Britain's new Gambling Act came into force at the weekend. This piece of legislation was established by Blair's manipulators at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, particularly the odious Tessa Jowell who is now wasting taxpayers money on behalf of the white elephant London Olympics, together with the Gambling Commission which is an organ effectively controlled by the gambling industry.
The Gambling Act 2005 allegedly aims to ensure that gambling is conducted fairly and openly, it purports to protect children and the vulnerable from being harmed or exploited by gambling and, most humorously, it targets keeping crime out of gambling. By paying lip service to such issues, the new Act is actually about opening up the advertising media to the bookmakers and casinos which is an interesting angle on the protection of the public.
Several members of the Dietrological team have enjoyed (sic) involvement with the government ministers and other operators related to this Act and, at no point, have any of the bodies established to police the industry shown the slightest interest in facing up to the rampant criminality in the gambling sector nor the manipulation of betting markets by insiders resulting in most sports having outcomes that are determined by betting patterns as opposed to the skills of the participants.
When Gordon Brown swept away the corrupt regime of his predecessor and put the super-casino in Manchester on hold, we dared to hope that the situation might improve under the new administration. We need not have bothered holding our collectives breaths.
The new Minister for Sport is right wing reactionary Gerry Sutcliffe who, for example, when asked about his response to Thaksin Shinawatra taking over Manchester City, offered the weasel-like reply that he chooses not to comment on specific cases. What is Sutcliffe likely to comment on then? We should expect vague duplicitous generalisations together with an overriding concern not to face down the criminalisation of the sports sector, I guess. It is peculiar that Sutcliffe is more than willing to comment on other specific political issues such as his very strong and vocal support for ID cards, the creation of foundation hospitals, the introduction of student top-up fees, backing Labour's anti-terrorism laws and speaking out in favour of both the Iraq war and replacing Trident as well as various other Tory-esque measures. Yet, the takeover of an English football club by a tyrant who faces two arrest warrants in his homeland with numerous human rights abuses having been widely documented by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch is, apparently, not worthy of comment. Sutcliffe is just the sort of pliant career politician that the gambling industry would have chosen for the post of Minister for Sport if they had any say in the matter - which, of course, in a democratic society like Britain, they don't!? Bring back Richard Caborn who at least stood up for something resembling the occasional principle rather than shape-shifting his integrity to the benefit of the magnitude of his mortgage and in favour of his children's private education.
Anyway, we have a new Gambling Act and we are stuck with it. So, what are the likely impacts on the football betting markets?
Last weekend gave us some indication as to what we might expect in the future from the newly deregulated gambling sector and the industry participants. Due to suddenly having the option to widely advertise and market their addictive wares to new potential customers, the major market operators are targeting such clients very aggressively. The Big Three bookmakers in Britain are all members of the Association of Major Levy Payers which operates as a trade association to protect the bookies interests (as if such protection is required). Historically, these major league players in Europe have been the most abusive when it comes down to the overround percentage (the degree to which the bookmakers tilt the markets in their favour to avoid anything like a level playing field). The Big Three generally offer fixed odds football markets with an overround of 113%, the fringe operators price up to around 107% to gain market share while the betting exchanges hover around the 104% mark. It is surely no coincidence that the Big Three en masse moved to an average of 107% on the weekend's Premiership matches which effectively undercut the other psychopathic layers like Skybet while directly competing on price with the peripheral firms wiping out their one area of competitive advantage in the process. William Hill were the perpetrators of this marketing strategy and the other two firms fell dutifully into line. Under normal circumstances, this strategy would be something to applaud but we are not dealing with an impromptu outbreak of altruism on behalf of the layers here. Its a Tesco strategy at play. The Big Three simply wish to grab as much of the new market for the gullibles who are to be attracted to the gambling sector by the heavy duty advertising campaign planned for the month of September. Indeed, William Hill have already indicated that the overround will return to the abusive levels of old at the end of the month. In the meantime, however, the Big Three will not only cream off most of the new bettors but they will also persuade clients from the lower tiered bookies to transfer their accounts - why deal with offshore criminals when you can deal with onshore ones based in London or Leeds instead? Many of these peripheral firms are already finding the business highly competitive due the Asian firms reasserting control of much of the marketplace and some firms like Premierbet have already gone to that great Licenced Betting Office in the sky. As we posted last week, even Bet-Un-Fair are feeling the pinch. In confirmation, its a Tesco battlefield - price up to wipe out the opposition and then raise prices in a monopolistic and psychopathic manner.
Now, we can't really believe that New Labour's aim when implementing the Gambling Act 2005 was to create a more cartelised industry sector, with more corrupt markets and more manipulated outcomes, can we? Of course not, Jowell, Blair, Sutcliffe, the Gambling Commission and the rest were actually really focusing on the issue of problem gambling and criminality in sport. Honestly...
Where would we be without these people?
© Football Is Fixed/Dietrological
