe they should look at themselves before going on about exchange players. How much levy do they pay on bets placed online?
Aren,t WH registered in Gibraltar,isn,t it a bit rich them going offshore to avoid this and having the cheek to ask another company to pay probably their share.Might have this totally wrong.
He loves the company that much they have to give him a whacking retention bonus to stay
telegraph.co.uk
Chairman Gareth Davis and chief executive Ralph Topping received a warm round of applause from the assembled shareholders as they listed the bookmakers' various achievements.
There were few mutterings when Topping's controversial retention bonus – which will keep him at the bookmakers until the end of 2013 – was mentioned.
When Davis asked the assembled shareholders – one of whom informed the hall he had travelled all the way from Yeovil to attend – if they supported the resolution, around 80% waved their voting cards in favour.
But during the usual question-and-answer session, some dissent emerged over the £1.2m shares and cash deal.
Shareholder Anthony Lee said: "At last year's AGM the chief executive said he has never been more excited with the people he is working with and that he loved the business.
"That was all very encouraging, but I was worried that between four and five weeks later Mr Topping loved the business so much he had to be offered a whacking incentive to stay with the business and it seemed very odd.
"I wonder now, what happened in those four or five weeks after attending the AGM?"
He added: "There is a general feeling across industries that chief executives are drinking in a last chance saloon. They see the writing on the wall and they want to take as much as they can, while they can."
telegraph.co.uk
Chairman Gareth Davis and chief executive Ralph Topping received a warm round of applause from the assembled shareholders as they listed the bookmakers' various achievements.
There were few mutterings when Topping's controversial retention bonus – which will keep him at the bookmakers until the end of 2013 – was mentioned.
When Davis asked the assembled shareholders – one of whom informed the hall he had travelled all the way from Yeovil to attend – if they supported the resolution, around 80% waved their voting cards in favour.
But during the usual question-and-answer session, some dissent emerged over the £1.2m shares and cash deal.
Shareholder Anthony Lee said: "At last year's AGM the chief executive said he has never been more excited with the people he is working with and that he loved the business.
"That was all very encouraging, but I was worried that between four and five weeks later Mr Topping loved the business so much he had to be offered a whacking incentive to stay with the business and it seemed very odd.
"I wonder now, what happened in those four or five weeks after attending the AGM?"
He added: "There is a general feeling across industries that chief executives are drinking in a last chance saloon. They see the writing on the wall and they want to take as much as they can, while they can."
i personally think that william hill should be charged the levy for every bet of mines that they refuse..
failing that they should have their licence to take bets on horse racing away from them..
failing that they should have their licence to take bets on horse racing away from them..
Give it a couple of more years and their staff will be saying 'Bet's on horse racing! what's that?'
in fact , its friday night..
lets go the whole hogg..
i think ralph topping should personally pay any levy due from bets that his company refuses to take from me.
see how long his bonus would last him then..
lets go the whole hogg..
i think ralph topping should personally pay any levy due from bets that his company refuses to take from me.
see how long his bonus would last him then..
This drawn out affair is becoming as tedious as the man is bitter.
How many times does this argument have to get slapped down before its put to bed?
It's complete desperation IMO and at some point somebody has to realise that it's only the legal rats that gain from these greed opportunistic ventures.
More fool the BHA for getting involved in this seemingly one man war.
I believe betfair reduce the amount of contributions it gives racing each time this vendetta results in legal council.
Even ppl sent down for serious deviant acts only have so many chances to argue their point in court....isn't it about time this one got barred at the door?
How many times does this argument have to get slapped down before its put to bed?
It's complete desperation IMO and at some point somebody has to realise that it's only the legal rats that gain from these greed opportunistic ventures.
More fool the BHA for getting involved in this seemingly one man war.
I believe betfair reduce the amount of contributions it gives racing each time this vendetta results in legal council.
Even ppl sent down for serious deviant acts only have so many chances to argue their point in court....isn't it about time this one got barred at the door?
Why should i help to fund racing. How much money do they want out of the punters pound. This is going to be worse then the 10% tax. I hope the judge is a punter and tells him to go play with the traffic.
http://www.kimbaileyracing.com
Dance Tempo on the other hand bolted up. It was an awful race and as there was no one who wanted to go faster than a trot Jason Maguire took the race but the scruff of the neck and made all; that was why we won so easily. Perhaps none of the others were trying!!
A welcome winner and although the cold list said I was cold and winnerless the race commentator said 'Kim Baileys horses are in flying form'..fickle world?
I was delighted for his owner Tony Solomons, who like me, wisely did not travel to the delights of Worcester.
Tony has been an owner and friend for many years and loyalty is the key word in our relationship.
But what Tony did say after Dance Tempo had won was that he had won less prize money yesterday than any winner he has had in the last 15 years.
Hardly covering a months training fees, and it certainly would not of if we had travelled further than Worcester.
As he said it is a disgrace, and hardly conducive for carrying on.
At least you would hope that a winner would pay for at least 3 months training fees. We are just fodder to bookmakers, and racegoers who don't appreciate what owners like Tony put up with to produce the sport for their day at the races.
Yes I know you can say he does not have to own racehorses, but if he did not, I would have one less horse for me to train, and as a result one less person for me to employ, and one less horse to fill a card to keep racegoers and bookmakers racing. What is frightening is that there are races where the winners prize money is less than what Dance Tempo won yesterday.
My reply is try being an owner at your course for the day and by that I mean paying for the experience. Please racecourses give the owners a decent facility and then perhaps a prize/trophy that they might like, not something that will head to the nearest jumble sale.. It was my owners first winner for over a year and it would be good it he had something worthwhile to shove on his manltepiece...I am not sure I will be sending the prize/trophy as it will cost twice as much as it is worth to send!
Dance Tempo on the other hand bolted up. It was an awful race and as there was no one who wanted to go faster than a trot Jason Maguire took the race but the scruff of the neck and made all; that was why we won so easily. Perhaps none of the others were trying!!
A welcome winner and although the cold list said I was cold and winnerless the race commentator said 'Kim Baileys horses are in flying form'..fickle world?
I was delighted for his owner Tony Solomons, who like me, wisely did not travel to the delights of Worcester.
Tony has been an owner and friend for many years and loyalty is the key word in our relationship.
But what Tony did say after Dance Tempo had won was that he had won less prize money yesterday than any winner he has had in the last 15 years.
Hardly covering a months training fees, and it certainly would not of if we had travelled further than Worcester.
As he said it is a disgrace, and hardly conducive for carrying on.
At least you would hope that a winner would pay for at least 3 months training fees. We are just fodder to bookmakers, and racegoers who don't appreciate what owners like Tony put up with to produce the sport for their day at the races.
Yes I know you can say he does not have to own racehorses, but if he did not, I would have one less horse for me to train, and as a result one less person for me to employ, and one less horse to fill a card to keep racegoers and bookmakers racing. What is frightening is that there are races where the winners prize money is less than what Dance Tempo won yesterday.
My reply is try being an owner at your course for the day and by that I mean paying for the experience. Please racecourses give the owners a decent facility and then perhaps a prize/trophy that they might like, not something that will head to the nearest jumble sale.. It was my owners first winner for over a year and it would be good it he had something worthwhile to shove on his manltepiece...I am not sure I will be sending the prize/trophy as it will cost twice as much as it is worth to send!
how many times have they done this now?
one time they had an mp on their books
one time they had an mp on their books
Poor Ralph just cant let it rest, perhaps he should his own house in order.
await the current court case, HMCE v Jennings, regarding off-shore bookmakers avoiding UK tax.
regardless of outcome, the government seem determined to pass legislation bringing tax havens into line.
which will include exchanges who sometimes claim they aren't bookmakers but just middle men ie, agents, a very dangerous policy with VAT implications
regardless of outcome, the government seem determined to pass legislation bringing tax havens into line.
which will include exchanges who sometimes claim they aren't bookmakers but just middle men ie, agents, a very dangerous policy with VAT implications
Here comes Barry the harbinger of doom, who always makes me think he's on the exchanges gritting his teeth in animosity every time.
A bit like the old school book shops who are now realising that ebooks and iBooks will become very serious players in the future and have decided to 'get into bed' with them begrudgingly.
With all due respect Barry I think that's a different argument.
For the state to force off shore tax avoiders to pay more tax on the resident punter would effect all users and likely culminate in an increase of commission paid over everyone. Pin pointing a sub section on a point of law and attempting to call them something all significant players in the law say are merely punters is quite another.
IMO.
A bit like the old school book shops who are now realising that ebooks and iBooks will become very serious players in the future and have decided to 'get into bed' with them begrudgingly.
With all due respect Barry I think that's a different argument.
For the state to force off shore tax avoiders to pay more tax on the resident punter would effect all users and likely culminate in an increase of commission paid over everyone. Pin pointing a sub section on a point of law and attempting to call them something all significant players in the law say are merely punters is quite another.
IMO.
Yes those punters in the bookies backing the away team and the draw will have to pay levy for laying the home team
Bazza dont like his paymaster being rubbished.
Keep crushing those s/ps for ralphy baby bazza. . . . Who you going to fight in Hills Highbury box next
Keep crushing those s/ps for ralphy baby bazza. . . . Who you going to fight in Hills Highbury box next
http://www.kimbaileyracing.com
Hardly covering a months training fees, and it certainly would not of if we had travelled further than Worcester.
Shameful stuff from Bailey.
Hardly covering a months training fees, and it certainly would not of if we had travelled further than Worcester.
Shameful stuff from Bailey.
I would have one less horse for me to train, and as a result one less person for me to employ, and one less horse to fill a card
If I were Bailey's mater and pater, I'd be gutted. How much must they have spent sending the ignorant clown to Radley, only for him to embarrass himself like this?
If I were Bailey's mater and pater, I'd be gutted. How much must they have spent sending the ignorant clown to Radley, only for him to embarrass himself like this?
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539