YOU CAN BET ON CHANGE

It was the philosopher Heraclitus who is credited with the quotation: “Change is the only constant in life” . . . or something roughly along those lines . . . and in Greek.

Presumably he wasn’t thinking about pushing out a 7-4 chance to 2-1, though we do know that the Greeks were partial to a punt. (A tradition carried on by their descendants who filled the tote windows at Harringay every Monday and Friday for 58 years.)

The Greeks reckoned the ancient gods had invented gambling with a ‘double or quits’ session over how the universe should be split up.

Zeus got the heavens including the sun, moon and all visible stars. Apollo was given the oceans, mountains and all living creatures. Deliallius, the god of losers, got plague, misery, famine and White Hart Lane (allegedly).

On April 1, something almost as dramatic is expected when the maximum pay-out from all FOBT machines will reduce from £100 to £2, and nobody quite knows what will happen next.

(Plan A – which looked as though the betting Plcs had hit the jackpot following a change in betting laws in the USA – has since been scuppered by an appeal)

There will surely be UK betting shop closures, but the extent as to how many is guesswork. Some will surely shut as a direct result of the FOBT legislation, others will board-up with the Government as a convenient scapegoat.

In my opinion, it looks a safe bet that the decline in shop numbers will far exceed the decline in actual turnover.

But change is nothing new in bookmaking circles. The big firms, who all started out as illegal back street bookies, opened their first shops in 1961 with the ‘Blower – audio only’ service. SIS was born in 1986 and brought live pictures. FOBT machines arrived in 2001, just after a mass migration to Gilbraltar to avoid betting tax.

We’ve had betting tax and gross profit tax. We’ve had refreshments, virtual, and the rise of internet betting. We’ve seen blanked out shop windows all the way to an Essex boy in a robosuit shouting the odds “Lads, lad, lads and everybody”.

The betting shops saw off the football pools, and survived the national lottery. We’ve seen the introduction of spread betting and the proliferation of global betting exchanges . . . . and so it goes on.

 

But for every innovation, there is extinction. Somewhere between sea otter and snow leopard on the endangered species list is the track bookie.

At some stage, David Attenborough will announce that the last breeding pair have been spotted trying to make a book at an early morning SIS card but there were simply not enough punters to sustain them.

“And, as if that wasn’t bad enough, here we see an attack from the deadliest of all parasites the Betfairius Slowtopaythefundus. Before this little chap know what has happened, the Betfairius has taken all the 9-4 and laid off at 2-1. The end is now surely in sight. (Breathy sigh).”

On a more serious note, the whole SP return concept is broken beyond repair.

We have moved on from the “suggested” starting price percentages that the tracks were expected to return, to more current “advice” to racetrack promoters that the betting market should “more closely reflect the odds being shown by Betfair”.

Three bookies, (who might actually only be two bookies – nudge nudge wink wink!) are forming odds for 8,500 betting shops.

But greyhound betting has even greater issues as was highlighted when RPGTV announced thier £100,000 race sponsorship package (eight firms paying roughly £1,000 per month).

It came with a ‘please support our sponsors’ message.

“WE WOULD, IF WE COULD F***ING GET ON!” suggested our readers.

There are now NO big bookmakers prepared to back their judgement against punters. They all just want to cream off an easy (very few) quid and continue to treat dog racing like the sack race at the school sports day.

“£200 to £50? You can have £20 to £5. But if it wins we will shut your account.”

Despite all the industry innovations, there has been very little imagination shown in terms of greyhound bets and virtually zero innovation in using modern technology.

My first thought was – given the new on-line contributions to the Fund – might it be worth the greyhound industry leading the way?

Should GBGB be trying to create new betting opportunities for the piss idle bookies?

However, I now understand that SIS – who are considerably more greyhound dependent than ARC – have some interesting new innovations planned to increase dog betting from mid-year.

Will let you know when I hear more.

 

The other major facet of any debate on the future of bookmaking must inevitably consider the implications of the 14 month old media rights war.

I originally, perhaps naively, reckoned it would be done and dusted within two years. I’m not so sure anymore.

SIS have played a masterful hand in building their greyhound portfolio and the two sides are in a deadlock that appears stronger than ever.

As was reported a few weeks ago, their profits have plummeted and the days of excess for their shareholders are surely gone for good.

But is that really relevant if we look at the bigger picture?

56% of SIS shares are owned by Ladrokes Coral, William Hill and Betfred/Tote. Are they likely to leave themselves open to an ARC greyhound monopoly?

It would surely be like Burgerking saying to McDonalds, “We are paying too much for beef, so we will buy it all from you instead. Now you do promise that the price won’t go up?”

It has been suggested that when the current ARC horse racing deals with the big bookies expire, they will seek to ‘bundle’ greyhounds into the package.

They tried to do that at the start but were told where to poke it. Will they be any more successful the next time?

I reckon there are at least two other angles to this – maybe more.

Firstly, those of us of a certain vintage grew up with the betting industry controlling greyhound racing.

I am still astonished at comments on forums suggesting ‘the bookies are trying to take over greyhound racing’.

Cop on – you are about 40 years too late. The betting industry entirely bankrolls greyhound racing.

Interestingly though, the media rights battle which saw the fracturing of BAGS, brought an end to a bookmaker monopoly that has always driven down the price of the product.

“This is how much we are prepared to pay for a BAGS meeting – like it, or we will give it to someone else.”

If you don’t believe that to be the case, check out prize money levels now compared to 2017.

Would it be possible for either a triumphant ARC or SIS to return to a monopoly/cartel on greyhound racing and not attract the interest of the Competition Markets Authority?

Secondly, the current SIS deals with the bookmakers end in 2023. It seems unlikely that the current model will continue and revenue share the most likely option.

Even more reason for a fresh approach to greyhound racing’s role in gambling.

Change is needed . . . .  and according to an old Greek bloke in a toga . . . .