Recently in Germany Category

The Right2bet World Cup Report, published last week, has evoked a strong reaction across the online gambling industry, with consumers, consumer groups and operators all coming forward to comment on the report's findings.

The report exclusively revealed that European gambling monopolies offered their customers, on average, 32% worse odds during the World Cup than private and licensed betting operators, and the response across Europe has been one of shock and dismay.

Consumers across Europe contacted Right2bet to voice their reaction to the report.

Julien Beaudet in France said: "As a French player I now feel extremely limited and frustrated with regards to my playing experience. Consumers have been totally denigrated by the supposed French 'liberalisation' and it is totally unfair."

David Atkins of Amsterdam commented: "It never ceases to amaze me how monopolies like De Lotto get away with such blatant exploitation of customers.  This report shows first-hand how much people in the Netherlands and many other EU countries are losing out and I hope it acts as a catalyst to drive the change we need to enable free and fair access to online private operators."

Luca Pappalardo, Chairman of Italian Consumer group ACOGI, said: "We strongly agree with and applaud the output of this report. Even in Member States like Italy where there is no monopoly, the high burdens and barriers to entry make it almost impossible for many operators and as a result, Italian consumers are punished."

Martin Arendts, a prominent online gambling lawyer in Germany, told Right2bet: "A level playing field between state operators and licensed private operators would give customers freedom of choice and would prohibit unfair monopoly gains. With fair competition customers would get a far better value for their money."

Operators too were quick to comment on the report:

Ciaran O'Brien, Head of PR at Ladbrokes commented: "Consumer freedom and choice is at the heart of fundamental EU principles, yet as the Right2bet report shows, millions of Europeans are being denied the choice and the value that healthy competition provides. We urge the Commission to study the findings of the report and do more to rectify the unjust balance that exists between EU citizens living within different Member States."

Tim Phillips, Director of European Public Affairs at Betfair said: "An open and fairly regulated European gambling market is the best way of ensuring that all European consumers are getting the best value in a safe and transparent online environment. The Right2bet report shows quite clearly that consumers are the ultimate losers in Member States where gambling monopolies exist."
 
Right2bet spokesman Mike Robb was delighted with the widespread appreciation of the report.  He said: "I am pleased that the startling results of the report have reached individuals and groups within the online gambling world across Europe. We now urge the European Commission to study the findings and do more to rectify an unjust situation that is to the detriment of millions of European consumers."

This weekend the betting challenge went (in mind not body, unfortunately) to sunny Spain for a look at the Barcelona v Valencia match-up.

It was a huge game for Barca, who had to win to keep up with Real Madrid.  It's no surprise, therefore, that the Catalan giants raised their game and came away with a 3-0 victory against third-placed Valencia, who can now definitely forget any hope of a top two finish.

It was a short-odds victory this week, but yet again we see you, the betting public, losing out as a result of archaic and protectionist laws.  Here's the result in numbers:

Odds on a Barca win:
FDJ (Fra): 1.35
De Lotto (Ned): 1.25
Svenska Spel (Swe): 1.38
Danske Spil (Den): 1.35
Lotto Bayern (Ger): 1.35
Best Private Operator: 1.42

Profit on a €10 bet on a draw:
FDJ: €3.50
De Lotto: €2.50
Svenska Spel: €3.80
Danske Spil: €3.50
Lotto Bayern: €3.50
Best Private Operator: €4.20

Profit From Challenge So Far:

(After 17 Weeks)
FDJ: €290.50
De Lotto: €294.50
Best Private Operator: €383.70

(After 12 Weeks)

Svenska Spel: €225.10
Danske Spil: €252
Lotto Bayern: €227
Best Private Operator: €308.70

So not a massive difference this week as Barcelona were always fancied to come away from this one with a vicotyr, by both monopolies and private operators alike.

One obvious point this weekend is The Netherlands, where De Lotto shows how out of touch it is with the rest of Europe's monopolies, let alone the private operators, offering a measly 1.25, compared with 1.35 from the next-worst monopoly and 1.42 from the private sector.

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.

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.

The European Gaming and Betting Association (EGBA) welcomes today's opinion of Advocate General (AG) Bot in the betting case involving Winner Wetten (C-409/06) before the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). The opinion confirms that the primacy of EU law over national gaming legislation does not allow for any exception or transitional period. AG Bot dismissed the argument of Germany and other Member States that they should be allowed to have such an exception. Member States therefore have to immediately stop applying national gaming legislation that is not consistent with EU law.

This case involves Winner Wetten, a company located in Germany, accepting bets on behalf of an online betting service provider based and licensed in Malta. The Court in Cologne asked whether governments are allowed to continue to apply for a transitional period gaming legislation that is not compatible with the freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services provisions in the EU Treaty. The Cologne court considered North Rhine-Westphalia´s law on sports betting in force in 2006 to be inconsistent with the freedom to provide services as interpreted in the Gambelli ruling.

AG Bot clarified that there are no legal arguments to allow for an exception to the direct application of the Treaty to the gaming and betting sector. In addition, AG Bot confirms that it is not in the interest of consumers to maintain non EU compliant legislation that does not offer consistent and systematic protection. According to AG Bot, such ´legislation is itself inappropriate for the protection of consumers´ (para 113).

Secretary General Sigrid Ligné comments: ´This opinion is crucial for developments in Germany. The AG has made clear that EU law prevails and that unjustified restrictions are not admissible even for a transitional period. Today's opinion will further fuel the current political debate on online gaming in Germany´.

Sigrid Ligné further adds: ´We agree with the conclusions of AG Bot. Essential is AG Bot´s confirmation that it is detrimental to consumers to have national gambling legislation that doesn't offer consistent and systematic protection. Many Member States do not have consistent and systematic gambling legislation; this opinion clearly strengthens our argument.´

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

 

The German Interstate Gambling Treaty is set to expire in 2011, and despite some positive moves from one German State - Schleswig-Holstein - two others and the country's lottery operators are predicting even tougher times ahead for private betting operators.

Dr Freidhelm Repnick, Chairman of the Deutschen Lotto and Totoblock state lottery grouping said "Despite the clear legal position, there are still a large number of illegal gambling operators in the German market, and therefore valuable public revenue is lost.  However we are confident that the regulators will resolve this apparent lack of enforcement."

The states of North Rhine Westphalia and Baden Wurrtemberg have also recently announced their support of their gambling monopolies, despite the fact that they offer German consumers terrible odds and a far inferior product compared to what other EU citizens have available to them.

Recent legal proceedings brought against private operators have led to them being asked to ban German players via geo-localization techniques.  Measures such as these are a complete curtailment on the freedoms of German citizens. Why should they be barred from using safe and legal sites that their neighbours in Europe are free to use?

The answer of course is that those fighting for these limitations have more than one eye on the monopolies balance sheets which haven't been doing as well as they had hoped, which is perhaps why the determination to clamp down on other EU operators has been given a shot in the arm.

The state of Schleswig Holstein is a rare bright light in the German gambling landscape. Its government recently announced that it plans to back away from the Interstate Gambling Treaty and will seek a liberalized online betting market within its borders.

The treaty needs 13 of the 16 German states to vote for it to continue if it is to remain in place come 2012, and with several others apparently in support of Schleswig Holstein, the future for German punters is certainly looking up.

Having said that, there is clearly some way to go, and many battles to be won before we can take Germany off the list of Member States that deny their citizens the freedom to bet that they so deserve.

With public revenues and businesses to protect, the desire to see Germany remain a closed market will be intense, and the resistance to it opening up will be staunch. So sign our petition and write to your MEP. Together we can help win Germany's right2bet.

 

 

Research carried out by Bitkom, the German IT and New Media Association, has shown that two million Germans are partaking in some form of online gambling, despite the country's strict legislation against it.

The figures clearly show that the State's attempts to curb people's rights to wager are not working, and are instead forcing people down the murkier paths of black market betting.

Right2bet is campaigning for a liberalized online gambling market in the EU so that consumers have the ability to bet safely and securely with regulated operators.  Research such as this highlights the fact that State Gambling Monopolies which offer inferior products and poorer odds, drive customers away, and that the regulation in place in the modern internet age has no chance of preventing people from getting their bets on.

We continue to be puzzled by the Governments of Germany and others who refuse to accept this reality and continue onwards on their flawed paths.

Consumers across the EU deserve the finest betting products in the safest betting environments. The status quo in several Member States currently prevents millions from benefiting from this ideal environment and until the principles of fair trade and competition are adopted by all, this scenario will go on.

And so too will our campaign.

If you haven't signed our petition yet, please do so now. You can also send an email to your MEP championing our cause. It only takes 30 seconds!

 

 

Ist der Staat der bessere Unternehmer für Glücksspiele und Sportwetten? Kann nur der Staat den Schutz von möglicherweise der Spielsucht verfallenen Spielern gewährleisten oder können dies auch private Anbieter? Verfolgt der Staat tatsächlich das von ihm angegebene Ziel der Spielsuchtbekämpfung, wenn er Glückspielautomaten liberalisiert, durch die erhebliche Schäden aufgrund der Spielsucht entstehen, während er sich für Glücksspielformen mit deutlich geringerem Risiko ein Monopol vorbehält (und gut daran verdient)? Diese Fragen sind in der nächsten Zeit zu klären, nicht nur von den Gerichten (bei denen tausende von Sportwettenverfahren anhängig sind), sondern auch von der Politik.

Zunächst zur Ausgangslage: Derzeit dürfen Private in Deutschland keine Sportwetten anbieten, auch keine in einem anderen EU-Mitgliedstaat staatlich zugelassene Anbieter. Vielmehr gilt nach dem zum 1. Januar 2008 in Kraft getretenen Glücksspielstaatsvertrag ein staatliches Monopol für Sportwetten und Glücksspiele. Dieses schränkt die Berufsfreiheit (Art. 12 Grundgesetz) und die Niederlassungs- und Dienstleistungsfreiheit von in anderen EU-Mitgliedstaaten zugelassenen Wettanbietern massiv ein. Die Europäische Kommission hat deswegen Ende Januar 2008 ein weiteres Vertragsverletzungsverfahren gegen Deutschland eingeleitet (IP/08/119), nachdem sie die bisherigen Einschränkungen schon als rechtswidrig beurteilt hatte. Auch zahlreiche deutsche Verwaltungsgerichte halten die Monopolregelungen für verfassungswidrig und mit europäischem Gemeinschaftsrecht unvereinbar. Zum Schutz der Spieler sei ein staatliches Monopol nicht erforderlich. Auch werden die staatlichen Glücksspielprodukte weiterhin nachhaltig beworben (u. a. Bandenwerbung bei Bundesligaspielen), so dass eine Abschottung des deutschen Marktes nach außen rechtlich nicht begründbar ist.

Insbesondere ist fraglich, ob ein staatliches Monopol europarechtlich zulässig ist, wenn Glücksspielformen mit einer deutlich höheren Spielsuchtgefahr (insbesondere Glücksspielautomaten) privaten Anbietern überlassen bleiben und liberalisiert worden sind. Hierzu gibt es acht Vorlagen deutscher Verwaltungsgerichte zum Europäischen Gerichtshof, die dieser am 8. und 9. Dezember 2009 verhandelt. Entscheidungen zu diesen Verfahren aus Deutschland werden voraussichtlich im kommenden Jahr ergehen.

Auch in die politische Diskussion ist kürzlich etwas Wind gekommen, nachdem die Länder aus fiskalischen Gründen (Geld für den Staat) versucht hatten, den Status quo so lange wie möglich aufrecht zu erhalten. Das Land Schleswig-Holstein hat nämlich kürzlich angekündigt, entsprechend dem im Oktober 2009 zwischen CDU und FDP vereinbarten Koalitionsvertrag, den Glücksspielstaatsvertrag zu kündigen. Nach Presseberichten soll die Kündigung spätestens Anfang 2010 erfolgen.  Die Kündigung dürfte allerdings erst Ende 2011 mit dem regulären Auslaufen des Glücksspielstaatvertrags wirksam werden, wenn sich nicht die Länder vorher auf eine einvernehmliche Änderung einigen. Auf den Medientagen in München wurde angesichts der aktuellen Entwicklung bereits über eine Öffnung des Wettmarktes im Jahr 2012 spekuliert.

Mit der Kündigung soll eine bundeseinheitliche Änderung der Rechtslage erzwungen werden, die bislang - durch den Glücksspielstaatsvertrag noch einmal verstärkt - ein staatliches Monopol für Sportwetten und Glücksspiele vorschreibt. Schleswig-Holstein will dagegen ein Konzessionssystem einführen, das private Sportwettenanbieter erlaubt. Auch der Vertrieb von Sportwetten über das Internet - durch den Glücksspielstaatsvertrag ausdrücklich verboten - soll zukünftig wieder möglich sein.

Das Land strebt mit der Neuregelung eine Aufteilung des Sportwettenmarktes zwischen dem bisherigen staatlichen Monopolangebot ODDSET („Die Sportwette von Lotto") und privaten Anbietern an. Begründet wird dies mit einem deutlich größeren finanziellen Gewinn für den Sport.  „Die Abschöpfung privater Anbieter wäre wesentlich höher, weil diese einen höheren Umsatz haben würden", sagte der CDU-Landtagsabgeordnete Hans-Jörn Arp der Deutschen Presse-Agentur dpa. Angeblich  haben bereits andere Bundesländer zugesagt, die sich dem Vorstoß aus dem Norden anschließen zu wollen. „Wenn wir keine Unterstützung durch andere Länder erhalten, dann gehen wir eben einen eigenen Weg", ergänzte Arp. Rechtlich dürfte eine gespaltene Rechtslage, ein Konzessionssystem in einigen Bundesländern und ein Monopol in den anderen Ländern, allerdings auf Dauer nicht haltbar sein. Spätestens dann dürfte klar sein, dass ein Monopol nicht zwingend erforderlich ist.

Ausschlaggebend für die Liberalisierungsbestrebungen sind - wie häufig - fiskalische Gründe. In Schleswig-Holstein belaufen sich laut Arp die garantierten Abgaben an den Sport auf mindestens 6,8 Millionen Euro. Die Einnahmen des Monopolisten sinken allerdings seit Jahren. „Wenn wir den Lottomarkt liberalisieren und attraktiver gestalten und verstärkt das Internet für Wetten nutzen, können wir auf ein Vielfaches an Einnahmen kommen", sagte Arp. Positiv zu einer Öffnung des Wettmarkts äußerte sich auch der ehemaligen EU-Sportkommissar Jan Figel. "Es ist wichtig, neue Wege zu erkunden und Geldgeber für den Sport, speziell für den Breitensport, zu finden. Wetten und Glücksspiele sind sehr bekannte und starke Einkommensquellen", so Figel.

Auch seitens des Sports gab es Unterstützung. Insbesondere DFB-Präsident Theo Zwanziger hat angesichts des neuen Wettskandals im Fußball eine Liberalisierung des Wettmarktes gefordert. "Der Staat muss den Wettmarkt (...) liberalisieren und private Anbieter zulassen, die dann unter strenger staatlicher Kontrolle stehen", sagte Zwanziger in einem Interview der "Sport Bild". Auch Franz Beckenbauer setzte sich im Interview mit „Bild" für eine Öffnung des Sportwettenmarktes für private Wettanbieter ein: "DFB-Präsident Theo Zwanziger kritisiert zu Recht, dass das Monopol der staatlichen Sportwette Oddset viele Zocker auf den schwarzen Wettmarkt treibt. Eindeutig ein Fehler. Man sollte den Markt für seriöse, lizenzierte Anbieter öffnen." Er ergänzte: "Legale Anbieter setzen Limits für Einsätze und Höchstgewinne. Um mitzuspielen, muss man sich ausweisen. So herrscht mehr Transparenz. Und: Die Firmen müssen sich strengen staatlichen Kontrollen und dem europäischen Frühwarnsystem unterwerfen. Für die Mafia wird es unattraktiver, an Fußball-Ergebnissen zu drehen, auch wenn man Kriminalität nie ganz verhindern kann."

 

Check out Martin's blog   -  http://germangaminglaw.blogspot.com/

If you'd like to guestblog for right2bet than get in touch. We'd love to hear from you.

Liverpool have had a bad run of results of late and failed to get a home win once again this weekend, this time against big-spending Manchester City.  Rafa Benitez is under real pressure to deliver results now and restlessness from The Kop can be heard a million miles away.

The Anfield faithful might well be upset, but if you are a Liverpool fan from France, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden or Denmark you should be in tears this morning.

If you had been savvy enough to have a bet on the draw, just to dampen the pain of not winning, you would have got odds of 3.46 with the best private operator, meaning winnings of €24.60 with which to buy yourself a consolatory beer.

Had you bet with any of the monopoly gambling operators in the countries listed above, you'd have been lucky to have enough for the bus fare home.

Liverpool v Manchester City: Odds On The Draw

FDJ (Fra)                                  3.0
De Lotto (Ned)                       2.95
Svenska Spel (Swe)             2.2
Danske Spil (Den)                3.25
Lotto Bayern (Ger)                2.8
Best Private Operator*       3.46

 

Profit From A 10 Euro Bet On The Draw

FDJ                                         €20
De Lotto                                €19.50
Svenska Spel                       €12
Danske Spil                          €22.50
Lotto Bayern                         €18
Best Private Operator*       €24.60

Profits From The Challenge So Far (after seven bets)

FDJ                                            €124 (-30%)
De Lotto                                    €133.4 (-25%)
Best Private Operator*          €176.80

 

Profits From The Challenge So Far (after two bets)

Svenska Spel (Swe)               €55.50 (-42.6%)
Danske Spil (Den)                   €87.50 (-10%)
Lotto Bayern (Ger)                  €58 (-40%)
Best Private Operator*          €96.80

 

Do you want us to cover the odds in a particular game from where you are?  We can do no problem, send us an email (mike@right2bet.net) and we'll get it done!

 

*Note: throughout this challenge any applicable commission associated with private operators has been taken off the weekly and total winnings.

 

An amusing, worrying and intriguing  story has just broken in Bremen, Germany,  where judges have ruled against city chiefs attempting to financially cripple a local shop for the 'heinous' crime of selling football kits.

Department store 'Karstadt' had received a banning order from Bremen officials, ordering them to stop selling the jersey's of AC Milan and Real Madrid, due to the fact that the two European heavyweights were sponsored by betting company Bwin.

The  city of Bremen is known for its zero-tolerance approach to what the German State Treaty on Gaming deems as 'illegal gambling', and in their eyes, the selling of these kits amounted to the promotion of illegal online gambling.

Not only is this theory an absurd one, but the proposed punishment was even more ludicrous, with 'Karstadt' having been fined an astronomical 1,000 euros per kit sold. To make matters worse, the City claimed that the store was selling 100 kits per week, when in actual fact the figure was close to only five.

Fortunately for Karstdat, Bremen's European football fans, as well as all people of sane mind, this ridiculous banning order was deemed as 'unlawful' by an administrative Judge and was subsequently overturned.

To our minds, it's just another blatant example of government authorities going to great and outrageous lengths in their efforts to protect their lucrative monopolies.  On this occasion, their desperation to safeguard their own profits led them to the murky road of heavily fining a local retail outlet, owned and run by Germans offering a valuable service to the local community.

Not only do they want to control which EU betting operators their citizen's use, they now want to control what football teams they're allowed to support! What next? Will a German be fined 1,000 euro's every time he plays five-aside in a Real Madrid shirt?  The scenario seems inconceivable now, yet on this evidence who knows what the future may bring?

We're pleased to see common sense prevail on this occasion, yet aside from the episode's comical nature, a serious and worrying trend is being highlighted in cases such as this.

EU governments and their local authorities are becoming increasingly proactive and petty in their attempt to protect the financial rewards offered to them by State gaming monopolies.

How far they'll go in their protectionist quest, nobody knows. One thing that is for certain though is that as more cases like this surface, the need for a campaign like right2bet grows, and so too does our determination to succeed.

 

 

Weg frei für europaweite Online-Petitionen

London/Berlin, 8. Oktober 2009 - Wohl kaum jemand hätte einen großen Betrag
darauf gewettet, dass die Iren diesmal „Ja" zum Lissabon-Vertrag sagen und damit
den Weg für einheitliche Gesetze in Europa ein ganzes Stück freier machen. Die
Zustimmung Irlands ist ein großer Schritt in Richtung Petitionsrecht aller Europäer vor
der Europäischen Kommission und damit auch ein gelungener Coup für die
europaweite Online-Petitionskampagne right2bet.net.

Die Kampagne, deren Ziel die Schaffung eines einheitlichen Wettrechts in Europa und
die gleichzeitige Abschaffung staatlicher Monopole ist, wie sie in Deutschland,
Finnland, Schweden und den Niederlanden noch immer bestehen, startete im
vergangenen Monat eine europaweite Online-Unterschriftenkampagne unter
www.right2bet.de. Bis Ende Januar 2010 werden eine Million Unterschriften
gesammelt, um die Petition anschließend der Europäischen Kommission in Brüssel
übergeben zu können.

Denn wer als EU-Bürger mindestens eine Millionen Stimmen zu einem Thema
generiert hat, hat das Recht, seinen Anspruch vor der Europäischen Kommission
geltend zu machen und eine Petition einzureichen. „Das grüne Licht von der grünen
Insel ist ein positives Signal für unser Ziel, Dienstleistungsfreiheit und freien Handel
innerhalb der Europäischen Union auf Internetwetten genau so konsequent zu
übertragen, wie auf alle anderen Bereiche und Branchen", so Michael Robb,
Kampagnensprecher von right2bet.

Wie die Stimmen für die Petition generiert werden, ob mit Unterschriften auf Papier
oder digitale per Internet, spielt dabei keine Rolle. „Das Internet hat den großen
Vorteil, dass man mit einer Online-Petition wie unserer tatsächlich Unterstützer aus
ganz Europa mobilisieren kann. Die Zustimmung Irlands zum EU-Referendum macht
diese Form der Petition zu einer grenzenübergreifenden Alternative. Deshalb nutzen
wir unsere Chance für die Wahlfreiheit des Konsumenten aus der EU auf die Straße
oder ins World Wide Web zu gehen, konsequent", schließt Robb.

Weitere Informationen zur Kampagne sowie die Möglichkeit zur Teilnahme an der
Online-Petition gibt es unter www.right2bet.de