CairnBet serious blog alert...
The white paper came out on Thursday. I'd like to take a little time to look at the impact, both now and potentially in the future, from the perspective of the reality of on course bookmaking and some of the inaccurate and ill informed perceptions that are floating around the social media like an unflushed, well, you know what. Almost literally.
Reality
The reality of on course bookmaking is that there are an estimated 400 or so firms plying their trade. The overwhelming majority are, like mine, small one or two man bands earning a modest living in what is generally an enjoyable environment. We don't have the capability or desire to offer prices on Colombian football at 11pm or Latvian tennis at 7am the next morning. We don't do spin to lose slots. We are not mini casinos. We don't have roulette wheels hanging around the back of the joint at Kelso in January, or any other racecourse on any other day. In other words we do not engage in gambling activities that are generally accepted to be the type of betting that is likely to fuel compulsive gambling behaviour leading to problem gamblers. The white paper has been produced to reduce gambling harm for individuals who have a problem regulating their betting activities and, from our perspective, it is good to see the government understand this and not additionally regulate for regulation sake.
What we do offer is an on course service which offers 6 or 7 betting events over a 3-4 hour period. Again, not a high risk environment for problem gambling. I would also say, whilst we are unable to offer 20 places in The Gold Cup and money back if your jockey is left handed in The National and all the other loss leaders the online bookmakers can afford to offer in an attempt to secure accounts, we do offer an honest service and you won't get banned if you beat the SP twice on the run and/or win a few quid. And we may even smile when we pay you out.
Our customer base is overwhelmingly recreational punters coming to the races for a good day out who view betting a modest amount over the day which they are prepared to lose as part of their day's entertainment. If they get a few wins and end up in profit, more's the better.
We are highly regulated. We have policies around under age gambling, money laundering and problem gambling the same as any other gambling firms. We are not exempt from this requirement.
Perception
Sadly, there still remains a lot of talk on Twitter and similar that land based gambling has somehow "got away with it". Can I reiterate that the white paper is designed to reduce harmful gambling, not to tar every single area of gambling with the same brush. Land based gambling, and particularly on course gambling, is extremely low risk in this regard. Problem gamblers do not travel to a racecourse and pay a 25 quid entry fee to bet once every 35 minutes. They nip out in their tea and lunch breaks to bet on their phone on whatever sporting event is live and/or spin and lose. And then do the same at night. None of this is an on course bookmaker's business model.
There is even some talk about getting round the rules by going on course. Can I stress, again, that we have policies around problem gambling. You will not get very far going on course to get a bet on if you are a problem gambler. And it's not an environment conducive to that anyway.
Can I finally ask that, whether you are a punter or a fellow bookmaker, you challenge these misconceptions whenever you see them? I appreciate I have an interest in this as it's my business but we cannot allow potentially future regulation to be affected by perceptions and thinking that are faulty and inaccurate. This would be damaging not only for on course bookmakers but also for horse racing as an industry which relies on betting in general and also the atmosphere that a fun and vibrant betting ring brings to a day at the races.
Enough of that- how was Perth?
1) Bingo time with the book alternating winners and losers to give us 3 of each. Inferno Sacree went out to a huge lead and never really looked like being caught which was fortunate for us as it was a solid winner and also beat one of our bogeys, Lucinda's Cuban Cigar. Our day would continue to be dependent on the fortunes of Lucinda's runners as you would expect at Perth shortly after winning the National. Next door attracted Roger Moore in his 1970s James Bond safari suit who was after a whole plethora of exotic bets that we didn't have the software or ability to provide. They got his life story as well.
2) 6 losers. Count them. Six. And we had no chance as none of our winners threatened. The winner, If Not For Dylan was right at the bottom end of the market and we grumbled whilst our colleagues twirled. It's the nature of the way we do it and, as I've said many times, we have to accept it when it happens. And it wasn't going to be the last time today either.
3) And this was the flip side. Another 6 losers in an 8 runner race with only Resplendent Grey and Desert Stranger onside. Grey prevailed however and we were 50 shades of happy as we racked up another solid profit on what was a short priced winner. We didn't twirl though...
4) And we were on the right side of the joint-ish favourites here as we had more winners than losers in the book for, literally, first time today. And one of the bogeys, Here Comes The Man gave me the opportunity to belt out the Pixies banger (with a word changed) with ever increasing enthusiasm and ever reducing tunefulness. Next door hung their heads, James Bond may have been whistling Live and Let Die between his Tricasts. ReadySteadyBeau the best winner in our book and we marched on.
5) 3 losers, 3 winners and a bore draw. It was the bore draw, The Wolf, who won in gladiatorial fashion (one for you 1980s folks there) but at least it beat one of the bogeys, Uncle Alastair. Our best chance, Doyen Breed, fell when leading but didn't look the winner in any event. Another of our bogeys, Evander was boxed in. Well, probably not but I couldn't resist.
6) Twirl alert. But not from us. Twice in a day we got a big priced winner at Perth and for the second time we didn't cash in. Born Famous finished strongly to get up from Maillot Blanc who was a better result for us. It was another 0-0 for us and another opportunity to reflect on what might have been as the rest of the bottom of the market were, of course, jackpots. WatchOutItsCookie and What A Steal were the bogeys for completeness, We were winning when we had more bogeys than winners and now the reverse was kicking in.
7) And so it continued. 4 losers and the worst one, Haribo Collonges won for fans of jellied sweets and the places were equally rotten as The Bandit held on for 3rd. Big step backwards.
8) The power of love is a curious thing apparently. The support for Marty McFly less so as it was backed off the boards along with, of course, Lucinda's favourite El Elefante. Another led all from the jolly and we got battered again. Hopes raised briefly as Beaumesnil, a monster winner, was cruising and hit odds on for a nano second. But like gigantic tankers in the Suez Canal there was no turn of speed, the tank emptied and we lost.
Going in we loved that it was an 8 race card but we'd have been a lot better of if it had been 6. Musselburgh on Sunday. Until then...
An excellent appraisal addressing all of the salient concerns. Rightly pointing out differences between on course and other betting platforms/ avenues in an amusing yet informative thread. These clear distinctions must be repeated et al in order to create “ clear blue water“ going forward. The analogies of “columbian football“ and “Latvian tennis“ highlight the issues being faced.
Television advertisements show a woman in the bath playing bingo! An “own goal” if ever i saw one. The “independence” of on course bookmaking depends on clear distinctions being cherished and protected and vigorously defended and supported by the “fraternity”.