April 20, 2018

From facing Arsenal to betting ban: Former Lincoln defender Bradley Wood suspended from football for six years


Former Lincoln City defender Bradley Wood was banned for six years and fined £3,275 pounds by an FA tribunal on Thursday after being found guilty of match-fixing and betting offences.

The player was accused of getting himself booked on purpose in two FA Cup matches in January and February 2017 to "influence a football betting market".

Wood, who played against Arsenal in the FA Cup quarter-finals last season, had denied deliberately seeking out yellow cards in the games against Ipswich Town, where he committed a 90th-minute professional foul, and Burnley where he was involved in an altercation.

Seven people had bet on Wood being cautioned, none of whom had previously bet on such a thing, according to the FA and betting companies.

The bets were also "atypical in the context of the caution betting market" and the potential winnings, which were not all paid out, in the region of £10,000.

"The betting evidence and the evidence of Mr Wood's association with those placing the bets is compelling," the tribunal said.

It ruled, however, that Wood's conduct had not constituted "match-fixing at its most serious" and there were mitigating factors which meant a lifetime ban would have been disproportionate.

Woods was banned for five years for the match-fixing offences and a further year for 23 other charges of betting on the outcome of matches.

Lincoln are in the fourth tier of English soccer after winning promotion back to the league at the end of last season when they also reached the FA Cup quarter-finals.

April 12, 2018

Playtech makes a $1.05B play for Italian betting firm Snaitech

Online gambling technology provider Playtech has agreed to buy a 70.6% stake in Italian gambling firm Snaitech, a move that the UK company expects will enhance its “revenue mix towards regulated markets.”

Playtech makes a $1.05B play for Italian betting firm SnaitechThe “initial acquisition” of Snaitech carries a price tag of €846 million ($1.05 billion), Playtech announced in a Thursday filing. The British gambling company is required to make a mandatory takeover offer for the remaining stake in Snaitech after the initial acquisition is completed sometime in the third quarter of 2018. The mandatory takeover offer is aimed at delisting Snaitech from the Milan Stock Exchange, according to Playtech. It expects the entire transaction will be completed before the year ends.

The deal will be funded by Playtech’s existing cash resources, plus new debt, and is expected to deliver cost material annual cost synergies of €10 million.

If the deal manages to clear regulatory and shareholder approvals, it would mean that Playtech will be seeing 78 percent of its revenue from regulated markets. The Snaitech acquisition will allow Playtech to establish “strong presence in Italy, Europe’s largest and growing gaming market, a fragmented market which is relatively underdeveloped online.”

Playtech sees the acquisition as an opportunity to combine “two market leading players in the B2B/B2C space with brand strength and scalable offerings,” giving the British company “incremental organic growth potential and greater strategic optionality.”

Snaitech is licensed by the Italian Monopolies Authority to offer gaming services and products, including sport and horse racing betting; virtual sports; video lottery; online and mobile poker, skill games, casino games, bingo; esports; and pari-mutuel. The SNAI retail betting network has more than 1,600 points of sale located throughout Italy. The group also operates 60,000 “New Slot” as well as more than 10,000 video lotteries across the country.

In 2017, Snaitech generated revenue €890 million and EBITDA of €136 million.

The acquisition deal couldn’t have come at a better time for UK’s Playtech, which has been battling the sweeping regulatory changes at its home market on top of the persisting operational problems in Asia.

Playtech reported a modest 18% net revenue gain in 2017, following Malaysia’s crackdown on gambling in the country. In February, Playtech Chairman Alan Jackson said the company is looking to diversify its revenue base by investing in fast growing regulated and regulating markets in Europe and Latin America.

April 05, 2018

Lottoland sings swan song, but Aussie newsagents aren’t buying it

Online gambling company Lottoland has finally begun singing its swan song, in an attempt to pull at the heartstrings of newsagents before it’s evicted from Australia.

On Thursday, Lottoland has published a full-page newspaper advertisement appealing to newsagents to come to the table and discuss a win-win solution for both parties in the wake of the Australian government’s decision to ban online betting on lotteries and keno.

The ad comes as a letter addressed to newsagents penned by no less than Lottoland CEO Luke Brill, who offered them 20 percent of the profits generated from every bet they refer to the online gambling firm. Newsagents may earn thousands of additional dollars from the proposal, according Brill.

At the same time, Brill said newsagents that took part in the program would have an opportunity to benefit financially from Lottoland bets on overseas lotteries.

“The reality is that the proposed legislation could make life even more difficult for newsagents while reducing choice for hundreds of thousands of customers,” Brill said in a statement. “We want to partner with newsagents to provide our customers with greater choice, in a way that will be fair and profitable for your business.”

Brill then took aim at rival Tatts Group, which it accused of bankrolling local lotteries in their fight against Lottoland.

The Lottoland boss claimed that Tatts is cementing its monopoly in Australia, to the detriment of both the newsagents and players. Their continued operations in Australia encourages both competition and innovation, according to Brill.

If there’s one threat to newsagents’ survival, Brill said that it is no other than Tatts.

“We believe in a level-playing field that encourages rather than restricts competition and innovation. That’s why we want to work with you as a true business partner,” he said.

However, Lottoland’s last-ditch appeal has fallen on Australian Lottery and Newsagents Association’s (ALNA) deaf ears.

In a statement, ALNA CEO Adam Joy said newsagents will never align themselves with a business that lacks consumer protections and doesn’t deliver what it promotes. Joy also dismissed Lottoland’s latest ad to be a desperate PR maneuver.

“Lottoland have spent years denigrating newsagents, and a partnership requires trust. They have repeatedly said that they are not targeting the customers of newsagents, yet this idea along with its entire business model does exactly that,” Joy said.

April 03, 2018

DraftKings seeks partners for US betting expansion

US daily fantasy sports operator DraftKings is reported to be seeking casino and leisure partners, with a view to expanding its future sports betting proposition.

DraftKings leadership seeks to gain a competitive advantage over potential US market incumbents, as the Supreme Court reviews the repeal of federal PASPA provisions.

This February, DraftKings declared its statement of intent on becoming a major player in licensed US sports betting, opening a strategic ‘betting’ office in Hoboken, New Jersey.

Furthermore, DraftKings has appointed UK betting executive Sean Hurley as the company’s first-ever Head of Sportsbook, tasked with delivering a US-centric sports betting platform and strategy.

DraftKings which to date has raised +$700 million in enterprise funding, believes that it has the best organic strategy for a potential US betting market.

Through its daily fantasy sports offering, DraftKings has a secured 10 million US customers and built a platform tailored to US sports engagement (live streaming, ticketing, payments).

For the betting sector, all eyes remain on Capitol Hill, as industry stakeholders await the judgement of the Supreme Court.

Latest industry reports indicate that 19 states have declared an interest in implementing licensed sports betting, should the Supreme Court repeal PASPA.

However, as yet little is known with regards to how US betting legislations and provisions will be shaped up, and what potential requirements will be needed by operators seeking to enter the market.

GVC gets bigger, more impressive, and more unwieldy

GVC is certainly becoming a very large company, now that regulators have approved its deal to acquire Ladbrokes Coral. The ever wily GVC is being praised for its genius move of offering Ladbrokes a sliding contingent offer based on whatever the politicians in the House of Commons decide will be the maximum safe allowable bet at fixed odd betting terminals that makes up so much of Ladbrokes’ revenues, and that will end the problem of gambling addiction once and for all. Having covered all the bases before the pitch was even thrown, GVC made an offer that Ladbrokes Coral couldn’t refuse.

GVC’s latest acquisition follows its last-minute sniping of 888 for bwin.party, which itself merged in 2011, rather unsuccessfully. Now with Ladbrokes Coral, GVC is effectively, GVC Ladbrokes Coral bwin.party and friends. Plus a bunch of other satellites that GVC has gathered recently including a Greek gaming company called Zatrix, and Georgian firm called Mars LLC, or the Crystalbet Acquisition. Greece and Georgia. Hmm….

It’s been rather impressive how GVC has managed to accomplish all this roll-up without leveraging itself up the wazoo. Its debt, before the merger with Ladbrokes Coral at least, was only £300M, just over 10% of its market cap. With all the acquisitions it has splurged on, it could be considered something between miraculous and sleight-of-hand.

There is an answer as to how GVC has managed to do all this, but before I just blurt it out, let me say GVC has proven me wrong time and time again. Its share price just keeps marching on higher and higher, despite a less-than-conservative business model, dangerous markets, and, of course,losing money. GVC has lost £178M over the last two years, and £284M overall since its founding.

So how did they do it? It’s something of a self-fulfilling positive feedback loop driven by rising equity. Take the latest deal with Ladbrokes Coral. 32.7 pence in cash and 0.141 GVC share per Ladbrokes share amounts to £625M in cash and the rest paid in issued equity. The higher GVC shares go, the more attractive and valuable are its share-based offers for potential buyouts, the more it can rely on just gifting shares to those it merges with and the happier its partners are to receive those shares. And the more GVC acquires, the bigger it looks, the more excited shareholders become, the higher its stock goes, which feeds right back into the loop for the next acquisitions.

The question is, what good are the acquisitions for besides creating a giant gambling umbrella organization with GVC at the head? What is the glue that will keep all these moving parts together besides being all loosely in the gaming industry? Do they function together, or are they just an impressive gathering of names that executives can list off regarding how much market share in whatever segment is under their control?

It sort of reminds me of the AOL-Time Warner merger of 2000, though not as blatant in its merger-for-the-sake-of-a-merger nature. Yes, different segments of the gambling market are related, and there might be some cost-savings and efficiencies that can be found here and there thanks to it all being under common ownership, but is there anything really compelling about the fact that Ladbrokes Coral Group and GVC are now owned by the same people? Maybe there is something compelling to a sharper eye, but nothing really stands out all that obviously to my average vision. Perhaps the fact that I can’t see it is the reason I’m not at the top of the industry making all the important decisions.

Skeptical about this assessment? Me, too. GVC has gone much higher for much longer and impressed far more investors than I ever anticipated, and good for them. But listen to what the UK regulators at the Competition and Markets Authority had to say when approving this deal. It relegated a foundational brand of British betting culture since the 19th century to a subsidiary of what is turning out to be a modern roll-up behemoth.

GVC has a small presence in the UK and only offers services online. The Competition and Markets Authority has found that GVC and Ladbrokes are not close rivals and there are many other providers of betting and gaming services online. The CMA looked closely at betting services for individual sports and individual games but found that, in all cases, there will be enough rivals to the merged entity to prevent price increases or a reduced quality of service as a result of the merger.

If they are not close rivals then what is the point of merging? Can sports betters in Germany and Italy have any impact on FOBT gamblers at betting shops in the UK? Yes, there will be some efficiencies and synergies and overlap, but really, Ladbrokes Coral and GVC are two different companies. They just happen to be under the same umbrella now.

What I’m worried about is what happens to GVC’s various disparate parts when the equity bull that has been fueling this motley collection of gaming and betting firms comes to a halt? It’s the acquisitions that have been fueling the stock price.It hasn’t been the money, since none much has been made yet. It’s the promise of higher earnings through the excitement of mergers and acquisitions that has fueled much of this run and may continue to do so yet. Who knows for how much longer though.

When I think of GVC Ladbrokes Coral bwin.party Zatrix Mars LLC, I think of all these separate firms that have merged together though I don’t understand exactly why, other than for the money of the deal.

So will this merger help? I don’t quite see how it could hurt exactly, but I don’t see how it really changes all that much for the positive either, aside from GVC getting to show everyone how big it is and how much it owns now.