SPs and the dying on-course market

[Prufrock]

Incidentally, Barry, you appeared to assume, mistakenly, that over-rounds were the point of my earlier post, not manipulation. Though manipulation can, of course, lead to higher over-rounds among other things.

My main problem is with SPs continuing to be determined by an on-course market that is sometimes very weak and open to significant abuse, and always weaker than at least one of the alternatives, rather than with over-rounds as such.

HTH.

[barry dennis]

Prufrock,

You admit that the alternatives are unacceptable by the OFT,

surely you dont feel exchanges are the answer, great 0% where will the Levy come from,

Please remember, the levy is based on profit from UK horseracing, which is getting smaller every year.

[Prufrock]

Barry, I am not going to share all my views on the SP mechanism for free. But it should be clear even to fools like Lord Donoughue that a robust SP requires a robust marketplace which simply isn’t the case on course in many instances. It is not necessary – or even desirable as things stand, for the obvious reason to do with funding that you point out – for SPs to be pitched at 101% in order for them to borrow positively from the more robust model provided by exchanges. People need to think beyond the obvious on this one.

[Author]

Posts