Tonkatime!

Brodie just because someone doesn’t agree with you it doesn’t make them an antagonist.

I have no agenda at all Brodie. If you talk sense I’ll more than likely agree with you. If you rabble on and contradict yourself I’ll probably disagree with you.

For once you are actually on the money.

Isn’t that just business? All business try to look after good/profitable customers and weed out bad/un profitable ones.

What correspondence have you had with the tab and the dia in regards to the amount and who decided on it? Are you stating facts or opinion? If it’s so easy to get around, why have you spat the dummy and started multiple threads about it?

I think the issue with only going on what was bet is that it would be a lot easier to split bets in to amounts under $1000. I agree in the example it’s silly.

I never said anything about what’s written in the AML legislation so I’m not sure how I’m incorrect based on that? You may have a fair point that the management should have done more but I believe the DIA wanted a much tighter regime and this was a compromise. I agree with you it’s stupid in the case of someone who wins $1000 of a $4 trifecta. It will be interesting to see the turnover numbers all though I believe the website has turned a few people off.

You make some valid points but are there really that many big punters that wouldn’t have a tab account? At the risk of re litigating last weeks debate you are not correct in your assertion that the tab had a choice about the aml limit.

Exactly my thoughts. The guy at the counter responded with a simple “there’s nothing I can do until you verify yourself”. The way the guy was going on I thought it may have been the Broadster but he’s ruled himself out tonight.

The voucher basically gets locked until you verify yourself. So you need to go to the counter. I know of one person who got grumpy because they couldn’t collect but they were warned for weeks that it was coming in.

Having spoken to someone at the tab and as rusty has said the DIA originally wanted a much lower threshold. The $1000 was a compromise between the two. The DIA wanted a much lower limit.

That was awfully long rant about nothing. I’m not defending the tab, more pointing out that yet again the broadster isn’t on the money with his claims of legal breaches.

Clutching at straws Brodie. First it was a breach of the aml act, now your rattling on about the privacy act being breached. Im not a lawyer but I can’t see how it’s breaching anyone’s privacy.

I’m not sure you are correct Brodie, the threshold to report is $10,000 but I wouldn’t think collecting information on those who collect over $1000 or bet over $1000 is a breach of the act. It is possibly an overly cautious approach and butt covering. I agree that someone collecting $1100 from an $8 bet having to provide id is a bit silly but for most I would doubt its a big deal.

I thought that would be the case but wasn’t sure so I thought I’d play it a bit safe in case this one of those rare occasions that Brodie was on the money.

As I previously stated if we are to take your past comments about your restrictions as correct then you are uneffected by this change in policy. Stand alone agencies are all ready on the way out and reducing in numbers unless they have gaming, I only know of one in the Wellington region without pokies. Digital will be come the dominant channel regardless of this legislation or not.

Are you seriously suggesting the tabs money laundering policy enforcement should be determined by individual staff members rather than across the board? Your privacy points are ridiculous. They are two completely different things you are talking about. Might I suggest you make you comments before your 6th gin of the day?

I agree with you that it seems silly in that example. A couple of your other comments confuse me though. Numerous times you have said you are restricted to less than $1000 and you don’t seem to be able to find anyway around it, so I would think you are largely unaffected by the new anti money laundering regulations.

Surely a bit of personal responsibility has to come into it. There’s various ways to control what you spend.

Only when the Abernathys are involved.

Of course he does and is entitled to have one. My point was simply that he wouldn’t be betting at Auckland anyway mile racing or not mile racing.

Rogan Norvall for mine.

I thought Brodie was out of it prior to his latest distance issue as 1) he doesn’t like racing in the north or more specifically Alexandra park and 2) he is so heavily restricted it’s not worth his while punting.

I use to take a few easy bet trifecta’a at the meetings in the Deep South ten years or so ago. The number of times I got Kelly Evander in them was unreal.

There should be as they are a great way to attract people to the sport.