• 7games the game android
• novibet sign up offer
• luva bet 200 de bonus
• cassino nos estados unidos
• placar apostas de futebol
• app bet mobile

Code: http://onthepunt.au/betting-news/item/607-bet365-hauled-before-regulator.html

We take it with our trousers down, but the Australians drink Fosters. They're real men!The Northern Territory Racing Commission ♠ (NTRC) appear to have taken the first step in an attempt to rein in UK entrant Bet365 and their controversial ♠ risk management practises.Responding to a series of questions posed by, NTRC Chairman Richard O'Sullivan said that the commission has "invited ♠ a representative of Bet365 to the next Racing Commission meeting in Darwin to fully explain its risk management practices". This ♠ has come about due to a "considerable number of complaints .. to the practices of Bet365."The giant privately-owned firm have ♠ adopted a strict policy since opening up shop in Australia – one that appears to simply not tolerate winning clients. ♠ Punters have often expressed outrage in online forums and on social media.Bet365 management use phrases such as "due to the ♠ nature of your business" and deeming an account to be "uneconomical" as justification for closing accounts or restricted punters to ♠ miniscule wagers. They have also removed bonus bet winnings from accounts that have had restrictions subsequently placed upon them. Actions ♠ like this have never been seen in Australia.The broader issue – fairness to puntersAfter consultation with bookmakers, the NTRC recently ♠ removed the "Minimum Bet Rule" which required licensees to bet punters to win a minimum amount -R$1000 on major race ♠ meetings for example. They quietly posted a somewhat confusing media release regarding the subject on August 16.The NTRC stated that ♠ the min bet rule was brought in because bookies were often betting punters to win minuscule amounts. But then, due ♠ to "technical realities of internet operations", bookmakers simply closed accounts."Since removing the rule, the Commission continues to be disappointed over ♠ licensed bookmakers offering to accept minimum wagers or continuation of the practise of closure of accounts," O'Sullivan told. Well what ♠ did he expect would happen?Let's remember that the NTRC has as one of its regulatory objectives:"to promote fairness in the ♠ delivery of betting services to the public"As I've stated here before, there is nothing fair about bookies betting only losing ♠ clients. The NTRC even suggest that punters who get banned or cut back should wager into the pari-mutuel pool. Are ♠ these guys serious?I'm not pretending that there is an easy solution, but how can a regulator charged with promoting "fairness" ♠ totally dump a rule that was specifically designed to introduce fairness? And do so when a couple of foreign-owned corporates ♠ start whinging? Where's the consultation with stakeholders (i.e. the tax-paying punters)?Maybe one solution could be to lower the minimum bet ♠ amount to winR$500. That would surely be reasonable. If bookmakers can't make a profit by betting winners to winR$500 and ♠ losers to whatever they like, then perhaps they don't deserve to be in business.Moving forward, the NTRC offer the following: ♠ "It is the belief of the Racing Commission that going forward a commercially realistic balance with respect to alternative available ♠ wagering product will be struck to the benefit of the broader gambling public."It's fine to put that in writing, but ♠ the NTRC have simply failed to protect the interests of the punter and there is little evidence to say that ♠ they intend on doing so in the future, despite what their regulatory objectives may say.It's hard to see how the ♠ NT Racing Minister can have any confidence in the NTRC at all. But then again, he'd be from a Government ♠ that came away with justR$2.5 million in tax fromR$6 billion in bookmaker turnover last financial year. Enough said."your account is ♠ uneconomical"in other words..."we only want losing accounts, Ta very much"