June 6, 2007 at 09:44 #1889
They say that nobody wins a war, but if a fraction of the protaganists in the upcoming conflicts fall by the wayside it will be, what might be termed, a right result for the good guys.
Firstly we have David Harding, of the unspeakable firm, declaring war on racing. He’s not happy that a racing owned broadcaster is selling piccies, possibly on preferntial terms, to racing’s bookie. He is far happier that a bookie owned broadcaster sells the piccies, possibly on preferential terms, to the bookie owners of the broadcaster.
This is the same unspeakable firm that complained about the integrity of the SP mechanism. If you remember, they were upset that the SP was being tainted by real money influencing the SP rather than them being able to dictate it through the use of some chalk moves and the strategic placement of a few hundred quid.
The big bookies were so incenced about this lack of integrity they had to ‘presuade’ Lord Donoghue of how wrong it all was. In lieu of any arguments, they decided the best way to do this was by showering him with gifts. Donoghue was ‘persuaded’ by Corals over lavish lunches at three consecutive Eclipse meetings, while Ladbrokes had the Noble Lord as guest of honour at three consecutive Cheltenham festivals.. Then there was Royal Ascot, where the tote did the ‘persuading’.
Now Barney Curley has a bee in his bonnet about the big bookies winning the battle on SP manipulation and has declared war.
The question is: which side are you on?June 6, 2007 at 10:46 #63827
While most of the recorded office money is hedged on favs, an awful lot of clipping goes on of longshots, which has more to do with manipulation than hedging.
Didn’t watch the Firenze race, so can’t comment beyond noting that 11 of the 35 tickets scoop6 tickets were on him. So why he, as an early 2/1 poke was disproportionately hedged I don’t know. Maybe someone just didn’t fancy him.June 6, 2007 at 13:26 #63828psychosisMember
- Total Posts 35
For me the SP debate is all academic anyway. I haven’t bet at SP for a good 5 years, and very rarely bet on anything other than Betfair these days.
That said, if the bookies "lose" the SP debate (or, for that matter, see a downturn in business as a result of the screening rights farce). Yes, the shareholders in the firms, but also ultimately racing, which is more or less propped up by funding/levies from the bookmakers.June 6, 2007 at 14:29 #63829Black Sam BellamyMember
- Total Posts 441
On the subject of the picture rights, my local shop (Stan James) is deserted since the picture war broke out. I gave-up on it having been unable to hear the "away" audio horse commentary over the excitable dogs coverage on screen. Can anyone working in the shops, confirm whether it’s having a significant impact on revenue ?
It’s sad that the powers that be are shooting themselves in the foot like this. Surely the BHB or whoever must realise how much it’s all damaging the sport ?June 6, 2007 at 15:12 #63830witParticipant
- Total Posts 2152
the recent statements from the CEOs of both Hills and Corals could have huge implications for the value of their estates.
"the reason we should have a licence to open up next door is that they don’t bet on actual horseracing any more. Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â their business is one-armed bandits and gaff tracks; ours is catering to the real racing enthusiast who now is totally unserved in the area (and thank you we’ll also have a few quality FOBTs)".
wit<br>June 6, 2007 at 18:22 #63831
Think I might apply for a few choice pitches myself Wit:biggrin:June 7, 2007 at 13:13 #63832andyodMember
- Total Posts 4012
Gambling is an addiction like drink or drugs.When you get involved in an addiction don’t expect the law to protect you.It cannot. Nothing can protect an addict.<br>The bookies are like the companies who make alcohol. They provide the relief the addict craves.The bookies office is the local. Get real, horseracing is like calling your drink, if you bet. But unlike drink it can be a lot of fun if you don’t, not like watching people getting drunk.<br>For most people betting on the Derby is like having a glass of sherry at Christmas.<br>When we talk about betting here we are talking about our addiction. Hopefully like at AA we will be cured.Critising Barney Curley is like one drunk objecting to how another drunk does it. It don’t make sense because they are both drunk.June 7, 2007 at 21:46 #63833
Neither gambling, drink or drugs are an addiction.
Hope this helps.June 8, 2007 at 02:49 #63834FlatSeasonLoverMember
- Total Posts 2065
Its not had a noticeable impact on revenue taken in the Ladbrokes shop I work in BSB.June 8, 2007 at 12:31 #63835andyodMember
- Total Posts 4012
Dear Glenn <br>That should help the addicts feel better but it won’t help cure them.June 8, 2007 at 14:53 #63836madman marzMember
- Total Posts 707
Interesting Curley only mentioned Betfair.<br>Maybe Barney could inform us on wether he and his associates have accounts with Betdaq. I expect an answer in seven days, if not I’ll take that as a yes then Barney.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.