Sport is made for betting

News today that the governor of New Jersey has signed a bill permitting exchange betting within the state. It's not a given for Betfair or any other company trying to operate a betting exchange on horse racing, it just allows the possibility of such betting platforms. I posted a whole batch of reasons a month ago why investors in particular shouldn't be counting their chickens just yet. Here's the story from US racing bible, the Daily Racing Form. New Jersey governor Christie signs exchange-betting bill New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie signed bills on Monday that will legalize exchange wagering and a new method of pooling parimutuel wagers, the governor's office said on Monday. Both bills were supported by elements of the racing industry as the state continues to pursue ways to help the state's beleaguered gambling industries. Christie also vetoed a bill on Monday that supporters said would streamline the process by which offtrack betting locations are approv...

Over the past few months, there has been some excitement about the prospects of exchange wagering being permitted in the USA , particularly California and New Jersey. The governments of these two states have passed legislation to allow exchange betting on local horse racing, with Betfair heavily involved in the lobbying. All that has happened is the current gambling legislation has been expanded to include a racing-only betting exchange as an option, it's not a given, and it's certainly not a given that Betfair have the rights to it. There are still some huge obstacles a betting exchange has to overcome before a Betfair-branded exchange is up and running in the USA. 1 - the debate over the ethics of laying horses . That hasn't occurred yet, and there's no reason to believe American racing people will be any less antiquated than the rest of the world when it comes to explaining that you can effectively lay a horse via current wagering systems, it's just more comp...

Much has been made this week of the Californian government passing legislation to allow exchange wagering on horse racing in the state. With Betfair already having a presence in California as owners of broadcast network and pari-mutuel operator TVG, and sponsoring the bill, the easy conclusion is that Betfair will start up in the USA. But a lot of water still has to pass under the bridge before a Betfair-run exchange can be licensed. This bill also allowed pari-mutuel operators to raise takeout on Californian racing pools... so where is the logic in pushing rake up to over 20% on one hand, and bringing in a foreign company to run a business on 2-5% commission at the same time? Of course there's no guarantee Betfair would use (or be allowed to use) the same business model as they have in the UK, a market subject to far more competition. Politicians have a history of making half-baked decisions, particularly when they are desperate for cash (the state of California is as financia...

Racing in many states of the US is really struggling. The Off-Track Betting (OTB) of New York is millions in debt (how you can run a monopoly tote at a loss is beyond belief), broadcast rights are a mess, politicians in Arizona thought it was a great idea to ban online betting altogether, Californian racetracks are being sold off to property developers or lobbying to increase takeout rates and trainers who are banned for doping offences in one state can simply up sticks and move to another. With the exception of a handful of tracks, it's a basket case. New Jersey moves forward with betting exchange plans This week New Jersey state assembly unanimously voted (78-0) in favour of a bill that would authorise a Betfair-style betting exchange for state residents on horse racing. Like everything in the US, it's restricted by state, but.. "The bill also provides that exchange bets submitted on a given market on the exchange in New Jersey may, under approved conditions, be matched...

Yesterday, the French Senate decided to adopt the bill aiming to "open market competition for gambling online." But sadly, their citizens will still be ripped off by limited competition, high margins and poor options. Read the translated article from sospronostics.com Sports betting, live betting, poker and betting on horse racing was approved (no detail whether fixed-odds racing was given the nod). Exchange and spread betting remain prohibited, "because of the risk of money laundering and ease of addiction worse than this may cause." There is nothing like dealing with an authority which makes up its own data, and then buries its head in the sand when proven otherwise. Every online transaction can be traced to IP addresses, bank accounts, counterparties etc - exactly how does that compare with cash transactions in PMU outlets and land casinos. Just look at the record of Australian casinos for a history of money laundering, and without a doubt that happens in every o...

This case has been running all week and will continue for a few days yet. Numerous articles about it in the Aus press with Racing NSW gaining some ground (they couldn't really lose much more) and legalese choking proceedings to a very slow grind. One quote from tomorrow's article in the Sydney Morning Herald I wanted to highlight though: Racing NSW argues that the fee should be calculated by turnover because turnover is easier to assess and ''less susceptible to avoidance or manipulation'' than gross revenue. It also argues that turnover is not influenced by the particular business model or business decisions made by the company. Turnover is also preferable to gross revenue because it cannot be manipulated by inducements, rebates or benefits given to valuable customers, Racing NSW argues. Rubbish, there is not one system in the world which is manipulation-proof. On-course bookmakers in Aus have been caught over the years taking bets on a second set of books - s...

North American betting exchange Matchbook will be fairly anonymous unless you bet on US sports regularly. This week they've announced changes to their commission structure, switching from the commission on winnings model which everyone else operates to a fees per trade structure. Funnily enough, that hasn't been popular with punters - the SBR forum thread has gone ten pages so far, and doesn't look like stopping anytime soon. The question is - is this Matchbook trying to stimulate business or trying to stay profitable? By charging market makers less than market takers (people accepting offers), this encourages people to post odds and make the markets more competitive rather than just suck up liquidity. But the fee-per-trade option kills off the trader who bets again and again in-running, as I love to do. Staying profitable though is another consideration. Betfair's annual reports shows they make nearly 25% of profits from the interest on client deposits. With the fina...

You'd probably not notice unless you were focused on US sports markets, but TradeSports has closed down. A message on their site essentially says they've given up as they were never going to make any money out of it. Go back five years, there were probably about 40 betting exchanges out there including several white-labels. Without the liquidity, they will all fall over. Betdaq and WBX have been around for a few years now and still can't make much of a dent on Betfair, despite Betfair scoring a few own goals this year. Matchbook in the US is obviously proprietary backed in-running (prices set in-house, might as well be a bookmaker) much like Mansion tried to be. And there's a new joke-looking one advertising on Livescore at the moment - BetCruise, advertising no commission! Anyone offering odds on them going broke by the end of 09?