Skip to main content

UK press getting sucked in again over Betfair float talks

The financial sections of Sunday's papers got all excited about rumours of a Betfair float again.

Betfair considers £1.5bn flotation

The logic is all wrong. The company has been profitable every year since it began. Its cash reserves are huge and there would be little benefit in going to market. The company does however need an exit strategy for the next maturing staff share plan in October, and if and when Andrew Black decides to step away completely from the business, which is a possibility as he has little to do with the firm apart from board activity these days. A full-scale float in either of those cases is unlikely to be required. The other option would be if major investor Softbank wanted to bail out, but that's unlikely after just a couple of years, unless they have issues elsewhere. Or perhaps a listed company would look better to American authorities if the market there was opening up....

Betfair will float eventually. They have been reporting like a floated company and preparing for the relevant corporate governance and responsibility for years. Unless they suddenly wanted to buy a land casino or a major competitor, I'd be very surprised if they floated in the near future. This talk has happened several times before, Betfair were serious about it when they appointed Stephen Hill as CEO a few years back, but they decided it wasn't right at the time and Hill departed soon after. Journos love something to talk about on quiet news days, and it's not as if there have been many big IPOs lately with the state of the economy!

Footnote - I no longer have anything to do with Betfair apart from writing the occasional article for them and drinking with ex-colleagues occasionally, none of whom would be involved in any decision-making process regarding an IPO.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Spot-fixing - you will never, ever be able to stop it

According to this report , IPL tournaments so far have been rife with spot-fixing - that is fixing minor elements of the game - runs in a single over, number of wides bowled etc. The curious part of that article is that the Income Tax department are supposed to have found these crimes. What idiot would be stupid enough to put down 'big wad of cash handed to me by bookie' as a source of income? Backhanders for sportsmen, particularly in a celebrity- and cricket-obsessed culture like India are not rare. They could come from anything like turning up to open someone's new business (not a sponsor, but a 'friend of a friend' arrangement), to being a guest at some devoted fan's dinner party etc. The opportunities are always there, and there will always be people trying to become friends with players and their entourage - that is human nature. This form of match-fixing (and it's not really fixing a match, just a minor element of it) is very hard to prove, but also, ...

lay the field - my favourite racing strategy

Dabbling with laying the field in-running at various prices today, not just one price, but several in the same race. Got several matched in the previous race at Brighton, then this race came along at Nottingham. Such a long straight at Nottingham makes punters often over-react and think the finish line is closer than it actually is. As you can see by the number of bets matched, there was plenty of volatility in this in-play market. It's rare you'll get a complete wipe-out with one horse getting matched at all levels, but it can happen, so don't give yourself too much risk...

It's all gone Pete Tong at Betfair!

The Christmas Hurdle from Leopardstown, a good Grade 2 race during the holiday period. But now it will go into history as the race which brought Betfair down. Over £21m at odds of 29 available on Voler La Vedette in-running - that's a potential liability of over £500m. You might think that's a bit suspicious, something's fishy, especially with the horse starting at a Betfair SP of 2.96. Well, this wasn't a horse being stopped by a jockey either - the bloody horse won! Look at what was matched at 29. Split that in half and multiply by 28 for the actual liability for the layer(s). (Matched amounts always shown as double the backers' stake, never counts the layers' risk). There's no way a Betfair client would have £600m+ in their account. Maybe £20 or even £50m from the massive syndicates who regard(ed) Betfair as safer than any bank, but not £600m. So the error has to be something technical. However, rumour has it, a helpdesk reply (not gospel, natur...