View Full Version : YES!!!!EXCHANGE BETTING IN NJ
NY BRED
11-24-2010, 09:26 PM
My "FRIEND" , MR. C aka THE GUV has agreed to permit Exchang betting
New Yersey :) according to TVG.
Does this mean TVG/Betfair enters the state of NJ?
Is this a guise to show AC doesn't control Mr. C?
Should I start searching vulnerable favs at CD/Parx/FL/ and of course AQUI??
The possibilities are endless:jump: :rolleyes: :jump:
horses4courses
11-24-2010, 09:34 PM
Somehow, I see this being held up in the courts.
If this variation on bookmaking makes it out of there eventually, and is declared legal, I will be pleasantly surprised.
In the meantime, lawyers should be getting another payday.
If it ever gets off the ground, it sounds like it will be restricted to NJ residents wagering within NJ and might just be restricted to NJ races . That doesn't sound like a good recipe for a viable exchange.
If that is the case, there is no interstate activity for any of the existing federal laws to apply that I am aware of. If there are any contradictory existing state laws, they could probably be amended quite easily since the development of an exchange has political support of the state level.
Charlie D
11-25-2010, 05:14 AM
Betfair has argued that the practice is a new form of parimutuel wagering, but critics have said that the practice fits the legal definition of bookmaking because the customer sets the odds, not the distribution of money within a pool.
https://www.drf.com/news/new-jersey-moves-closer-allowing-exchange-betting
Interesting argument from critics, but Betfair are correct in stating it is a new form of parimutuel wagering.The distribution of exchange customers money (or Weight of Money) set the odds, just as they do in parimutuel pools.
xfile
11-25-2010, 08:20 AM
What website would all of you recommend for Exchange betting through your own experience? Not many choices.
horses4courses
11-25-2010, 08:49 AM
https://www.drf.com/news/new-jersey-moves-closer-allowing-exchange-betting
Interesting argument from critics, but Betfair are correct in stating it is a new form of parimutuel wagering.The distribution of exchange customers money (or Weight of Money) set the odds, just as they do in parimutuel pools.
How can you say that, Charlie?
If exchange wagering is comparable to pari-mutuel wagering, which I don't believe, how is it any different to a ring of bookmakers setting the odds at a UK/Irish racecourse? It is supply and demand in it's simplest form.
Exchange wagering is more like bookmaking, rather than pari-mutuel wagering, because the individual has control over the odds at which they transact.
You are locked-in to a fixed price, which does not fluctuate after the bet has been made. Surely, that cannot be compared to the pari-mutuel wagering experience?
Of course, odds will be affected by the group of bettors wishing to wager into a race, but to say that they influence the odds as much as they do in a tote pool is folly.
Having stated my case on why I believe that exchange betting is another form of bookmaking, I should expand on this. Exchange betting would be the most innovative and exciting form of wagering within the US racing industry in modern times. It has, however, a long way to go before it becomes legal.
Charlie D
11-25-2010, 10:00 AM
OK horses4courses, Tell my why as an exchange customer it was decided you do not need a bookmaking licence or have to contribute to the Levy fund if exchange wagering is bookmaking.
DeanT
11-25-2010, 10:09 AM
I always have a bit of a chuckle regarding bookmaking versus trading. Even in places like the UK and others where betting is a part of legal life and has been for years, the argument crops up.
I can log in right now and put a ten share bid on Intel at $x and someone sitting at her home in Iowa can match me. When INTC goes down a dollar she is a genius and a sharp trader.
I can log in right now and put a $10 bid on the third at Taunton and someone from Sweden can put an offer in and lay the horse for $10 and match me. If the horse loses the Swedish lady is a bookmaker.
:)
Charlie D
11-25-2010, 10:18 AM
:ThmbUp: Dean
The exchange model is derived from the Trading Model and not the bookmaking model.
In Trading, you are gambling your hard earned and why this is seen different to other forms of gambling in places like US is beyond me tbh.
horses4courses
11-25-2010, 11:39 AM
OK horses4courses, Tell my why as an exchange customer it was decided you do not need a bookmaking licence or have to contribute to the Levy fund if exchange wagering is bookmaking.
For the same reason that you do not need to have a business license to buy and sell on E-Bay, or a stock broker's license to buy and sell shares online.
That doesn't mean they are not methods of trading, or that exchange wagering is not bookmaking.
Charlie D
11-25-2010, 12:01 PM
The bookmakers in UK tried their best to show exchange wagering was bookmaking, they failed for one reason and that is, exchange wagering is not considered bookmaking.
You may think it is bookmaking, but the above shows you to be wrong, as it did those bookmakers who fought the good fight and lost.
Accept this and move on imho just like the UK books have done.
horses4courses
11-25-2010, 07:06 PM
The bookmakers in UK tried their best to show exchange wagering was bookmaking, they failed for one reason and that is, exchange wagering is not considered bookmaking.
You may think it is bookmaking, but the above shows you to be wrong, as it did those bookmakers who fought the good fight and lost.
Accept this and move on imho just like the UK books have done.
I don't accept what you say - and I doubt that legal authorities in the US will, either.
I have been a bookmaker, on both sides of the Atlantic, for over 20 years.
The law in the US makes this a totally different situation than in the UK. That is because bookmaking is illegal in the US.
If it were legal, as in UK, the difference between exchange wagering and bookmaking would be sufficient to keep them separate entities, as they are in the UK. As that is not the case here, the parallels are such as to render exchange wagering on horse racing (and all sporting events) illegal.
States such as NJ and Cal will do their best to introduce it.
They are likely to run into roadblocks in the courts.
Stay tuned!
Charlie D
11-25-2010, 07:30 PM
OK so you do not accept the UK/Ire books argument and your argument was thrown in the trash can.
The laws may be different, but they don't seem to be stopping exchange wagering coming to NJ and they may not stop it in other states in the future.
Only the idiots and those protecting the status quo would want to block a new form of Parimutuel wagering or exchange Trading and those people may not be as influential as they may think they are ithis instance.
Horses4courses, if NJ opens an exchange that can only be used by NJ residents that are physically located in NJ, please tell me what federal gambling law that violates. I don't purport to be an expert on gambling law, but I am guessing you are not either. However, you seem to be quite confident that an intrastate exchange definitely violates some federal law. I would like to know which one and how.
horses4courses
11-26-2010, 08:35 AM
Horses4courses, if NJ opens an exchange that can only be used by NJ residents that are physically located in NJ, please tell me what federal gambling law that violates. I don't purport to be an expert on gambling law, but I am guessing you are not either. However, you seem to be quite confident that an intrastate exchange definitely violates some federal law. I would like to know which one and how.
You guessed right, Fox. I am no legal expert.
Just many years of frustration with US government's ambivalence towards gambling - especially sports wagering.
All they have to stall it with is the ever-popular 1961 Wire Act.
It is the penicillin for all things bookmaking in this country.
It's about time they added to it, so that they can apply it in the 21st century, but it has done the trick for 50 years.
http://www.gambling-law-us.com/Federal-Laws/wire-act.htm
Bennie
11-26-2010, 08:59 AM
Being from NJ it would be interesting if they added this to our menu of wagers but my question would be what would the states' "VIG" be on these wagers?
horses4courses
11-26-2010, 10:24 AM
Being from NJ it would be interesting if they added this to our menu of wagers but my question would be what would the states' "VIG" be on these wagers?
According to recent articles, NJ wants 50% of the exchange operator's net profits to go to overnight purses. Their reasoning, I'm guessing, is that what is good for racing is ultimately good for NJ, through a rise in handle within a healthier industry.
A rise in betting handle, though, is no given. It has worked in the short term for Monmouth Park, due mainly to wagers coming from other states. Their product, in order to keep it's edge, has to maintain purses at their current high levels.
You guessed right, Fox. I am no legal expert.
Just many years of frustration with US government's ambivalence towards gambling - especially sports wagering.
All they have to stall it with is the ever-popular 1961 Wire Act.
It is the penicillin for all things bookmaking in this country.
It's about time they added to it, so that they can apply it in the 21st century, but it has done the trick for 50 years.
http://www.gambling-law-us.com/Federal-Laws/wire-act.htm
From the link you posted:
In order to prove a prima facie case, the government must establish that:
1. The person was "engaged in the business of betting or wagering"
2. (compared with a casual bettor);
3. The person transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce:
bets or wagers, information assisting in the placement of bets or wagers, or
a communication that entitled the recipient to receive money or credit as a result of a bet or wager;
4. The person used a " wire communication facility;" and
5. The person knowingly used a wire communication facility to engage in one of the three prohibited forms of transmissions.
I am not seeing how a NJ based exchange used by those physically in NJ clearly violates requirement 3.
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.