Kit Walker

I don't need to scare mongering the above efficiency and performance review done earlier this year does that. $250 million fine compared to other Austrac fines. I was at $400 - 500 million but reduced as some indiscretions will be pointed at former Entain top Aussie management just like it was in Turkey.

You left out money laundering. Use google compare to in the Aust outcomes its not hard to find. Your still haven't admitted your were incorrect by stating charges were pre Entain purchasing Neds and Ladbrokes - whys that?

How about admitting your quote is out of context. Not hard to confirm you were wrong when reading the court documents. Lets see what sort of man you are.

http://TAB New Zealand – s.60 Performance and Efficiency Review Source of other quote - it's scary reading. In fact it's that bad Stephen King was going buy the rights to it - then he decided no film goer would believe this bullshit.

Read the court document and come back and say why you think the claims are less than other cases. Be warned it nearly rivals War & Peace page wise. The claims are similar to what occurred in Turkey. Hence the comparison. In Turkey they wouldn't have come up themselves to pay $1 billion. They would have pinned it on the individuals under current charges. A company doesn't pay that sort of money if they were oblivious to what was going on. http://chrome-extension://kdpelmjpfafjppnhbloffcjpeomlnpah/https://www.austrac.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-09/Entain Group Pty Ltd - AMENDED Statement of Claim (REDACTED) (sealed).pdf.pdf

Yes thanks -$250 million maths was never a strong point

Some of those advisers are worse than Trackside tipsters

Nostradamus isn't a distant relative so I don't know the exact amount but if I had to pull a figure I would say it won't be less than 250k. Your in cuckoo land if you think there won't be a monetary fine.

I might add when ENTAIN shares were well below the current price not long ago I said time to buy.

Labrokes & Neds were purchased by ENTAIN in 2018. The relevant period of the alleged contraventions are between 16 December 2018 and 16 December 2024 and are certainly not at the low end of the scale. The Group has set aside £51 million ($64.8 million) to address the matter, although Entain claims the amount relates to accounting and does not reflect a potential penalty. They set aside £51 million to address the matter but that doesn't reflect a potential penalty? Yes could be a lot more. Crown Melbourne and Crown Perth faced significant scrutiny for operating under inadequate AML/CTF measures across their casino premises in Melbourne and Perth. Regulatory investigations uncovered failures in managing high-risk customers, including potential money laundering through junket operators and VIP programs. Crown was ordered to pay a AUD 450 million civil penalty for its breaches of the AML/CTF Act. Entain will fight its case in court if mediation is unsuccessful. It is due to file a defence by September. They won't want it going to Court just like they didn't in Turkey when without any prompting said they would pay 1 billion dollars as a fine. ----------------------------------------------------- This was never going to happen. New opportunities payment $90m The SPA includes a potential new opportunities payment of up to $90m. This payment relates to legislative changes Entain aims to pursue that were not in place when the agreement began. The payment is contingent on two key developments: • TAB NZ will receive at least $75m if the New Zealand Government legalises and establishes a licensing system for online casino products (e.g., online slots, table games, etc.) within 10 years of the agreement's start. • TAB NZ will receive at least $15m if the government legalises and creates a licensing system for virtual racing and sports products (both retail and online) within the same 10-year period. • Both new opportunities payments are conditional on: • TAB NZ being granted the exclusive licence during this period and appointing Entain as the only manager of that licence. No more than three licences are granted by the New Zealand Government. ----------------------------------- The above quote is a big worry especially with reduced income once the NZ dogs are gone - millions now not payable by Australian bookmakers on consumption tax - and once 15 online casinos get regulated to operate in NZ the gambling dollar on NZ racing will be reduced - and NZ SPORTS Codes are collectively through the Government seeking a bigger % payout.

Its the only week I have seen to compare to. I know one thing for sure after 12 months the figures will prove the TAB plucked out of the sky to claim hundreds of millions lost to overseas betting outlets was rubbish. That claim was used as an excuse to mask their incompetence. They are going to have to increase betting with Geo blocking to make up for the lost millions in consumption fees. You were correct in your earlier quote saying I don't like ENTAIN but in saying that I did say here that at just over $5 a share they were worth investing in. Great time now to start dumping them as can see a big drop coming soon.

Avondale turned them off decades ago.

It used to be club on-course commission of 11% win and place and 13% on exotic bets.

They are bludgers because they do nothing to promote sports betting but continue to want more money. Go and have a look at the web sites of most of the sports codes no promotion to bet on their product. The greyhounds had to pay $20 million to become part of the TAB - sports codes zero.

They better crank it up with no greyhound racing looming and the sporting code bludgers making joint submission to the Govt for increased payouts - oh and then 15 online casinos getting licensed to operate in NZ. Geo blocking won't be saving them.

NZ turnover last week - same total number of races as last season. Add in lost consumption fees from Aust for those races. Idiots had no clues.

They deserve a life but without racing they would have never experienced one. Greenies will give it traction and with Greyhounds getting banned they will use that to support it.

You would have to spend all day scanning the markets to find any value in sporting markets. Then 90% of punters wouldn't know how to find value as they can't access overseas betting sites for comparison. If you were any good making up racing odds to find any over's and consistently found value to make money they will restrict your win limits. That's a fact - as Brodie often reminds us. The NZ TAB pre Entain were going that badly due to incompetent management went crying to the Government that they were losing millions to overseas outfits to cover up their poor financial results. The figures with GEO blocking now in will be minuscule and with no consumption fees now payable will probably result in a negative result. Once 15 online casino's get issued licenses to operate thigs will get bad. They will advertise a lot of money to attract customers and receive a lot of current gambling dollars from the racing Industry. Overseas in the USA casino's tat are based on racetracks have to pay the relevant codes a % of profit as it reduced racings take. Online same thing will happen here and the Govt should have put the same clause in the casino requirements. Once the TAB were #1 in NZ gambling spending stats - today they are a poor last % wise and come next year that % will decrease. The Govt have no idea thinking GEO blocking will improve things - MP's voted like sheep conned into it because they were clueless. Only thing it did was make ENTAIN's share price increase as a gambling monopoly is a huge plus in the gambling industry.

From Entain's media release - 2023 vs 2025. That's a worry when you compare numbers. They were obviously sold some bull#$%^& numbers by the TAB prior to them taking it over. The increase June 24 to June 25 will have got bumped up with customers getting friends of family members to sign up to receive up to $100 in bonus bets. I know 6 or 7 people who did just that. June 2023r June 2025

Entain share dipped to $5.01 overnight a. 8.44% drop and over the past five days are down 17.1%. Last month 31.15% - 7.26 - 501. At 501 that is a great price to buy. They may have done a few things wrong of late but that share price has to rise over the next few weeks. At the current price It wouldn't come as any surprise to see a takeover proposal getting announced. MGM Resorts might be one Company considering it having previously made an offer.

The betting option below is giving Entain a huge house edge by not offering all four options eg zero wins. Casinos scoop the pool if the ball lands on zero but you do have the opportunity to bet on it happening. Waller does have three of the favourites in three of the four races but Group 1 events are never easy to win.

This person is onto it. I'm writing to strongly oppose this bill. As a keen observer of the industry, and recreational player I feel I'm very well placed to offer an informed objective opinion on this bill. In my opinion Entain very clearly operates a no long term winners trading policy. It is abundantly clear both anecdotally and from a personal account of betting with them or their subsidiaries over the last 20 years that as soon as you turn a long term profit you will have your bets heavily restricted to a point where you have no option but to go elsewhere to have a bet. It is a trading practice that preys on losing customers and has no room for customers that have the slightest edge in the market or turn a consistent profit. In my opinion Entain operates the most aggressive restrictive trading practice in the industry and their current trading model is completely unfit for a monopoly where consumers lose the option to bet elsewhere. It is the antithesis of safer gambling, where only long term losing customers are welcome. It is a model that simply does not allow customers to win over the long term. It is common for a customer to be restricted and offered as little as 10 dollars on an All Blacks match, and even less on an NPC game once they start to show the slightest bit of betting nouse. Let's have a hypothetical example - Do you like the Canterbury odds at home this week against North Harbour in the NPC? You've done some research, you think North Harbour may be concentrating on their match the following week against Auckland - a more winnable opportunity, hence the reason you like the odds on Canterbury. Fairly logical thinking right? A bet on this on a Wednesday for Saturday's game followed by the market moving significantly in your direction (odds get lower) will nearly always result in your account being restricted the following week. If it is not restricted the following week, it is restricted the week after. This is the stark reality of modern day bookmaking, winning customers are quite simply eliminated, and why it makes a monopoly completely unfeasible in modern day bookmaking. Responsible gamblers bet for two reasons, for entertainment purposes, and to try and win some money. Unlike the casino, sport and racing odds are inefficient and subjective, it is a game of your opinion against the bookmakers with a nice little margin in the bookmakers favour to cover that degree of inefficiency and subjectiveness. Everything is stacked in the bookmakers favour. To then restrict customers playing to a point where they have to go elsewhere to bet simply because as a global conglomerate making hundreds of millions of dollars a year they cant face losing even the most nominal amount to customers who bother to do some research is incredibly unethical and once again completely unfit for a monopoly which restricts choice. The betting eco system relies on winning customers to function. It also relies on customers winning to function. It simply will not function long term without winning customers framing the market to a point where it is positive expected value for a bookmaker to take bets on both sides. It will also not function under a high margin trading strategy where uncompetitive odds are offered. Customers become disinterested when they lose too fast. Entain quite clearly ignore these very two key parts of the betting eco system in a trading practice that has one thing in mind - appeasing shareholders through maximising profits to the detriment of customers. This is facilitated by removing winning customers and even removing net zero customers from their books to increase margin and profits. Unless you lose consistently you are simply not welcome. If this bill gets passed some keys points must be addressed. Minimum Bet Laws The government must guarantee robust minimum bet guarantees on sport and racing by selection (not market) with no exceptions so everyone can participate in the market at their free will to a respectable amount. Australia operates a Minimum bet guarantee on racing. The parameters are to win 2k on metro racing. Please note the difference of a bet guarantee to a bet. $2000 = $200 @ 11.0 or $400@ 6.0 it is not a guarantee of $2000 at any odds. However under their system and free market within Australia you can operate with 20+ bookmakers so the real limit is closer to 40k. This must be taken into account when structuring a minimum bet guarantee. It simply must be higher to fall in line and simply has to be extended to sports betting. There can be no grey area that allows Entain to act in an arbitrary manner against customers restricting trade using outs granted to them under safer gambling and arbitrage/bonus abusers small print. They can not be allowed to treat customers in an arbitrary manner that restricts trade. The lines between acting on customers under safer gambling protocol can not be blurred or used to act on normal winning customers. Bet guarantees have to be applied to sport by selection, and not by event. Competitive odds. Currently Entains product is one of the most uncompetitive from a bookmakers margin point of view in the world. Standardised industry odds are now 1.91 v 1.91 in a two way market across the global betting market, some bookmakers are 1.93 v 1.93, betfair exchange is roughly 1.97 after commission. It is the default for The TAB to offer 1.87 v 1.87 or even 1.83 v 1.83. Currently they are obliged to contribute a turnover tax to NZ sporting bodies which goes some way to explain this uncompetitive pricing strategy on some sports, but other sports are just inexcusably uncompetitive from an odds and market percentage point of view where no turnover takeouts are required. Turnover takeouts to sporting bodies can simply not be used as an excuse to offer a grossly inferior product to the NZ betting public under monopoly restrictions. I suggest minimum market percentages of 104-105% must be enforced. The failure to do this simply means customers lose quicker, and lose interest quicker, turnover then drops, and the entire industry suffers. Once again it is the antithesis of safer gambling. High take outs are catastrophic for the betting eco system and stifle turnover and lead to greater gambling harm. It is irrefutable. Another area of great concern is markets with 4 or more selections. they are extremely uncompetitive from a margin POV. A top bat cricket market is sometimes routinely bet to 140% for Eleven selections. There is no consistency to their trading margins for markets with more than 4 selections in a market. It is this kind of defensive, erratic pricing that has contributed to turning customers off shore in the first place. There is zero consistency of product in regards to margin. How can this practice of uncompetitive and inconsistent pricing possibly be trusted under a monopoly? It almost appears their traders are not even aware of competitive market percentages once they get past 4 selections. The art of odds compiling and percentage per runner formulas appears non-existent. It is simple but very important intricacies like this that provide an insight into their trading practices and inability to be competitive in a free market where they should be, never mind a monopoly. Betfair exchange. I plead with the members to take a meeting with Betfair Exchange and understand the intricacies of the exchange and how it differentiates from a fixed odds bookmaker i.e. The Tab. There is almost zero crossover of customers who currently operate in the exchange space that will filter back to the fixed odds model Entain provides i.e The Tab. It is a trading platform that allows the active trading and framing of the sports betting markets through peer to peer exchange, there is simply no equivalent product offered by Entain should it be banned. It would be like banning yogurt under a milk monopoly. It is vital to the betting eco system and is also a key product used by Entain themselves to frame their own markets and hedge their business. From a financial standpoint a banning of the Betfair exchange will lead to thriving black markets as these customers seek a product no longer available in NZ. Likewise the POC tax will simply disappear from customers who do not cross over back to a fixed odds product, because that product now fails to exist. It is a lose lose for the consumer, the betting eco system, the industry, and the government. It is quite literally an unparalleled product in NZ. An exchange exemption will help provide a robust betting market in NZ that will complement fixed odds turnover while still allowing the industry to prosper from tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars of turnover driven through the exchange each year from NZ players. It is incredibly misinformed to think that even 1% of the betfair exchange turnover will return to a NZ fixed odds monopoly. This is why it is essential for the committee to understand the intricacies of the exchange market vs a fixed odds market. It is also in my opinion highly unethical that Entain should be able to hedge through the betfair exchange to offset their own risk, along with framing their own markets using the platform, while the rest of the NZ public is left out. Once again it's the equivalent of Entain getting to purchase yogurt and rest of NZ being banned. In summary, I believe granting Entain a monopoly under their current trading practices shows a complete misunderstanding of how a modern day bookmaker operates, what really drives betting turnover, and the restrictive and arbitrary manner customers are treated. It also naively assumes that lost turnover will simply just return to NZ. I can't even begin to explain just how misinformed this is. It is astonishing that a 25 year handcuff is being floated for 100 Million dollars when other free market options are available. The NZ consumer should not be punished for the racing industry’s failures.

I think it will go through to the total detriment of the NZ punter. The politician's are clueless on betting and will vote like sheep. The crap will hit next year when 15 online casino sites are licensed. I no where the majorly of young peoples betting will be going. What NZ racing is losing to overseas betting sites on sports and racing is way less than what online casinos are ripping from the entertainment dollar. That coupled with loss of Greyhound revenue will hurt. Ohh and the sports codes are currently collectively addressing the Government to receive all profits from sports betting.

Greg ? Who the hell is Greg?