As part of their ruling the High Court would have had a thorough examination of Betfair's books to establish where & how they generate profits, & the ruling would seem to suggest that the imposition of a turnover tax would/should not render their business unprofitable & that with some tweaking, they could continue on as before.

That said I wonder if their review also looked at the issue of the impact on Betfair clients, profitable or not? I would assume one couldn't be done without the other, as clients leaving in droves tends to be bad for business;)

Perhaps we might be jumping the gun on this one.

Hardly likely norisk, courts concern themselves with the rights of the plaintiff not what effect it will have on the defendant.

as above, extremely unlikely, why should they?
It's the business of BF to make it work under the rules.

Maybe so, but it will end in tears for some punters on a low POT.
As a backer I'm not fond of bots making it difficult to bet against them by constantly changing the odds they would accept, but if there are no layers there will also be no chance for backers.

Time will tell but one thing is certain, as with new taxes there is only the end user who is going to pick up the bill.
The question is as CP has posited, can you afford to pay that bill?

Picked this up on another site.

How many shop owners hang the closed sign up when they have people at the counter with money in hand waiting to buy their product? Not many, right?

If they do then they are either idiots and will likely go broke, or they have an agenda.

I have been asking myself why Racing NSW consciously imposed a tax law on the giant global betting exchange Betfair, when they knew that their business model would never survive such a hit.

Many observers may consider Betfair (BF) are just another bookie and who cares anyway, but they are not a bookie as they facilitate bets between two punters when one bets to win and the other lays to lose. BF survive by collecting a 5% (or less) commission from whichever punter wins his investment. Racing NSW should be collecting their fair whack from the profit that Betfair makes from their winning members, but in a staggering affront, they have demanded a 1.5% tax based on the turnover.

I asked trader Tony Hargraves for a print out from his trades today and you can quickly see that Betfair have no future in the exchange business as a partner with RNSW.

Tony worked on ten races and as usual won on all of them, but importantly he turned over $16,754 and made a profit of $320 which yielded BF $6.40 Gross Profit on Tony's trades, but because RNSW want 1.5% of the turnover, BF lose $251 from the business.

OK got it!

Betfair generate incremental income for the racing industry as their unique fun model has attracted many players to the fold, and thousands of "retired" punters have flocked back to the industry as they love Betfair. The BF business creates millions of dollars of exotic bets and bet backs for corporate bookies including the TAB.

Tony had $8,200 in bet backs that stemmed from his trades today, which RNSW also grab 1.5%.

So we have proved that Betfair cannot survive under the RNSW tax and that they attract incremental revenue and participants to the industry. So given that very clear and obvious statement is some government watch dog going to ask why?

Racing Minister George Souris must ask RNSW why have they actively killed off a cash cow? We all would like to know the answer.


CHEERS.

Hi Garyf,

My first instinct is because the TAB effectively runs racing NSW and this model suits them just fine, they'll probably increase takeout to 20% and the mug punters won't notice a thing.

TheSchmile

Hi T.S.

When it comes to Peter v Landys and Racing N.S.W.
Anythings possible.

Cheers.
Garyf.

Nothing against the guy for finding what works but this is the reason betfair have failed, traders work the market and pay little, that's why they introduced the PC.

Glad it's not me who bets like this for a living.
But feel sorry for those who rely on this method.

Got to remember why and who is responsible,
For all of this it's one mans personal crusade to,
Effectively quell all competition.

It's not the first time Racing N.S.W. have been,
Emroiled in court cases just this is the first one,
They have effectively won.

Betfair didn't do this to themselves and didn't,
Change the terms of betting it was forced on to them.

Nobody elase seems to have mentioned this.

cheers.

Hi Garyf,

I still remember Vlandys on the racenet punters show and how good his rebuttals were.

Great mullet too....or am I imagining things?? :D

TheSchmile

L.OL.


Cheers.

Australian racing administrators either just don't understand the exchange concept or they want them out completely.

The TAB and bookies make money on turnover, exchanges make money on commission from winning bets.
Either way, I can adapt by utilising foreign markets more, but I think it's sad that in the end Australian racing will actually suffer rather than gain from a turnover tax.

If it weren't for an exchange, I certainly wouldn't be looking at GB, SAF, UAE, USA markets etc.
I'm quite sure that people from those countries wouldn't be looking at AUS racing either, except for maybe a handful of races each year.
So in the end, AUS racing will be the loser.