smokin

The Druitt St Bunker has fired a new salvo off in the Race Fields legislation bunfight after sending the CEO of Betfair two letters claiming defamation and demanding retractions and apologies. By claiming that the result of the court verdict handed down last month was great news for Tabcorp and in response to a website blog he wrote on November 19 where he questioned race field payment arrangements between Racing NSW, Tabcorp and members of the Tabcorp wagering group including the Victorian TAB, Luxbet and TAB Sportsbet.

Whilst challenging the validity of the ruling is not beyond the questioning of anyone who has been judged against, I somehow think that the C.E.O of Racing NSW has decided that he is the new dog on the block, hiding behind the ruling made in favour of Racing NSW and using this as the new club by which any dissenter is going to be charged, badgered and beaten into submission.

Furthermore V’Landys has now been quoted as stating that Tabcorp and Luxbet do not receive a rebate to offset the race fields legislation fees and claiming that the TAB was paying 4.7 per cent of turnover and is now required to pay an additional 1.5 per cent of turnover to bring them up to 6.2 per cent.

In one single article though, Mr V’Landys has proven his point that his spin has him in such a whirlwind, the guy is dizzy…..

One look at the Judgement by Justice Perram will determine that the following was discovered: In fact in 2008/09 RNSW refunded the fee paid to it by the TAB in full. That is consistent with Mr V’Landy’s’ advice to the board that no fee would be recovered from the TAB and in a deed of financial release stated an amount from RNSW $13,882,935 that the Payment Amount is not a refund or return of any part of Applicable New South Wales Race Fields Fees.

So, that Racing NSW in the financial year of 08/09 just gave Tabcorp a $13 Million dollar gift is the most generous piece of corporate gift-wrapping in the history of racing.

The sooner Racing NSW get the point that the whole legal challenge could have been avoided if the Racing Distribution Agreement had been altered in the first place to include the 1.5% they were seeking to charge, there is no discrimination of charging then, no court case and the only thing that could be challenged is the validity of the legislation, when if it is charged to all operators, would of ended up in the same vote as was handed down in November. You are allowed to charge what you want for your product, just not in a discriminatory fashion.

But The Druitt St bunker, instead of getting to the pointy end quickly, want to have their cake and eat it too.

Smokin…………