right2bet blog

 

The Polish Football Federation have been forced to suspend their sponsorship agreement with Swedish sports-betting company Unibet, in order to fall into line with the country's new online-gambling laws, which came into effect on January 1st 2010.

As we reported at the time, the Poles have banned all form of gambling outside of the land-based casinos, and advertising of gambling companies has also been blocked.

As a result, Unibet, which was the official sponsor of the Polish second division, can no longer have their branding placed in stadium and on TV, and as a result, the partnership has been suspended and the much needed money which was supposed to go to struggling Polish league clubs has been withdrawn.

The development will come as a hammer blow to the league, its clubs and their supporters, who are now being robbed of the chance to earn the type of money needed if Polish football is to progress and regain a sure footing in the global game.

Polish football, in terms of infrastructure and quality is in the pits, and the ridiculously restrictive legislation now in place is having a major impact on everyone connected with the sport.

Amazingly, this new legislation only came about as a result of the government trying to pass the buck, after members of the cabinet were charged with corruption. The disgraced politicians were found to be opposing higher taxes on gambling institutions based on their ties with them, and rather than blame the individuals responsible, the government looked to appease the public by blaming gambling itself, and the new bill was proposed and passed at breakneck speed.

The European Commission has already voiced its displeasure with certain aspects of the new bill and have asked Poland for an explanation.

We urge the Commission to follow through with their querying of the actions of the Polish government, since in our opinion, the situation that Poles who want to place a bet are now faced with is unlawful, unjustifiable and incompatible with fundamental EU law.

 

 

Despite dominating for long spells AC Milan failed to break down Roma in the Eternal City, and as a result, both sides failed to close the gap between themselves and Inter at the top of Serie A.

Fortunately though, Jose Mourinho's men also drew 0-0 at home to Genoa the following day, meaning that the difference between them and their city rivals is still only four points, with Roma a further three points behind.

However, while Inter may have failed to extend their lead, the chasm between the value offered by Private betting operators, and public betting operators continues to widen.

The Roma v Milan game was the focus of this weekend's charity betting challenge, and the discrepancy in the odds offered across Europe can be seen below.

Odds on a Draw:

FDJ (Fra): 3.05
De Lotto (Ned): 2.85
Svenska Spel (Swe); 2.15
Danske Spil (Den): 2.85
Lotto Bayern (Ger): 2.60
Best Private Operator: 3.35

Profit on a 10 Euro Bet on The Draw

FDJ: 20.5 Euro
De Lotto: 18.5 Euro
Svenska Spel: 11.5 Euro
Danske Spil: 18.5 Euro
Lotto Bayern: 16 Euro
Best Private Operator: 23.5 Euro

Profit From Challenge So Far

After 17 Weeks

FDJ: 287 Euro
De Lotto: 292 Euro
Best Private Operator: 379.5 Euro

After 12 Weeks

Svenska Spel: 221.3
Danske Spil: 248.5 Euro
Lotto Bayern: 223.5 Euro
Best Private Operator: 304.5 Euro

As we can see from above, yet again the odds and profits being offered by monopoly operators are well below those offered by private competitors. And the losers?  The consumers of course.

The situation is crystal clear. Public operators are being protected by their governments to protect the revenues they bring in. As a consequence, EU consumers are being offered less choice, quality and value by the products they are being forced to use.

In an age of European integration, coordination and cooperation, the situation within the online gaming industry is abhorrent.  Fundamental EU laws are not to be breached as and when it suits and despite the fact that there is no justification for the banning of legal, licensed EU operators, this is exactly what is happening across the continent.

Sign our petition today, and add your name to the fight for freedom of choice in the EU. We need your support and with it, we're confident of making our voices heard.

We were delighted to see the World Online Gambling Law Report publish a feature length peice wrtten by right2bet. The  Magazine is read widely by a varied mix of lawyers, legislators and EU politcians, and we're thrilled that they've been preesnted with our position in the latest edition.

Below is the article in full. To view it on the WOGLR site and to subscribe to their service go here:

Right2bet  Bringing The Consumer's Voice To A Traditionally Corporate Issue

Right2bet is a pan-European coalition of consumers, betting operators, online web portals and media publishers all united in their desire to see the European online betting market liberalized.

Our core belief is that all EU citizens should have the right to bet with whichever licensed EU operator they choose, regardless of which Member State their chosen provider operates from.
We're tired of Member State governments protecting their lucrative state monopolies at the expense of the welfare of their citizens, and our aim is to give the public a platform from which they can voice their frustrations.

The battle between operators and the monopolies has been going on for some time, yet never before has the consumer taken centre stage on the issue. At right2bet, we're trying to achieve this by engaging the public as best as we can, and by highlighting to them succinctly why this issue is important, primarily to those who gamble of course, but also to those who don't.

Our website, which is offered in 15 different languages, hosts a petition that aims to take advantage of the new European Citizens Initiative that was adopted when the Lisbon Treaty was ratified.( It states that should a petition of 1 million signatures be brought to Brussels, the Commission will be compelled to act upon it.)

Aside from the petition, the site offers users the chance to send an email to their MEP, asking them to raise the issue in Parliament. It also hosts our daily blog and gives users the the chance to rant, post photos and learn more about the current legislative situation. 

We're building a strong presence across several social media outlets and internet blogs, with webmasters being encouraged to host our voting widgets which allow their visitors to sign our petition without leaving their site.

We've been delighted with the response and while we've been active in looking to recruit partners and supporters we've been thrilled by the fact that so many people- individuals and groups - have contacted us, asking  if they can become a part of the campaign.  Lawyers in Germany, employee unions in Italy and major news sites in France have proactively sought to join the cause and they along with some large EU operators are now part of right2bet.

Our ambition is twofold. We want to effectively bring this issue into the consumer's consciousness and then at the same time give them the necessary tools to stand up for their rights that are being infringed upon.

There's no question that consumers are losing out. Those forced to bet with state monopolies are forced to accept inferior odds, inferior products and inferior choice to many of their European counterparts. What's more, in our opinion, they are being offered a service which offers less consumer protection as well.

There is no hiding from the fact that many of those who are being prevented from betting legally online are finding ways around the system to get their bets on.  Instead of providing their citizens with a transparent, legal framework within which they can wager, governments are funnelling their citizens into the murkier sphere of black market betting. It is a situation that benefits neither the state nor the consumer, yet this reality is one that lawmakers seem keen to ignore.

We certainly don't advocate illegal betting or any breaching of current national laws. The welfare of the consumer is our chief concern and we would support any legislation that we feel would not only offer the greatest amount of value and enjoyment but protection and safety too.

European law is undoubtedly complex, and we fully understand that there are needs and traditions of different localities which require careful consideration and protection, even during a time of wider integration.  It is not our intention to ignore this and we see no value in fighting for a consumer's specific right at the expense of others.  We appreciate that certain freedoms need to be curtailed in order to protect others and are fully supportive of this logic - we are not anarchists.

However, arguments for a restricted online gambling market simply fail to make a compelling case.

In our opinion, it is unquestionably the case that Member State monopolies are being supported, not in the interest of the public, but in the interest of Government balance sheets.  We say this not to be uncouth or controversial, but rather because we have seen no evidence to suggest otherwise.

Those that argue for the monopolies point to them being better equipped to protect against problem gambling, yet independently published reports have proven this to be untrue. In fact, a recent study conducted by Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies at Nottingham Trent University found that very few Member States have even carried out sufficient research on the topic.

They say that monopolies will protect against fraud and money laundering, yet it is almost common knowledge and in our opinion undeniably true that private operators offer the most sophisticated systems of crime prevention along with the most stringent of KYC checks.

Lawmakers claim that they restrict the market in order to protect their citizens from the dangers of gambling, yet at the same time they offer them the same products, marketed in the same manner with the one difference being that the state holds the key to the coffers. It's a hypocritical status quo that is almost comical in its clarity.

This scenario where an Englishman can earn twice as much having staked the same amount on the same bet as his French neighbour - as highlighted in our innovative Charity Betting Challenge - is absurd.

Europeans have shown an increasing desire to share and trade innovation and quality service seamlessly cross-border. The EU was founded on the notion of this fundamental principle, and we're disgusted by the fact that when it comes to online gambling, this core building block is being ignored.

The situation needs to change and the monopolies need to be disbanded or at least forced to go toe-to-toe with private operators. A competitive environment will see EU bettors benefit in the same way that they benefit from healthy competition in many other sectors. Increased choice of markets, better functionality and better odds will ensue, and vitally, so too will a higher standard of consumer protection.

Millions of Europeans who enjoy a bet no longer wish to be treated as if they need protecting from their government on this issue, particularly when that same government has the audacity to offer them a poorer version of the exact same service.  The vast majority of Europeans who gamble are not addicts and do not have a problem, and the ones that do, would be in better hands if the betting market was liberated and regulated.

We are extremely passionate about our cause because it is one that if heeded to will genuinely benefit all involved, the state, the operators and most importantly the consumer.

We've enjoyed an exciting and progressive first three months. The broad coalition of partners that we have built so far gives the campaign a unique constitution and the events and media releases we've laid on have effectively announced our arrival into the debate. Over 10,000 signatures have been collected but our intention is to see that number rapidly increase.

A new satirical, online video campaign titled 'Renegade Ref' will be launched imminently and new features to the website, including a monthly competition will also be introduced. We're continuing to work hard in signing new partners up and as a result are confident that the campaign will go from strength to strength.

There is no fixed end date to our campaign. We intend to provide consumers with an increasingly effective voice until they are sufficiently heard and as we expand our charity betting challenge and introduce a new odds comparison tool, our methods of portraying just how consumers are missing out will become increasingly engaging and sophisticated.

We firmly believe that the laws we support have already been written. We believe wholeheartedly that logic is on our side and we look forward to the day when all EU consumers are rightfully awarded their deserved right to bet.

Ari Last

If you're interested in becoming an official partner of Right2bet then please be in touch at ari@right2bet.net

To visit right2bet and sign the petition go to www.right2bet.net

Today Advocate General (AG) Mengozzi issued two opinions in German cases.

In a very political introduction to his opinion on the Stoss case, AG Mengozzi acknowledges that ´online gaming knows no borders´ and that new technologies raise complex legal questions. In the absence of harmonized legislation, Member States are developing very different legislation which makes it challenging for the community judge to ensure the respect of the freedoms provided by the Treaty.  

The Advocate General then goes on, confirming in this specific case, that:

• Monopoly holders can only promote the participation in games of chance in a moderate manner and cannot be intended to increase the revenue of the public purse

• It is for the national court to examine in particular whether Oddset, the German sports betting monopoly, meets these criteria. The German Federal Constitutional Court has concluded in March 2006 that the advertising displayed by Oddset "was not intended to limit opportunities for gaming and to prevent addiction to gaming, but was intended to obtain tax revenue for the public purse"

• "Consistency must always be examined from a national view point, with the result that regional differences within a Member State might render the system inconsistent"

The State Treaty prohibiting online gaming and betting entered into force in 2008, but no one has gained from it. Consumers wanting to enjoy their leisure activity in a clear and transparent manner are ignored. The German State and Länder are deprived of revenue. Important sectors such as sports and the media are denied the opportunity to enter into commercial and marketing agreements with EU gaming and betting operators.  

Sigrid Ligné, Secretary General of the EGBA comments: "This is the second opinion in a short period involving a German gaming case. AG Bot in January confirmed the primacy of EU law over German law by clarifying that non EU compliant law has to be immediately dis-applied, without any transitional period.

"Beyond the legal considerations, you have to look at the reality of the market. There is a consumer demand for online gaming in Germany. The sports community is losing out as it is not allowed to cooperate with the European gaming industry. Other EU member states are embracing the reality that online gaming is a popular leisure activity and have started regulating the sector. EGBA urges the German authorities to do likewise."   

A date for the ruling of the ECJ has not yet been set.

 

From the off we've stressed that the rigt2bet campaign will only succeed with the help of its supporters. We are determined to engage as many consumers touched by our cause as possible, and it is a key aim of ours to give them, you, the tools to fight the good fight.

Our MEP email writer is at the core of this strategy.  All you need to do is enter your name and address, and the tool automatically finds the MEP's that represent you in Brussels. A letter, voicing your support for the right2bet campaign and for the right of consumers in the EU to choose who they bet with has already been drafted, and all you need to do is hit send.

Together, we can make our voices heard.

The Email tool is a quick, easy and effective way of letting your MEP know how you feel on this issue.

If you haven't done so already, then please take a minute to send the email to your representative, and do let us know if you receive a response!

Thanks for your continued support.

 

 

If you were to spend your time listening to the flawed rhetoric of those looking to protect state gambling monopolies, you could be forgiven for entertaining the thought that private operators and their supporters have little regard for public safety and crime prevention.

Of course the opposite is true, and study after independent study has proven that when it comes to consumer protection and fraud prevention, private operators in general do a better job than their state-run counterparts.

Private operators work hard to assist the governments they work in harmony with, and the latest case of the RGA - an association representing several large EU operators - supporting and assisting the UK government in setting up a new sports betting integrity unit, reflects this.

Following the UK government's acceptance of all recommendations listed in last week's Sports Betting Integrity Panel report, which was commission by Sports Minister Gerry Sutcliffe, a decision has been reached to set up the new unit as a further measure to protect sport from betting corruption.

RGA Chief Exec Clive Hawkswood has been quick to back the decision:

"Although the evidence, including that in an independent report that we published in January, demonstrates that instances of betting related corruption in sport are very few and far between, we can never be complacent about the risks. 

"It is important therefore that the betting industry in collaboration with the Gambling Commission and the sports themselves take reasonable steps to address the threats that exist."

This type of collaboration can only be good for sports and consumers. What many member states seem to forget is that private operators, and the various reputable associations linked to them have a wealth of knowledge, data and expertise they are willing to share with the government.

Yet instead of being included in the conversation, they are shown a complete lack of respect and are banned.

The UK has been a great example of government and the gambling industry working hand-in-hand, and as a result, betting consumers in Britain have a wonderful array of betting choice and great value, all offered in an extremely safe environment.

All EU citizens should be able to reap the benefits of an honest reciprocal relationship between their governments and the operators. Legal, licensed EU operators should no longer be treated as pariahs by certain governments looking to protect their own, if not for their sake, then for the sake of their citizens.

 

 

The European Commission's new Internal Market Commissioner, Michel Barnier, has delighted those in favour of a free European gambling market by stating that the Commission will continue to review legal battles between operators and member states on a case by case basis.

Since Portugal's state monopoly, Santa Casa, won their case in the ECJ last year, other member states had begun forming restrictive legislation based on the September ruling.

Operators, consumers and us here at right2bet, were extremely concerned that the Portuguese case would form some sort of precedence that would alter the opinions of EU judges when dealing with other similar cases.

Barnier though has moved to assure all concerned parties that the Commission recognizes the unique nature of the Santa Casa case, and will continue to apply EU principals when dealing with current and ongoing legal battles.

Speaking to the European Parliament, Barnier said that "the analysis of the Commission Legal Service regarding the European Court of Justice's Santa Casa ruling of September last year in favour of the Portuguese monopoly does not fundamentally alter the Commission's approach towards infringement procedures."

This is great news. Since the Santa Casa case, too many states have rushed to use that ruling to defend their own agendas of protecting their own, banning private operators and ultimately ripping-off their consumers.

Barnier's comments mean that the Commission will continue to treat each case on its own merits, and it send a warning to member states that they won't be able to infringe EU Law on the basis of "Santa Casa".

Naturally, the EGBA were pleased with what Barnier had to say, and their Secretary General Sigrid Ligne said the following:

"With several Member States currently reforming their gaming and betting legislation, this is an important confirmation that the Commission will not stand by while Member States introduce restrictions that go against the fundamental principles of the EU.
 
"We believe that the respect of Internal Market rules in our sector will promote high standards and improve the protection of players throughout the EU". 

We're encouraged by the new Commissioner's stance, however we want to see the Commission do more to punish member states who wantonly break fundamental EU Law.

There is no proof that restricting the market helps prevent addiction and crime. There is no proof that state-run operators offer better customer care. Though there is clear proof that many of the banned private EU operators offer consumers better value, more choice and better protection.

We're grateful that the Commission is at least talking a good game, however we'll only be satisfied when real action is taken against those states who continue to  protect their monopolies, at the consumer's expense.

 

The European Gaming and Betting Association (EGBA) welcomed today´s two Advocate General (AG) opinions at the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in cases related to gaming and betting restrictions, respectively in Austria and Sweden.

Advocate General Mazák questions the legality of Casinos Austria licenses and its de facto monopoly.

In his opinion delivered in the Austrian Casino case involving Ernst Engelmann before the ECJ, Advocate General Mazák confirmed today that:

• The requirement of an establishment in Austria "is a clear example of direct discrimination against companies who are seated in another member state".

• "Contrary to the view of the Austrian government, controls can be enforced on any company established in a member state and in addition, sanctions can be applied irrespective of the place of residence of its management".

• Licenses in the gaming sector must be awarded in a public and transparent manner.

• The national court has to determine whether fiscal objectives of the legislation in fact only constitute "an incidental beneficial consequence". Should this not be the case, the monopoly regime is in violation of EU law, regardless of the level of advertising.

This opinion, if confirmed by the ECJ in its ruling, would sign the end of Casinos Austria's de facto monopoly on poker and casino games, and lead to important reforms in Austria.

Austria has clear profit-driven objectives when it comes to gaming and betting, with no consistent or systematic consumer protection policy. The Austrian market has been continuously expanding with massive monopolists' advertising expenditure. 77% of the shares of Casinos Austria are held by private shareholders, including banks and insurance companies.

Sigrid Ligné, Secretary General of the EGBA comments: "In this context, there is no acceptable justification to prevent reputable European competitors from offering online poker and casino games to Austrian players".

Advocate General Bot confirms in joint Swedish newspapers cases that Member States must not discriminate against EU operators.

These cases were brought to the ECJ in the context of the advertising in two Swedish newspapers "Expressen" and "Aftonbladet" of non-Swedish online gaming and betting operators duly licensed in other Member States. The chief editors of both newspapers are subject to criminal sanctions under Swedish law.

In his opinion, Advocate General Bot concludes:

• "While a member state is entitled to restrict activities associated with gambling within its territory, the measures which it adopts for that purpose must not be discriminatory, even if they are based on the defense of public order".

• "Community law precludes national legislation under which anyone who promotes participation in internet gaming organized by a company established in another member state is liable to criminal penalties, whereas anyone who promotes participation in such gaming organized within the national territory without an authorization does not incur such penalties."

The EGBA welcomes the confirmation by AG Bot that Sweden must not apply discriminatory sanctions towards licensed EU operators. EGBA further notes that marketing restrictions in place in Sweden are detrimental to the national economy.

Sigrid Ligné, Secretary General of the EGBA comments: "It is remarkable that leading national newspapers, which are financed through and very much dependent on the sale of advertising, are unfairly deprived of substantial sources of revenue".

Sigrid Ligné adds: "The marketing prohibition that applies to legal EU operators in Swedish media does not have any impact on the overall level of consumption of games of chance in Sweden. Svenska Spel and ATG conduct heavy advertising campaign throughout the territory and Swedish consumers also receive advertising from other Member States on Television".

Dates for the rulings of the ECJ in the two above-mentioned cases have not yet been determined.

 

The Unlawful Internet and Gambling Enforcement Act's compliance deadline is nearing, and online gambling lobbyists in The States are coming together in an attempt to see the bill delayed for a second time.

The act, which would spell disaster for several operators and sites across North America was initially scheduled to come into force in November 2009, however thanks to the efforts of the PPA in particular, Barack Obama's Federal regulators were convinced to delay the bill for six months.

The new deadline is fast approaching, and with several parties still scrambling to become compliant, the desire for another deadline push-off is fervent.

The PPA is working closely with several organizations, including the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, as well as US congressman in trying to force the delay.

John Pappas, executive director of the PPA said: "The PPA is working alongside some of the groups we've worked with in the past to file a second petition with the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve."

However the chances of a second delay being achieved look less likely this time around, although Pappas isn't losing faith just yet.

"I think we need to go through the formality of it. We need to make sure we get just as many - if not more - members of Congress to weigh in, and we also need to get the banks to weigh in like we did last time."

The reason why many believe that the luck of the online gambling lobbyists has run out is based on the language of the Treasury and Fed back in November, when they implemented the initial delay:

"The Agencies believe that a six month extension is sufficient for regulated entities to address issues related to the definition of 'unlawful internet gambling."

Another factor working against the PPA is that Rep. Barney Frank, who was instrumental in securing the first delay, is believed to be less willing to lend his full support this time around, having lost allies and political gains in other policy areas by leading the lobbyist charge.

We'll keep you abreast of the situation as it develops and will continue to champions our support for the PPA and their allies. 

Banning online gambling is unlawful and illogical, in the EU, The US or anywhere else. And we call for politicians and governments worldwide, to consider the consumer and the evidence provided when making their decisions and policy on this subject.

It has been reported today that Norway are to compel banks and financial institutions to block payments to betting companies not licenced in Norway.

The new rules will come into place on 1st June 2010 and is a clear move to protect Norway's state monopolies, notably Norsk Tipping and Rikstoto.

The government are using the same old arguments to justify such a move, notably that doing so will limit illegal gambling and protect Norway's citizens from gambling addiction.

Things could not be further from the truth.  All this move will do - in theory, if it works - is make it more difficult for respectable, legal and licenced EU-based operators from operating in Norway.  As a result, all Norwegians will be forced to bet with operators based further away in far less protected regimes.

The issue that so many governments do not seem to get a grip of is that if you have a state-run gambling monopoly, the bottom-line result is a lack of value and choice for the consumers in that market, as our betting challenge has shown over the past six months.  Why would a consumer want to bet on Bayern Munich at evens when he or she knows 2-1 is available elsewhere on the internet?

As a result, it is inevitable consumers will look elsewhere, and if the regulated operators in the EU are barred from Norway they will be forced to gamble with unregulated companies.  This results in no guarantee of player protection, return of money or, indeed, that such companies do anything to fight fraud and corruption, something that all EU-licenced operators are required to do as part of their licence conditions.

When will Norway and the many other EU countries rumoured to be considering such a move realise that this is completely the wrong way to go?  This is in nobody's best interest - obviously not for the private operators, not for the consumers and not even for the governments, who will be able to tax licenced companies but not the unlicenced operators to which they are forcing their citizens to go.