Jump to content
Bit Of A Yarn

New TAB NZ Advert on Trackside Imploring Us to Bet With Them rather than Offshore Agencies


Chief Stipe

Recommended Posts

Did anyone else see the ad on Trackside imploring us to be bet with TAB NZ rather than with Offshore Agencies?  Full marks I guess for promoting TAB NZ but I'm not sure who they are actually targeting.  What are your views?

If you are a new punter you may not even know that there are offshore options.

If you are a big punter then you will punt with those that offer the best deal regardless of hometown loyalty.  

If you are a small to medium punter then you probably bet with TAB NZ anyway and maybe occasionally have a splash on something that the local TAB doesn't offer.

In the advert it says we are losing $80m in revenue to offshore agencies.  I thought Racefield's legislation was going to claw a chunk of that back.  Is the advert an admission that things aren't going to plan?  With regard to $80m "lost from the industry" at a takeout rate of 14% then that is over $500m (half a billion) that is punted offshore by NZ'ers.  Of course that estimate would be greater if the quoted $80m was net profit.  Is it really that much?

I also see in the news section of the TAB NZ site that they are "pleased to announce the renewal of the commingling agreement with TABCORP Australia".  I guess there must be some profit in that agreement.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:

Did anyone else see the ad on Trackside imploring us to be bet with TAB NZ rather than with Offshore Agencies?  Full marks I guess for promoting TAB NZ but I'm not sure who they are actually targeting.  What are your views?

If you are a new punter you may not even know that there are offshore options.

If you are a big punter then you will punt with those that offer the best deal regardless of hometown loyalty.  

If you are a small to medium punter then you probably bet with TAB NZ anyway and maybe occasionally have a splash on something that the local TAB doesn't offer.

In the advert it says we are losing $80m in revenue to offshore agencies.  I thought Racefield's legislation was going to claw a chunk of that back.  Is the advert an admission that things aren't going to plan?  With regard to $80m "lost from the industry" at a takeout rate of 14% then that is over $500m (half a billion) that is punted offshore by NZ'ers.  Of course that estimate would be greater if the quoted $80m was net profit.  Is it really that much?

I also see in the news section of the TAB NZ site that they are "pleased to announce the renewal of the commingling agreement with TABCORP Australia".  I guess there must be some profit in that agreement.

 

The low bastards got me the first time I bet with them, I even gave them a second chance, no third chance, they were 4 figure bets, yes, but someone obviously had to run off and check with his supervisor and when he/she came back I got the old idiom....''odds have changed'' downward of course......I walked then and used my TAB.COM.AU acc........useless, thieving, hypocrites, bookmakers arseholes, ....there, I feel better already.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just wondering if it would meet the standards?

PRINCIPLE 2: TRUTHFUL PRESENTATION

Gambling advertisements must be truthful, balanced and not misleading.  

Rule 2 (a) Truthful Presentation   Guidelines
Gambling advertisements must not mislead or be likely to mislead, deceive or confuse consumers, abuse their trust or exploit their lack of knowledge. This includes by implication, inaccuracy, ambiguity, exaggeration, unrealistic claim, omission, false representation or otherwise.

 

Obvious hyperbole identifiable as such is not considered to be misleading.

  Gambling advertisements must not:

 

  • Make claims about the chance of winning unless they are factual and able to be proven.
  • Exaggerate the chance of winning or the size of the prize.
  • Falsely state or imply that a gambler’s skill can influence the outcome of the gambling activity unless skill can affect the outcome.

Gambling advertisements must:

  • Include the terms and conditions or a reference to where the terms and conditions are readily available. Terms and conditions must be easily understood and must not contradict the advertisement content.
  • Clearly display in the advertisement information about where the gambling can be accessed (e.g. in the case of online gambling a URL address for a website) if it would otherwise be misleading to not display such information.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Doesn't that caveat cover it?

You think their claims are meant to be not taken literally by the general public? They are a mile away from anything recently published by Treasury, the DIA or any peer reviewed publications. Maybe they have more recent authoratative data to support their claims but I think they are required to reference that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, curious said:

You think their claims are meant to be not taken literally by the general public? They are a mile away from anything recently published by Treasury, the DIA or any peer reviewed publications. Maybe they have more recent authoratative data to support their claims but I think they are required to reference that.

I did see the ad,  thought the claims were well away from reality but gave them half a tick for trying.

The misleading advertising  bit never occurred to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing that was missing from that advert was a begging bowl. Seriously, I found it pathetic. To me they appear to be 'grasping at straws'. If they ever manage to run a sharp business then they will lessen the leakage. Until then they are reliant on any residual customer loyalty & whatever Racefields rakes in.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Freda said:

I did see the ad,  thought the claims were well away from reality but gave them half a tick for trying.

The misleading advertising  bit never occurred to me. 

You can go to Gaol here in Oz for that, 'misleading advertising', there'a fine line, ''gaining a financial advantage by deception'' for one.  There's no law though for offering the public ridiculous odds, survival in business is about customer service and satisfaction, how they are still in business is purely down to Jacinda and the bailout.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, curious said:

Doe anyone have the ad or the supporting data? Otherwise, I will request it from the Advertising Standards Authority. I find it unbelievable.

Aside from the above, does it not appear that

a]       they really have no idea

or

b]       they are lying

Not sure what is worse.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Freda said:

Aside from the above, does it not appear that

a]       they really have no idea

or

b]       they are lying

Not sure what is worse.

What might be worse is it could be both Freda and that wouldn't surprise me. I'm not going to turn trackside on for the first time in a decade to try and capture it, but if anyone has it and can send it to me or post it here, I'll follow it up. As CS suggests, if they are referring to net revenue, that's at least a billion $s of turnover going off shore on NZ racing isn't it that they are claiming?

Edited by curious
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, curious said:

What might be worse is it could be both Freda and that wouldn't surprise me. I'm not going to turn trackside on for the first time in a decade to try and capture it, but if anyone has it and can send it to me or post it here, I'll follow it up. As CS suggests, if they are referring to net revenue, that's at least a billion $s of turnover going off shore on NZ racing isn't it that they are claiming?

I'll try and record it somehow.  It is a very polished production and I'm picking it cost a bit to put together.

They have all the good looking people participating so no CWJ smiles.  Who is the good looking greyhound woman?    

They crossed the line though on looks and credibility with Thad Taylor sitting and talking at the bookie desk.

Mackenzie played the casual dress code warm fuzzy CEO role to script.

As for the $80m - I'm guessing if you challenged it they'll say it is in the Messara report or some such rubbish.  Of course they are not quoting the DIA or Treasury assessments.

Maybe they are smoothing the way for Grant Robertson to print some more money for them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, curious said:

Was having a few bets at Gulftream this morning. Thought I'd check their prices and give them  a shot. Got this:

RACE ABANDONED - NO NZ BETTING

Makes me think they must really want it and a few more grand of turnover goes off shore.

You'll find those races are abandoned because there is insufficient money in the pool.  If you check the betting regulations you will see the clauses that detail the required pool amounts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it has come to this.

After decades of shutting down courses and TABs, mismanagement of racing information publication, doing away with telephone betting, over promising on the revenue to be gained by co-mingling and switching to fixed odds betting, underestimating on the costs of (mostly failed) IT projects and running a top heavy and wasteful management team it us come to this - out comes the begging bowl.  This as all come in the quest to be a cool high tech operation, the collateral damage to has been a total disenfranhcisement of a profitable, loyal and established customer base.

I have been told that the cuts to various parts of the TAB were necessary, I assume to satisfy the banks' demands, but they were done in such a way that they severely limited the TAB's ability to maintain their customer base - heaven forbid allow for any growth.

It is like a obese person having to lose weight so they cut off an arm which has desired effect but limits them in other ways.  The racing industry as a whole is down to a rotting torso and even the hyenas have pissed off.

Note:  No mention of Covid 19 as it is entirely irrelevant to what has gone on.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

They crossed the line though on looks and credibility with Thad Taylor sitting and talking at the bookie desk.

Sadly he lost any credibility when a few days after the launch of the new betting platform and it's performance he tweeted "John Allen take a bow".

The working Group appointed in 2015 by the Government to look into the leakage quoted figures of - Around $58 million of gross betting profit (after prizes are paid but before tax is deducted) per year goes offshore from New Zealanders making bets with offshore gambling operators. This represents potential lost income of approximately $40 million to the three racing codes and $5 million to sports organisations.

The Working Group included the DIA and John Allen a clueless quinella you would never get paid out on. 

Word is they used this web site to come up with their numbers https://numbergenerator.org/randomnumbergenerator/1-100

If they got back 20% of what they have lost to overseas over the past few years they will have done well but my mates who have seen that advert pissed themselves, as one said the horse bolted ages ago.

Quote

I also see in the news section of the TAB NZ site that they are "pleased to announce the renewal of the commingling agreement with TABCORP Australia". 

 No doubt they fail to mention that there is no co-mingling on overseas Trifectas or NZ Quaddies because some clown gave away more in rebates than what they receive so they can't reduce the takeout to equal TAB Corps. Thanks to that moron who did it any Aussie Harness or Greyhound trifecta bet is a waste of time due to the small pools.

They are giving away millions in bonus bets which is great for the customer but it gives a false impression of true turnover and sadly they lost track of $6,000,000 of bonus bet transactions over 12 months. Dean McKenzie was going to undertake an independent to look into the matter and report the findings, that was back in March last year. Nothing yet and nothing in the end of year accounts, strange that :/  

The DIA briefing the new Racing Minister stated ":The reduced turnover as a result of COVID-19 was unsustainable for TAB NZ, which was at serious risk of insolvency. In response the Government announced a $72.5 million support package on 12 May 2020. The package included $50 million for direct industry support, $20 million towards two synthetic all-weather race tracks2 from the Provincial Growth Fund, and $2.5 million to put the racing package in place and monitor its implementation.

@$#k me 28 million of that package was needed to pay suppliers for accounts due prior to Covid lockdown. Covid acceleratted the financial problems bu they were well in the crap prior to it. The bank overdraft sky rocketed prior to Covid to $40 million from around $20 million  so add that 20 mill plus the 28 million to debtors owing they were well and truly #@@$#ed pre Covid. Good to see Transparency exists ha yeah right.

DIA again to the Minister 

Quote

There is the potential need for further reform and more Government funding as a result of COVID-19 26. The reduced turnover as a result of COVID-19 was unsustainable for TAB NZ, which was at serious risk of insolvency

 They left out 'before Covid' was at serious risk of insolvency.

Quote

In the course of developing the support package, the Department received advice suggesting TAB NZ may require re-capitalisation

 

Surprise surprise. Sadly it took Covid to cull staff something RITA should have done from day 1. Sadly again it would appear the wrong people were culled. Sucking up Tweet wise and in other ways does pay off obviously.

Quote

However, when the Crown agreed to put in place the racing industry support package, the Crown required TAB NZ (RITA as it was then) to accept a Crown Monitor to verify the use of the support funding and monitor TAB NZ’s recovery. PWC was appointed as the Crown Monitor and that arrangement is in place until 31 December 2020. 48. TAB NZ is only able to access the Crown grant for permitted purposes and must validate each funding request with evidence. The Department assesses each funding request and releases funds if it is satisfied conditions have been met. A more formal and longer-term monitoring arrangement may also need to be considered depending on the outcome of recapitalisation work

 DIA to the Minister yet again shows how #$@#4d they are so when those suck up adverts get played on Trackside grab a violin to play while watching.

Bottom line is they have treated their customers with disdain along with the Industry as in service and performance wise and now they play condescending adverts trying to woo back lost customers who moved their business elsewhere to receive better customer service.   

Edited by NZRacing
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...