Bookmakers reject Bartlett's tote monopoly

Ainsley Walters, Gleaner Writer

THE executive of the United Bookmakers Association on Wednesday reacted with shock to calls for a tote monopoly from Caymanas Track Limited (CTL) and Member of Parliament Dr St Aubyn Bartlett, a member of the Public Accounts and Appropriations Committee (PAAC).

The horse-racing promoting company's acting CEO, Christopher Armond, had appeared before the PAAC to explain why a mandate to divest Caymanas Park was being swept under the carpet.

All the PAAC members, barring Bartlett, chief veterinarian at the Jamaica Racing Commission (JRC), who also practises at Caymanas Park, demanded of Armond reasons why the divestment process, according to Opposition member, Fitz Jackson, was seemingly "dead".

Jackson, in whose constituency Caymanas Park is located in Portmore, St Catherine, said during his tenure in government, a mandate was given that the racetrack be divested. He chided CTL's management for not having a timeline for the process.

Armond, responding to similar concerns from Government minister Michael Stern, said nobody at CTL was a member of the committee to oversee divestment. He explained that it was the finance ministry which should handle the process.

However, it was PAAC member Bartlett's call for a tote monopoly to make Caymanas Park more "attractive" for a potential buyer which has left UBA members fuming.

A tote monopoly would see bookmakers become agents of Caymanas Park, selling bets on behalf of the promoting company for a commission, instead of operating their own businesses for which they now pay CTL rights fees of 3.5 per cent of sales in addition to a gross-profit tax of 16.5 per cent to Government.

Bartlett also alluded that CTL's sales have fallen dramatically since June 1 when an amendment to the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Commission Act (BGLC) allowed bookmakers to sell alongside the promoting company.

Prior to June 1, the BGLC Act had stated that bookmakers had to close their doors an hour before the first event on days when local racing was being run at Caymanas Park - despite them having overseas racing as part of their product.

Responding to Bartlett's position, a UBA director, Xavier Chin, said CTL was, as usual, seeking someone to blame for its inefficiencies.

"How can they blame us for their sales?" Chin asked. "Since the Fair Trading Commission ruled on the issue, years before, we were selling past the noon closing time. What happened on June 1 was merely the amended changes to the BGLC Act.

"Why don't they cut the blame game? It's either you want to sell something or you don't. It's either it can be sold, or it can't," he added.

The darling of government

Chin said CTL has been treated as the darling of Government.

"Under Mr Chin See's board, CTL said it was not making any money because the levy we paid to government was not coming to them at all or in time to pay purses. It was CTL which took the decision to pay all the purses then in exchange for a tax break. They got their wish and were happy then, announcing that they made a profit. Yet, they are still blaming bookmakers," he said.

Responding to Bartlett's claims that bookmakers contribute "nothing" to the industry, yet were competing with CTL, the promoter, Chin said the thought was ludicrous.

"Do you call 3.5 per cent of our sales as rights fee 'nothing'?" he asked. "What about the 16.5 per cent gross profit? How can you say there is no contribution?"

Chin said he was surprised that CTL was called to the PAAC to say what was stalling divestment, yet it turned into a bookmakers' blame game.

The UBA director said bookmakers are synonymous with racing and proceeded to name Australia, South Africa and the United Kingdom as examples where the tote and bookies co-exist peacefully.

"A tote monopoly cannot work because the punter is desirous of a bookmaker's product. Unless we, promoter and bookmaker, work together, no wise investor would want to be involved in racing.

"Everywhere there is a bookmaker, there is a vibrant racing industry," he said. "France has a tote monopoly, do you hear anybody, apart from when they're running the Arc de Triomphe, talking about French racing?

"Even in North America, where they also have a tote monopoly, apart from Breeders' Cup Day and their Triple Crown, racing is not as popular as in the UK, South Africa or Australia," he pointed out.

Bigger problems

Chin said if Government agrees to a tote monopoly, it would signal even bigger problems for local racing.

"We cover a wider range of geographical areas. We supply a demand which is different than the promoter, but is required by the customer. We contribute, in taxes, three times that of CTL, the promoter, plus we pay a high rights fee for a lot less than what is given throughout the world.

"If CTL has a problem with the number of outlets we have, why don't they increase their number of OTBs?"

Chin, however, agreed that in other countries bookmakers make their own odds instead of depending on the tote to pay the same dividend as the promoting company.

"Yes, they do, but they also pay what the tote pays. They give an option. For us, it's not possible. Bookmakers are also fixed-odds makers but, until the product is cleaned up from corruption, we will not be able to do as they do in England," he said.