'Bookies' moan $400m Cup loss

André Lowe, Senior Staff Reporter

Local bookmakers are complaining that the government's tardiness in implementing new regulations, which will allow them to offer Internet and telephone betting to their customers, is resulting in millions of dollars in losses.

In fact, one entity claims that it will lose more than $400 million in bets for this summer's FIFA World Cup.

This would also mean that the government is in essence losing substantial amounts in potential taxes, up to $150 million according to bookmakers' estimations.

This is because punters are taking their business 'underground' to the illegal bookmakers, who are more than willing to take these bets over the telephone, among other means.

Add to that the $500 million which, as stated, would have been made from electronic and telephone betting by leading local bookmakers on the National Basketball Association (NBA) season, and the picture becomes a little more grim.

The government ratified several amendments to the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act on May 6 of this year in an effort to expand the industry, with changes which allowed betting - including sports betting - to be taken electronically by way or telephone and Internet.

Framework or regulations

However, almost a month has passed and the framework or regulations under which this type of wagering can be offered has not yet been implemented by the regulators, the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Commission (BGLC), leaving the bookies to stare at what 'could have been', with the highly anticipated football tournament just weeks away.

"With this World Cup, we estimate that we could probably see $400 million worth of bets on that one-month tournament alone. A lot of that business goes underworld because the underworld man takes up his phone and takes a bet and the government gets nothing from that through taxes," explained Wilbert Witter of the United Bookmakers' Association.

"So, the law is there, but the framework is not here, so we are now selling only at the betting shops," said Witter.

The betting shops, according to Witter, are not the most enticing for the casual or irregular gambler and is even more unattractive for individuals who wish to place huge wagers.

"Not everybody wants to go to a betting shop. For instance, a man who wants to bet $50,000 on a football game is not going to walk into a betting shop with a man who has $100 betting on a racehorse," argued Witter, whose company is a partnership consisting of three leading bookmaking companies - Track Price Plus, Markham and Champion Betting.

"All of this business is going down the drain and government might be losing up to $150 million worth of income off the World Cup alone," Witter shared.

Derek Peart, BGLC's executive director, could not verify the figures being bantered about, but explained that the process is not an entirely easy one and that due diligence must be respected. He said it would require extensive training and testing to fully implement the requisite systems and perimetres.

"The amendments require a slew of regulations to give effect to the act," said Peart.

"Recruitment and development of the skills to conduct the relevant audits; these are all being addressed (and) a comprehensive public-education programme is also being drafted."

Peart, who agrees that the addition of electronic betting will have a positive spin-off, added that his organisation is putting the necessary steps in place to provide for proper monitoring of what is regarded as the most difficult type of betting to regulate.