Should TABNZ be granted an Online Casino License to compensate for loss of revenue?

[Wandering Eyes]

Should TABNZ be granted an Online Casino License to compensate for loss of revenue?  There is no exact precedent for it BUT arguably TABNZ (i.e. the racing industry) should have every right to apply for an online casino license.  

There is precedent for this in Victoria Australia when the introduction of a Casino to Melbourne was mooted in the eary 1990's.  As part of the negotiations to grant a Casino license TABCORP and Tattersalls were granted a duopoly on Pokies in the state for 18 years which prevented any other Club or outlet (other than Crown Casino) from operating pokies.  Some of the TABCORP revenue from them going to fund racing.  TABCORP and Tatt's in due course negotiated a controversial compensation deal if at the end of the 18 years their licenses were not renewed or a new operator was allowed.   Any new operator would compensate the the duopoly for loss of income. 

 

When electronic gaming machines (poker machines or "pokies") and the first legal casino were introduced to Victoria under the Kirner and Kennett governments in the early 1990s, the state established a specific statutory framework to govern compensation. [1, 2]

The Statutory Context

Under the original Gaming and Betting Act 1994 (and the Casino Control Act 1991), the Victoria government structured a commercial framework where two operators—Tabcorp and Tattersalls (Tatts)—were granted a lucrative 18-year duopoly to operate poker machines in pubs and clubs across the state. [1, 2, 3, 4]

A core tenet of this legislation was a statutory right to compensation if their gaming licences were not renewed or replaced by an equivalent commercial arrangement upon expiry in 2012. Crucially, the law intended for this potential liability to be offset or compensated by any new entity granted a future licence (such as a new casino operator or venue framework), safeguarding the state's public purse from funding the payout directly. [1, 2, 3]

The Subsequent High Court Legal Battle

When the Brumby Labor government moved to abolish the duopoly model in 2008 to let individual pubs and clubs own their gaming entitlements directly from 2012, it triggered a massive, decade-long legal dispute: [1, 2]

• The Companies' Claims: Following the 2012 transition, Tabcorp and Tatts sued the Victorian Government for over $1 billion combined, citing the original 1994 statutory promise of non-renewal compensation. [1, 2]

• The Government's Defense: The State argued that because the 1994 Act had been repealed and replaced by the Gambling Regulation Act 2003, and because individual pub/club entitlements were entirely different legal mechanisms than the old corporate duopoly licences, no compensation was triggered. [1, 2, 3]

• The High Court Ruling: After fluctuating decisions in the lower courts (where Tatts initially won its claim), the High Court of Australia ruled unanimously in favor of the Victorian Government in 2016. The High Court determined that the state owed zero compensation to either gaming giant because the specific, original licensing framework had simply expired by its own terms. This ultimately forced Tatts to repay $540 million (plus interest) that it had previously been awarded by a lower court. [1, 2, 3]

 

[Wandering Eyes]

But...Racing Victoria did have an arrangement with TABCORP to share their pokie revenue.  

Racing Victoria previously held a 25% share in a poker machine (pokies) business partnership with Tabcorp, which ended when their joint operation of gaming machines ceased in August 2012. [1, 2]

 

Historical Pokies Involvement

• Joint Venture: Racing Victoria was a partner with Tabcorp in operating electronic gaming machines in Victoria. [1, 2]

• End of Operations: The partnership stopped operating poker machines on August 15, 2012, after the Victorian state government changed the licensing structure to shift venue management directly to individual operators. [1]

• The Levy Dispute: Following the end of operations, Racing Victoria won a 2013 Supreme Court legal challenge against the Victorian Government, saving the racing industry from paying millions in disputed full-year statutory machine levies on a pro-rata basis. [1, 2]

[Wandering Eyes]

That all occurred because the Kennett Government privatised TABCORP. 

Racing Victoria and the broader Victorian racing industry entered into a joint venture with Tabcorp in 1994 when the Kennett state government privatized the state's Totalisator Agency Board (TAB). [1]

 

Origins of the 1994 Deal

• Privatization: The government floated and listed Tabcorp on the Australian Securities Exchange in August 1994. [1, 2]

• Industry Compensation: While the racing industry lost direct ownership of the traditional TAB, the arrangement was structured as a win-win partnership. [1]

• Pokies Revenue Share: As part of the privatization framework and subsequent licensing agreements, the racing industry formed a joint venture that secured a lucrative cut—initially 25 percent—of revenue generated from electronic gaming machines (pokies) operated by Tabcorp in pubs and clubs. [1]

 

Evolution and Conclusion of the Partnership

• Renewal: This joint venture model (the VicTAB JV), which pooled wagering and gaming machine proceeds across thoroughbred, harness, and greyhound racing, was renewed for another 12-year term starting in August 2012. [1, 2, 3, 4]

• The End of the JV: The historic joint venture officially concluded when the Victorian government awarded a fresh 20-year wagering licence to Tabcorp starting in August 2024. The updated framework completely scrapped the old 50/50 profit-sharing and pokies joint-venture model, replacing it with fixed licence fees and standard race-field fees to align with a modern, digital-focused regulatory environment. [1, 2, 3]

[mikeynz]

1 hour ago, Wandering Eyes said:

Should TABNZ be granted an Online Casino License to compensate for loss of revenue?  There is no exact precedent for it BUT arguably TABNZ (i.e. the racing industry) should have every right to apply for an online casino license.  

There is precedent for this in Victoria Australia when the introduction of a Casino to Melbourne was mooted in the eary 1990's.  As part of the negotiations to grant a Casino license TABCORP and Tattersalls were granted a duopoly on Pokies in the state for 18 years which prevented any other Club or outlet (other than Crown Casino) from operating pokies.  Some of the TABCORP revenue from them going to fund racing.  TABCORP and Tatt's in due course negotiated a controversial compensation deal if at the end of the 18 years their licenses were not renewed or a new operator was allowed.   Any new operator would compensate the the duopoly for loss of income. 

 

When electronic gaming machines (poker machines or "pokies") and the first legal casino were introduced to Victoria under the Kirner and Kennett governments in the early 1990s, the state established a specific statutory framework to govern compensation. [1, 2]

 

The Statutory Context

Under the original Gaming and Betting Act 1994 (and the Casino Control Act 1991), the Victoria government structured a commercial framework where two operators—Tabcorp and Tattersalls (Tatts)—were granted a lucrative 18-year duopoly to operate poker machines in pubs and clubs across the state. [1, 2, 3, 4]

A core tenet of this legislation was a statutory right to compensation if their gaming licences were not renewed or replaced by an equivalent commercial arrangement upon expiry in 2012. Crucially, the law intended for this potential liability to be offset or compensated by any new entity granted a future licence (such as a new casino operator or venue framework), safeguarding the state's public purse from funding the payout directly. [1, 2, 3]

 

The Subsequent High Court Legal Battle

When the Brumby Labor government moved to abolish the duopoly model in 2008 to let individual pubs and clubs own their gaming entitlements directly from 2012, it triggered a massive, decade-long legal dispute: [1, 2]

• The Companies' Claims: Following the 2012 transition, Tabcorp and Tatts sued the Victorian Government for over $1 billion combined, citing the original 1994 statutory promise of non-renewal compensation. [1, 2]

• The Government's Defense: The State argued that because the 1994 Act had been repealed and replaced by the Gambling Regulation Act 2003, and because individual pub/club entitlements were entirely different legal mechanisms than the old corporate duopoly licences, no compensation was triggered. [1, 2, 3]

• The High Court Ruling: After fluctuating decisions in the lower courts (where Tatts initially won its claim), the High Court of Australia ruled unanimously in favor of the Victorian Government in 2016. The High Court determined that the state owed zero compensation to either gaming giant because the specific, original licensing framework had simply expired by its own terms. This ultimately forced Tatts to repay $540 million (plus interest) that it had previously been awarded by a lower court. [1, 2, 3]

 

I guess if TAB NZ are/were granted a casino license then the money they get just don't go somewhere else, hundreds online at present, most likely once licenses are granted the rest will be geo blocked, shame they blocked Betfair for sports betting, probably just chased the larger punters out of the game.

[The Centaur]

NZ racing won't progress with Entain involved. Several tracks have facilities with a bit of upgrade could function as casinos around the racing product. There are legal ways which obviously I won't be mentioning here. Entain is an old style parasitic organisation based on the outdated English betting shop culture.

[curious]

30 minutes ago, The Centaur said:

NZ racing won't progress with Entain involved. Several tracks have facilities with a bit of upgrade could function as casinos around the racing product. There are legal ways which obviously I won't be mentioning here. Entain is an old style parasitic organisation based on the outdated English betting shop culture.

That is bullshit. Entain has little to do with NZ racing other than taking bets on it and providing half the GBR from all their NZ activities to TABNZ some of which goes to NZ racing, something the NZRB and TABNZ were unable to do.

[the galah]

personally i think in 10 years time people will judge  entains impact on nz racing as having been  similar to the sugar rush effect.

there was the short term substainial rush of cash,but its inevitable entains focus on racing will drop away as they focus on the parts of the business where they make more money and eventually the racing product will be cannabilised..

If all the customers who bet on racing are going to be targeted with incentives to bet on the igaming aspect of their products,then i just don't get how anyone could think thats anything but bad for racing.

everything i've ever read indicates entain around the world is pulling back from marketing investment in racing and transferring their focus onto the igaming.Its not hard to come to that realisation,they say it over and over again.

I think when dean shannon was head of entain down under he tried for racing,but then he got moved on and what did the new entain boss(vouris) say,that the $40m investment shannon had made into marketing racing had been a mistake.

"we tried something ambitious,it didn't work,it distracted us from our core strengths,what matters is discipline"

Look at what the global head of entain has said about their withdrawing sponsorship from british raceing,she said theres only so much of their marketing $ to go around,that the returns on their marketing investment were better from their non racing parts of their business.Its just a fact..

How many times does entain have to say something before it sinks in.Racing is in decline anyway,so its not just going to be entains fault.

i think to myself,if i'm a punter who , as an example,$100 to spend on racing and sport each week and entain comes along and starts offering me incentives through promotions to bet on their igaming ,their strategy apparently is combining my current preferred product i spend on with one of thier igaming products.Then they will soon work out what igaming product is my preference,then over time is inevitable i spend less on racing. How is the punter with that $100 a week spend going to be able to afford anymore.

so i hope the tab is able to leverage the genuine concerns racing and sports administrators should have for the future returns to the industry.Particularly racing.

so the way i see it,racing may have got the entain sugar rush,but they need much nore than that to survive long term. They need to tap into income from non racing sources and this igaming licence thing or leverage form the impact of the igaming entain customer base,they need to use that to push their case.

The nut case trump war will have a significant effect on the interest rates that new zealanders will be paying in years to come,they will rise,its just hard to tell but it will impact the discrtioanry dollar for sure.Then we have the el nino weather coming this year. The peruvian fishermen who gave it that name,they knew that meant empty nets and economic hardship to come,won't el nino impact people in racing as well  year if things play out as the weather people are predicting.

the racing industry racing needs another win somewhere.

Edited September 9 by the galah

[Shab]

9 hours ago, mikeynz said:

shame they blocked Betfair for sports betting, probably just chased the larger punters out of the game.

Yeah we all too lazy to do something to get around geoblocking and decided we didnt need the money so we joined the local orienteering group and started taking evening cooking classes at the local high school. Quite good cos there's more women there than the tab

[Chief Stipe]

6 hours ago, Shab said:

Yeah we all too lazy to do something to get around geoblocking and decided we didnt need the money so we joined the local orienteering group and started taking evening cooking classes at the local high school. Quite good cos there's more women there than the tab

Why are you so intent on giving the finger to everyone?

[curious]

5 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Why are you so intent on giving the finger to everyone?

I wouldn't call it giving the finger. More describing what a lot of people are doing or have done.

[Gammalite]

4 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Why are you so intent on giving the finger to everyone?

don't think that was the intention Chief. He sounds annoyed that one company can Monopolise the market so Dominantly , and introduce their own wagering systems/gambling outlets,. as they see fit , because of the lack of any opposition 

even in Politics that you see Chief . and even in retail sales, it's good to have competition like Woolies v Foodstuff, or BP v Shell ,etc , to keep one mob from pricing/setting the markets as they see fit for profit.

some Opposition will always create's good competition and some modicum of fairness for stake holders.

13 hours ago, the galah said:

so i hope the tab is able to leverage the genuine concerns racing and sports administrators should have for the future returns to the industry.Particularly racing.

yes the deal was for way to long. ENTAIN aren't that interested in the racing. as you said above in a post they are using it in a way to manipulate/lure any solid racing supporter/punter to migrate towards their real cash gains, made from on-line casino gambling games .  as long as their subscribers spend their dollars they are happy.

ENTAIN has maxed out in its profibility though. The past 5 years have seen their shares trading drop from GBX 1900 five years ago,  to about GBX 500 now. Indeed , later in this month of September 2026 , Entain are being Removed from the FTSE 100 ( top trading companies ) to the FTSE 250 ( mid range company list ) as have lost an incredible 70% of their share value in that time (past 5 years) .  and a drop of a HUGE 42% over the past year even, from Sept 25 . that's just FreeFall 😳 . things will have to change.  British racing as the Galah mentioned are going to get way less than currently. the Wildly popular football dominating their betting market in Europe. 

This will have some ripple effect (or even wave effect)  through the NZ racing industry for sure. 

ENTAIN are Trading as one of it's Subsidiary's ' Ladbrokes ' in Australia , the company has serious opposition from TABCORP and SPORTSBET giant betting companies in Aus though .

But Ladbrokes do particularly well framing and odds offering's from horse racing.  to beat off the opponents and look after it's clients. can only Hope that will continue. It helps us run the Interdominion  (harness racings Flagship event , with Ladbrokes as partner/sponsor.

Something NZ doesn't have currently . The beauty of Opposition . 

  

[Chief Stipe]

53 minutes ago, curious said:

I wouldn't call it giving the finger. More describing what a lot of people are doing or have done.

Doesn't seem to describe what you say it does.

53 minutes ago, Gammalite said:

don't think that was the intention Chief. He sounds annoyed that one company can Monopolise the market so Dominantly , and introduce their own wagering systems/gambling outlets,. as they see fit , because of the lack of any opposition 

You "don't think" and "he sounds annoyed"?  Are the prices posted in NZ any different to the ones ENTAIN posts in Australia?  If not then how "uncompetitive" are they?  @Shab misses betfair - an exchange - well not really if we believe what he says he circumvents geo-blocking anyway.  Which at the end of the day means no net loss one way or another to NZ.

[Gammalite]

1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:

Are the prices posted in NZ any different to the ones ENTAIN posts in Australia?  If not then how "uncompetitive" are they? 

we have 3 Major TAB outlets as well as the 3 Major Betting companies of Ladbrokes , Sportsbet ( that I use exclusively as it always pays the best divvie' of the 3 TABs) and TABCORP.

the 3 BIG tab agencies are NSW Tab ( services NSW only ) , SUPERTAB ( services Victoria and ACT ) , and UTAB ( formaly UBET) that service QLD , SA , Tasmania , and Northern Territory as one betting Pool )  

I can't even get NSW TAB, SUPERTAB, or NZ TAB up on my screen 🙄 . It's like you're defaulted to UTAB automatically unfortunately, being in QLD. So I don't bet into those other pools I take it , is the reason. 

West Australia has it's own State Government body called RWWA. ( they are Racing and Wagering West Australia) so are the last state to run a State owned Gambling agency. there WA TAB is called TABTouch.  

Because it is Independant I CAN get TABtouch up on my screen and it's Divvies are ALWAYS the SAME as the NZ TAB ones. I can't work out Why this is Chief 😉. They are generally a lot lower than the East Coast TAB prices too. When the racing is on TV they put up all the 3 East Coast TAB divvies after each race broadcast. ( as it is a National Broadcast station ) 

ENTAIN tried to buy the WA TAB but FAILED to do so. So just can't work out the Connection between NZ TAB and TABtouch.  But with Exactly the same Dividends Every race. There is Obviously some Solid Connection. I though it must of been the one Pool . but is that possible ??  But just don't know exactly what it is unfortunately  🤔  

 

KEEP in Mind that Australia's States run as Separate Countries virtually. All are run by their State governments and have differing laws and regulations and penalties (like law and road , etc)  for everything. 

 

[Chief Stipe]

57 minutes ago, Gammalite said:

But with Exactly the same Dividends Every race. There is Obviously some Solid Connection. I though it must of been the one Pool . but is that possible ??  But just don't know exactly what it is unfortunately

Possibly using the same software and algorithm as ENTAIN/Ladbrokes.

Just checked they use Betmakers software for Fixed Odds as does Ladbrokes.

[Shab]

1 hour ago, Gammalite said:

Because it is Independant I CAN get TABtouch up on my screen and it's Divvies are ALWAYS the SAME as the NZ TAB ones. I can't work out Why this is Chief 😉. They are generally a lot lower than the East Coast TAB prices too. When the racing is on TV they put up all the 3 East Coast TAB divvies after each race broadcast. ( as it is a National Broadcast station ) 

Tabtouch tote odds are Supertab odds. NZ Tab tote odds are Supertab odds, Commingled. Fixed odds are not the same. You can look at odds comparison sites if you wanna check.

[Chief Stipe]

16 minutes ago, Shab said:

Tabtouch tote odds are Supertab odds. NZ Tab tote odds are Supertab odds, Commingled. Fixed odds are not the same. You can look at odds comparison sites if you wanna check.

If you look at the odds for the next race at Riccarton they are the same as the Best Odds available in OZ.

[Shab]

NZ tab should be highest odds in every single race. Only agency that pays zero tax. But nah they gouge the kiwi punters  instead. They bought the right