There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 158 comments are related to the topic:
ARE THE FRB ABOUT TO DESERT ONCOURSE BOOKMAKERS
ARE THE FRB ABOUT TO DESERT ONCOURSE BOOKMAKERS
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 158
|
By:
Lol does anyone know anything that has been agreed or is it all speculation ?
|
|
By:
ITS NOT BEEN MADE OFFICIAL THAT THE MAJORITY OF ONCOURSE BOOKMAKERS HAVE BEEN SHAFTED,I BELIEVE MONDAY THE ANNOUNCEMENT WILL BE MADE!
|
|
By:
IT APPEARS THAT WHAT THE FEB HAVE DONE HAS ACTUALLY COME AS A SHOCK TO SOME OF THEIR MEMBERS!
|
|
By:
FRB
|
|
By:
SOME IF NOT ALL OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS BETRAYAL WOULD MAKE THE WORSE CHARACTERS IN GAME OF THRONES EMBARRASSED!
|
|
By:
any update on the settlement detail ?
|
|
By:
Seems like the settlement is the end of the FRB. Well done BRBA - mission accomplished.
|
|
By:
SPOT ON DSFIBBER,SAME POSITION AS 2 YEARS AGO -£500000,TOP 5% OF BOOKS A RESULT,FRB FINISHED AS SHOULD THE BRBA!
|
|
By:
no one can take any satisfaction from this outcome and the concessions given.
this case SHOULD have gone to court. after spending £540,000 and probably more over the last month to achieve so little. as factmachine says around 5% have had their own future solidified and the other 95% of bookmakers have zero to show for their own compulsory donation to the court fees. the FRB directors should now resign |
|
By:
http://nab-bookmakers.co.uk/pdf/nab_newsletter_079.pdf
Looks like that agreement with Jockey Club wasn't as good as they made it out to be at the time? Needed roughly "£540k" worth of amendments to get it right?? Unfortunately the money was supposed to be used to fight the selling off of new areas?! |
|
By:
ADGE,IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE PERSONAL SQUABBLES BETWEEN CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE NORTHERN AND THE FRB HAVE LED TO THE RIDICULOUS SITUATION WERE THE REAL 7 CULPRITS APPEAR TO HAVE NOT ONLY KEPT THEIR PITCHES,BUT BENEFITED FROM THIS OUTRAGEOUS DEBACLE.SELF INTEREST HAS ALWAYS BEEN A MASSIVE PROBLEM WITH ONCOURSE BOOKMAKERS THE GREED OF SOME IF NOT ALL OF THE PLAYERS IN THIS SORRY MESS HAS TO BE SEEN TO BE BELIEVED,AND TALKING OF BELIEVING,THE RANK AND FILE HAVE BEEN TOLD THROUGH OUT THAT THE BARRISTERS ADVICE WAS WE WERE MASSIVE ODDS ON TO WIN,IT APPEARS THAT WAS THE CASE UNTIL LITERALLY DAYS BEFORE THE COURT CASE, THEN IT APPEARS OUR REPRESENTATIVES WERE THREATENED WITH THE LOSS OF NEW AREAS AND THE RELIABLE SELF INTEREST TOOK OVER,YOU OF ALL PEOPLE KNOW WHAT JC ARE ABOUT,YET AS A DIRECTOR OF THE NORTHERN YOU LET SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE CAUSED THIS SITUATION JOIN AFTER BEING IMO AND MOST OTHER PEOPLES THROWN OFF THE ARB AND LET THE OTHERS THAT WERE ALREADY MEMBERS STAY,YES THE FRB DIRECTORS QUITE RIGHTLY SHOULD RESIGN,BUT SO SHOULD THE NORTHERN(BRBA) DRAIN THE SWAMP!
|
|
By:
From the learned comments posted here are we to assume the outcome of the Courtyard case has been overlooked in the interests of contract fine tuning ? The word 'value' is the most over used in 'bookmaker speak' - does the rank and file think 'value' has been achieved in this case considering the expenditure involved ?
|
|
By:
DEMOCRAT,GO ON BE A DEVIL,DO YOU?????????????
|
|
By:
 |
|
By:
AND THEREIN LIES THE PROBLEM!
 |
|
By:
NEVER IN THE FIELD OF BOOKMAKING CONFLICT,WAS SO MUCH OWED BY SO FEW TO SO MANY
|
|
By:
factmachine , i do think you are over reading things.there are disagreement between the BRBA and the FRB but these are only concerning how members data money is spent , the BRBA are representing their members best interests. for myself the last time i met RG we shook hands , I have worked next to or close by PC on three days in the last two weeks and have spoken amicably and quite normally . TS is a friend on facebook.
as regards the courtyard bookmakers none have broken any BRBA rules of membership so there are no grounds to expel them. i know you and MV have strong views as members that we should but you are 2 out of 200 members. this was an item at a past board meeting , so there was a concern but there was no adverse view from any director. the BRBA support all members equally and will continue to do so. the proof of that is the excellent data rights contracts which benefit all who signed up far in excess of previously and are promptly paid every three months. for the record , all BRBA directors wanted the court case to be heard at this stage and i personally feel very sad for all our members on how their data money has been lost |
|
By:
ADGE,I CANT SEE HOW YOU CAN POSSIBLY DEFEND THE COURTYARD MOB,IF YOU EXPRESS A NEGATIVE OPINION AGAINST THEM YOU HAVE SEEN WHAT HAPPENS,IT GOES TO PROVE AS A DIRECTOR HOW OUT OF TOUCH YOU ARE WITH THE 2 OUT OF 200 QUOTE,PUT IT TO THE VOTE AND THEY WILL BE EXPELLED,THEIR GREED HAS IN SOME WAY GOT TO BE PUNISHED,NOT THE CURRENT SITUATION WHICH THEY HAVE BENEFITED!
|
|
By:
AS FOR THE FRB,I WOULD IMAGINE BOOKMAKERS WILL BE MOVING OVER TO THE "EXCELLENT DATA RIGHTS CONTRACTS" PUT FORWARD BY THE NORTHERN,THEREFORE QUITE RIGHTLY DEPRIVING THE FRB OF FUNDING,LETS HOPE THE "EXCELLENT DATA RIGHTS CONTRACT" IS BETTER THAN THE "EXCELLENT CONTRACTS" ONCOURSE BOOKMAKERS WERE FORCED TO SIGN,THEN WHEN FIRST TESTED FAILED!
|
|
By:
i agree that there may be more than two but only the two have been made aware to me. none have broken any rule of membership and although i agree they have benefited by an FRB climbdown , that is not from the hands of the BRBA .
i don't accept that i'm out of touch as i speak and listen on a daily basis to all bookmakers before racing each day whether members of our association or others , yesterday at beverley being a prime example |
|
By:
THEN PUT IT TO THE VOTE,PLEASE STOP DEFENDING THESE PEOPLE ????????????
|
|
By:
WITHOUT DOUBT IF A LESSER GROUP OF BACK LINE BOOKMAKERS HAD PULLED THE SAME STROKE AND COST ONCOURSE BOOKMAKERS OVER HALF A MILLION POUNDS IN LEGAL FEES,THEY WOULD BE EXPELLED FROM EVERY USELESS ORGANISATION THERE IS,FACT!
|
|
By:
our AGM is just eight weeks away , factmachine . i trust that you will attend.
i can assure everyone that the data rights contracts we negotiated over four long painstaking months are as i've said the best ever deal those that signed up have experienced. incidentally , although the now defunct turf tv deal contract has to run it's course with whoever everyone signed up with that is not the case with the TPP contract where all bookmakers can switch to another provider at any time in the life of the contract. |
|
By:
Adge do you think it fair and reasonable that each bookmaker who has implicitly contributed to the funding of this 'project' should expect to receive a written communication from the FRB explaining as far as is possible how the current status quo has been reached and the associated reasons ? Without this explanation misguided debate based on misinformation will continue.
|
|
By:
I feel genuinely sorry for you on-course guys!
£540,000 down the Suwannee! Hell, that's more than I earned last year! |
|
By:
at the very least , democrat. the FRB are committing suicide if they don't.
|
|
By:
540k plus the loss in value of Cheltenham Off contracts....
Democrat - Looks like I might be surplus to requirements for norfolk's leading bookmaking in September - so no bowls for me - or Angels!! |
|
By:
Can I just clarify. Have the Cheltenham 7 been allowed to keep their courtyard off pitches?
|
|
By:
Adge - I thought the position of BRBA was that we shouldn't be spending this money on the court case? I personally don't think a win in court would have been a victory in the long run and i'm glad to see a deal done with JCR (I'm not condoning/supporting what the courtyard 7 have done). We need to work with these people not fight them.
|
|
By:
no davy , the BRBA position has always been that the JCR should be challenged . the difference is the amounts of unlimited money thrown at it by the FRB , together with no money for other issues e.g. aintree canal turn and warwick silver ring which affected other bookmakers who were expected to contribute to the courtyard whilst seeing their pitches taken away.
the BRBA are working closely with all racecourses on a personal level |
|
By:
maybe that doesn't read quite correctly . the BRBA did NOT support court action but a challenge on the terms of the contracts themselves such as a legal revue...but that was before the costs snowballed
|
|
By:
ADGE,THE NAB,FRB,ARB AND ANYTHING ELSE WITH B IN IT WILL TELL YOU THEY ARE "WORKING WITH ALL RACECOURSES ON A PERSONAL LEVEL" AND COLLECTIVELY WHAT HAVE YOU EVER ACHIEVED APART FROM STOPPING THE RACECOURSES STEALING OUR PITCHES IN 2012,SINCE THEN STARTING WITH THE CONTRACTS IT HAS BEEN AN UTTER DISASTER UNLESS YOUR IN THE TOP 5%,AS ONCOURSE BOOKMAKERS WE ARE DEALING(ESPECIALLY WITH JCR)WITH THE MOST RUTHLESS GROUP OF PEOPLE SINCE THE COURTYARD 7,IF THE ROLES HAD BEEN REVERSED JCR WOULD HAVE ANNIHILATED US,HALF A MILLION POUNDS LATER WHAT HAVE WE GOT? ANYONE LOOKING IN FROM THE OUTSIDE AT THIS STORY FROM THE ASSOCIATIONS, TO DIRECTORS "GOING ON HOLIDAY" AT THE MOST CRUCIAL OF TIMES,WOULD FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE.YOUR LAST POST ADGE OF THE "BRBA DID NOT SUPPORT COURT ACTION" HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY NOT?????? UNLESS YOU KNEW THAT SELF INTEREST WOULD PREVAIL,THE VILLAINS OF THIS STORY THE COURTYARD SEVEN AND JCR HAVE YET AGAIN BEEN REWARDED BY THE SHEER INEPTITUDE AND SELF INTEREST OF PEOPLE EITHER VOTED ON OR SELF APPOINTED TO FIGHT EVERY ONES INTEREST!NOW THERES A SHOCK!
|
|
By:
factmachine,
the BRBA have approx 200 members . we support each of these members equally [ yourself included ]. this is made clear by the data contracts that we negotiated , all bookmakers getting a lump sum cash payment plus a daily attendance income so that all benefit providing they attend just three days per year or are full time. you answer your own question as clearly we could never support an action which supports 5% above the position of 95% . you should be pleased that your own association has your best interests as a priority |
|
By:
"WE SUPPORT EACH OF THESE MEMBERS EQUALLY"
 YOU COULDNT MAKE THIS STUFF UP! |
|
By:
sometimes "the truth hurts " fact
|
|
By:
ADGE,WHY WERNT YOUR MEMBERS WITH TATTS PITCHES CONTACTED REGARDING THE £10 BET FOR £7 AT DONCASTER TONIGHT ???????????? NICE ADVERTISING FOR THE 5 IN PRIME PITCHES,WHAT WERE YOU SAYING ABOUT ALL MEMBERS BEING TREATED EQUALLY ??????????????????????
|
|
By:
A CASE OF SELF INTEREST,SURELY NOT!
|
|
By:
all tatts and silver ring bookmakers were spoken to by ring manager mark ryan as far as i'm aware...this is an incentive for all three thursdays in july arranged between the racecourse management and AGT. has no connection with the BRBA or any one single association.
|
|
By:
i will pass on the news of your interest to mark ryan tonight for addition in 2018.
he will be pleased to add you but you will need to attend all three thursdays |
|
By:
The whole purpose of the legal action as far as I, and many others were concerned was to ascertain whether racecourses had the legal right to sell pitches in new/established areas,and supported the actions of the FRB on that basis alone.
Does this deal legally settle that fundamental, contractual principle ?....NO it does not !!!!.....How can the FRB possibly accept ANY deal that leaves the courtyard seven in place with purchased courtyard 'off' picks ?....Are the courtyard seven content to trade from pitches where their legitimacy is NOT established, and doubtful ? ....and with the picks they hold on other racecourses, is it in their interests to do so ? Sadly, the perception with this deal,is that the FRB has acted to protect the interests of the very few, to the detriment of the many, preserving and enhancing the rights of the top picks....whilst handing the rest of us the legal bill !!!!!!!!!! FACT/ADGE. The way on course bookmakers are currently represented is no longer fit for purpose, the fragmentation between the various associations clearly serves ALL very poorly. Time for a change....time to seek professional,non vested interest contractual representation. |