A case of throwing good money after bad. Ever since the European Court of Justice’s judgement in Placanica, the European betting companies have poured good money down the drain, attempting to lobby the European Commission ( I will not name names). They have also spent a fortune attending conferences, where they have been told by European Law betting experts that the European betting market was going to be liberalised.
On 8 September 2009 the European Court of Justice ruled in the case of “Liga Portuguesa de Futebol Profissional (CA/LPFP) and Baw International Ltd v Departamento de Jogos de Santa Casa da Misericordia de Lisboa.” (”Bwin Liga”). The ruling represented an unequivocal victory as regards the right of state monopolies to exist in the field of gambling, and, moreover, it strengthened the rights of said monopolists vis a vis online betting.
The ramifications from the European Court of Justice’s ruling in the case of “Bwin Liga” are now being felt, with Ladbrokes withdrawning its legal action against the Norwegian State concerning its recent application for a licence, after Norway said it would rely on “Bwin Liga” in its defence.
Anyone who is aware of these facts, would know that Right2Bet is a waste of both time and money. This will be confirmed further when the European Commission gets around to announcing its position (post – Bwin/Liga) vis a vis the actions that it is currently taking against a number of European States.
The game is up. The monopolists and the incumbent operators have won, and the European gambling industry now lacks any significant catalysts (hence Paddy Power’s recent decision to target Australia.)
TradeSports will terminate itself on November 28, 2008.
A very sad day (which I am not glad to report that I predicted would happen). TradeSports is probably the latest victim of both the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 and the Louisiana prosecutors. It is also the victim of a lack of support from the prediction market luminaries. As for the pertinence of the InTrade-TradeSports splitting that was started in 2007, I leave this issue to the business historians.
InTrade (which does not float event derivatives on sports) is caught in the same regulatory net, but CEO John Delaney hopes that the CFTC could soon legalize event derivative exchanges —-except those on sports. That is far from certain, though. And InTrade’-s heyday is now over. See you in 2012, for the next presidential election.
The Sporting Exchange (which operates BetFair) is making a very different bet: the United States of America will one day legalize the betting exchanges and the trading on sports. That is a reasonable, long-term bet. But not all the Democratic legislators favor Internet gambling and betting —-far from it. We will see.
The future is spelled “-BetFair”-, but many of my readers don’-t like the way they display odds —-Americans prefer probabilities.
They got carried away from the prediction market approach (which, unlike InTrade, they never understood fully, anyway).
This gambling approach of the marketing of the prediction markets is very interesting in terms of potential revenue growth. I encourage InTrade, TradeSports, BetFair, NewsFutures and HubDub to adopt it.
However, it remains to be seen whether TradeFair is the right venue for gambling. TradeFair was supposed to be a serious financial prediction exchange (the British equivalent of HedgeStreet), and it is now the online equivalent of Macao or Las Vegas. Hummm…- Will these 2 different worlds mix well together? Could La Callas sell pork sausages? Could Yehudi Menuhin sell used condoms?
And I won’-t mention the issue of problem gambling, which I predict will be made worse thanks to TradeFair Hi &- Lo and BetFair Arcades.
Once the previous bet is resolved, you can start off anew with another 5-minute bet on the FTSE —-from the level that was the basis for the settlement of the previous bet.
Excellent analysis from the “-Punt”- blogger.
Serial bet winners are accused (that’-s the word) to withdraw money from the BetFair machine, compelling BetFair to attract new money from newbies at a high marketing cost, and thus BetFair has decided to tax those serial bet winners.
I wonder what a Harvard or Wharton MBA would think of this reasoning.
It is my understanding that, in the betting and gambling business, you are always trying to attract new blood to make up for the disillusioned gamblers that you are losing on a daily basis.
Am I correct, folks?
Why don’-t BetFair raise moderately the trading fees for everybody, or try to reduce the cost of the BetFair IT architecture by slashing out what has been unnecessary added by their IT maniacs?
Previously: BetFair impose new “Premium Charges”, and their very active traders are up in arms. – 2008-09-09