IT IS interesting – yet pleasing - to note that the much maligned but all powerful corporate bookies of Australia are making an attempt to “resuscitate their public image”.
Well, some of them at least.
The gambling industry's new peak body, Responsible Wagering Australia (RWA) headed by former Labor minister Stephen Conroy, is poised to unveil a list of concessions including a ban on offering credit to gamblers. But apparently not all corporates are in favour of the changes.
Fairfax Media reported at the weekend that bookmaker Tom Waterhouse is strongly opposed “and is at the centre of a bitter dispute with his online gambling sector colleagues”.
Surprised? Of course not.
Conroy, according to the Fairfax report hopes to restore the "social licence" of internet betting companies that are regularly criticised for their blanket advertising and hard-sell approach.
“Tom Waterhouse, has declined to join Responsible Wagering Australia which apart from banning credit, also proposes to scrap "sign-up" offers (bonus bets) that are used to lure new punters, and reduce advertising volume, especially during sport broadcasts, the report states.
“The Conroy-led RWA (which replaced the disbanded Australian Wagering Council), represents Sportsbet, Bet365, Betfair, Ubet and CrownBet and has an overarching aim to remain a self-regulating industry.
“But a stalemate has arisen because William Hill, headed by Waterhouse, and fellow British-owned bookie Ladbrokes, have so far declined to join the RWA.
Fairfax Media understands William Hill, which acquired the Tom Waterhouse.com brand for $34 million in 2013, along with Sportingbet and Centrebet, has no intention of cutting lines of credit to big punters or reining in its growing marketing spend.
William Hill declined to comment on its "internal position" on the proposed reform push but said it was an active participant in the 2015 review of illegal offshore wagering, led by former NSW premier Barry O'Farrell, and supported the "development and implementation of an evidence-based responsible gambling framework".
A Ladbrokes spokesman said it "respectfully declines the opportunity to comment on this matter at this point in time".
But a forthright statement from the RWA questioned the commitment of the dissenting companies to minimising gambling harm in the community.
"Our members are leading the industry and setting an example through their commitments to consumer protection, responsible gambling and harm minimisation measures," an RWA spokeswoman said.
"This is in contrast to other operators that do not demonstrate the same commitment to working with government and other stakeholders to improve regulation and consumer protection."
A source said Ladbrokes and William Hill remained unconvinced of the merits of joining the RWA after the former Wagering Council fell apart after failing to prevent the federal government legislating against online in-play betting, a move that is said to have cost operators $500,000 a week in profits.
“It's not the first time Waterhouse has been at loggerheads with rivals,” the report said.
In 2013, then Sportingbet chief executive Michael O'Sullivan sent shockwaves through the sector when he told Fairfax Media that the scion of the Waterhouse bookmaking dynasty was "acting irresponsibly" by spruiking live betting odds from the sidelines of NRL games in a deal with Channel Nine.
The Gillard government later stepped in to ban live odds updates after months of pressure from a widespread community backlash.
The RWA has proposed abolishing sign-up offers, saying "we believe customers should decide to join a wagering operator without a financial incentive".
But in contrast to that seemingly honourable commitment, a search on Friday showed Sportsbet offering $75 credit for a $25 opening deposit. William Hill will match any first deposit up to $505 and Ladbrokes gives $80 credit for a $10 deposit.
Well, they ARE bookies, you might say.
For every dollar William Hill takes in revenue from punters, it spends 26c on advertising and marketing.
And the company's publicly-listed British parent recently revealed would be raised to 28c in the dollar as it drives for greater market share.
Despite talk of reforms, the turf war for market share shows no signs of abating. CrownBet recently paid $300 million to become the official "digital partner" of 1200 registered clubs in NSW in a deal that poses a threat to the TAB and according to many, should never have been allowed.
The old question: Why do we need corporate bookies?
Simple answer: We Don’t.
A National Tote, exactly the same system used in the flourishing racing centres of Hongkong, Japan and Singapore would surely suffice. And of course corporates are banned in those jurisdictions and it is illegal for residents to bet with them on line.
It might take an Act of parliament to rid them. But untold millions and millions would remain on-shore.
Yes, it really is that simple.
A MONTH ago Let Me Say This finished near last at a 100/1 at his first Brisbane start. And then started favourite at his next two starts - and won.
And now the good judges are hailing the former Rockhampton galloper a Queensland Derby prospect. Albeit he is a son of the great sprinter Choisir who course led the charge of the Aussie brigade to Royal Ascot a decade or so ago.
Let Me Say This was also a great welcome home present for owner Jim Rundle, the former king pin of the Queensland Trainers Association who recently holidayed in South America.
And he was a leg of a winning treble for Steven O’Dea the youthful Townsville professional who has certainly made his mark in the cut throat world of Brisbane racing.
Like his horse Let Me Say This, Steven O’Dea has risen from obscurity. And established an enviable record and reputation as a trainer in the big smoke.
And he has done it all himself - which makes his sterling record of achievements even more deserved and meritorious.