- This topic has 43 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
The bets not being honoured is wrong. It doesn’t sit solely on Rich Ricci, what percentage does he hold? Is it 10% i heard? Just because he is in the limelight and already has in some people’s eyes a “murky” past, people are using this as a stick to beat him without knowing any facts whatsoever.
The whole thing should be handled better by BetBright + Unibet as a whole.
Twitter: Jackh1092
Hindsight is 20/20 so make the most of it!The problem with that argument, Jack, is his percentage is irrelevant and it’s the very fact that he is a well known racing figure that motivated the company to invite his investment because it wanted him to be its public face. Therefore, having agreed to play a key role in attracting folk to bet with the firm he deserves every bit of flak that comes his way now that people have effectively been robbed.
When one looks at many of the leading owners (another example would be the O’Learys) we find they are arch capitalists known for sharp business practices. They can all do one as far as I’m concerned. Racing will adjust to the absence of their filthy money.
Here’s a couple interviews with Lydia if anyone didn’t see them
Gaelic Warrior Gold Cup Winner 2026
Jack – I really have to disagree with your position. The facts are Rich Ricci was the Executive Chairman of Betbright and in this role his is accountable (not solely responsible but he is the person to be held most to account) for the financial affairs, corporate reputation, compliance and is responsible for the overall running of the company.
The liabilities they have are real liabilities. Can you imagine taking a loan from a bank on which interest is chargeable and then saying to the bank: we’re going to cancel the loan and only pay to back the principal i.e. no interest. Are you telling me this would be acceptable to the bank? No way, and neither should it be to the punter. Now I accept the situation is not exactly the same (there might not be any interest to be paid with bets) but that is what they are in essence saying.
What he owns in the company is less important because of separate legal personality. He needs to revise his position and quickly. I also agree with the point about him not being able to hold dual roles as a Executive Chairman of a bookmakers and owner of a racehorse(s). The is a unacceptable conflict of interest.
One last point, as to his murky past – I don’t think that’s in dispute. He was part of the leadership team at Barclays which was fined £450m for the rigging of Libor rates amongst other things.
I dont particularly like Oleary or Ricci but describing their money as “filthy” needs some clarification perhaps? Was it earned illegally? If not then thats a near libellous statement isnt it?
And no one has to bank with Barclays or fly with Ryanair ffs
Obviously, Clive, it was earned illegally. In the case of Ricci, he was part of a team fined for rigging rates whilst the O’Learys constantly break consumer law:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/ryanair/Ryanair-faces-action-for-breach-of-consumer-law/
https://www.ft.com/content/6dce0fcc-a531-11e7-b797-b61809486fe2
You’d be better served, mate, by cutting out the s***-stirring, just because we disagree on most things, and asking yourself why you’re so vehemently opposed to politicians who would take action to cut out the sot of sharp business practices that make the rich richer and the poor poorer.
Its far from an ideal scenario
But it has absolutely nothing to do with him being able to attend racing, stupidity to suggest he should be banned lol
what utter crap
I am opposed to Corbyn because hes a racist anti semitic Terrorist supportng idiot who thinks that Venezuela is the model economy. Hes also thick as two short planks
Got it?
and the expected hate driven attack on business and the so called “rich” will be of great benefit to british NH racing wont it?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.