[Scorpion]

[Scorpion]

http://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics...issuerCode=BCL

Announcements released by BCL

They are in pdf format

[muskie1]

So what does this mean? It could mean were getting stiffed by betcorp! As I see it we wont see our $

[isetcap]

So essentially WWTS has done exactly what BoS did? I'm sure the "intentions" of this 'A+' rated book were much more lofty than those of the criminal minds at BoS.

[Dark Horse]

Their 'MNF guess the score' contest just went from a $5000 to a $500 prize. Still with this small print: "In the case of multiple weekly winners, prize money will be split evenly among all winners."

[Yoshi]

Many posters said months ago this book is going downhill. And SBR was sitting on the A+...its a small tragedy.

[aggie]

many, many players also talk about their experience with VIP and what happens...?

[Yoshi]

Exactly...A+ should mean that the player NEVER gets dicked around if he didnt do something wrong, and there have been reports of WWTS slow-paying and sending players through hassels to get their money often enough. Its simply disappointing, and it hurts my trust in SBR, why not listen more to the players?

[SBR_John]

If you think SBR is going to be correct 100% of the time with all 732 ratings you will certainly be dissapointed. Even Standard and Poors with a staff of 30 working solely on Enron rated them an A- shortly before their collapse.

Some say WWTS had gone down but you hear every book has gone down from time to time from posters. It's not a perfect science but I think Bill and his staff do an incredible job with the ratings.

[Yoshi]

John this has nothing to do with 700+ ratings, its about the A ratings. WWTS was listed the BEST OF THE BEST, besides Pinnacle the Greek, CRIS etc.

Now please tell me, what is wrong with this picture?
The same thing is still going on btw, with VIP...

Btw i praise SBR whenever iam asked, and will continue to do so - but that doesnt stop me from saying out loud if something is just plain wrong.

[SBR_John]

So what you are saying is that in your opinion WWTS did not belong in that group. Its a bit of Monday Morning QB. If we knew the bill would pass and knew that the publicly traded companies were going to run we would have changed their ratings prior.

And what is the ect? Are you of the opinion that all of the small player books should not be rated A+? Many folks said Bet365 should not have been A+ and now we get a lot of email asking us how players can sneak in there. How about Bodog which currently has Arz at +14 setting up a great middle. And VIP? This is another great book that has a huge following.

I respect your opinion and even appreciate you taking the time to post your critiques. WWTS was a great book and deserved their rating with the facts we knew and the player feedback we constantly received on them. When those facts changed they were downgraded.

If you look at our top books they have things in common: They have been in business a very long time, they are big and they have good management. You may like smaller and newer books or selected A+ books.

[Yoshi]

Thanks for taking time to answer me John, but thats not exactly what i ment. I was thinking WWTS doesnt belong to that group way before that bill passed.
And my concerns werent about them being traded publicly, i just had a bad feeling about the whole betcorp company. Also i have heared of way too many payout complains, and other stuff that just doesnt fit to an A+ book.

Yes they have been in business a long time, but if I would hear about lets say Pinnacle slow-paying suddenly, i would also be worried. Because noone would expect that.
Just like noone who signs up at WWTS and checks the SBR ratings would expect it. But it happened, and it happened months ago already.

[JoshW]

Total BS from WWTS. In what world is this the right way to handle things.

[Sam Odom]

laker, just total BS, something a corperation has no problem with UNLIKE a real bookie

[Lucas]

If we knew the bill would pass and knew that the publicly traded companies were going to run we would have changed their ratings prior.

I do not want to say I was right, you were wrong. I believe you do the best. At least you have good forum. But I agree with Yoshi - you should pay more attention to posters. I must thank them very much because if I believed only the rating I would have slept much worse.

This is my post few days ago. I did not get response from SBR. It was clear that all publicly traded companies carry extra risk.

And what about VIP?
I agree with you John, but VIP is the only one A+ which is listed on stock exchange, isn´t it?
Carry those tradeable companies some extra risk?

[isetcap]

Lucas, you need to be posting more often.

[tacomax]

Lucas, you need to be posting more often.

You only want to see more of his pictures.

[aceking]

Looks like another BOS .

If nobody gets paid this week , then its all over.

[ourbet]

This is my post few days ago. I did not get response from SBR.

Probably because SBR is cliquy Lucas. I agree with isetcap btw, you should post more often and I thank you for posting support of Yoshi, who IMHO absolutely nails his point home.

Why stop at C- btw SBR when there are D's and F's for sportsbooks like this? IMHO you should make Betcorp an F rated set of books until they make good on their US client base, for; as I've written before, you can always upgrade later-on. An F rating IMHO would send prospective non-US clients a powerful message, which taking into account SBR's reputation in this industry, would not be lost on Betcorp!

[pags11]

I just think SBR might want to listen to more of the experienced guys here in regards to ratings...we have been asking for at least a A or A- rating for WWTS for the last 6 months to a year...especially since SBR was aware WWTS was having some financial issues (although still paying out all of their customers)...it doesn't look as bad when something like this happens to an A- to B+ book, but it does look bad when the book's an A+...

[marc]

If i'm reading the statement correctly, it sound slike US players will be stifffed for at least 45 days. My impression from the letter is that US accounts will be frozen until the sale is complete. But the sale can't be complete until a sharholder vot. In the US, shareholders are entitled to 20 business days. So first the board has to agree to a deal, whihc sound like it will take at least 10 days. Then they have to print up the proxy statements, which is another few days. Then they have to mail out the proxies, and then give the shareholders 20 business days. So we are talking a month and a half.

If any compnay was going to screw over thier players, I would have thought it would be Sportingbet, I wouldn't have thought it would be WWTS. MAybe we need to threaten a lawsuit against Betcorp and thier directors in order to gert them to free up our cash.

[tennis28]

If there is this minimum 20 day grace period before shareholders vote, how was the sportingbet sale complete so quickly. Sportingbet is also public and sold off their US-facing businesses, and those businesses are currently payout out to my knowledge.

[Lucas]

If there is this minimum 20 day grace period before shareholders vote, how was the sportingbet sale complete so quickly. Sportingbet is also public and sold off their US-facing businesses, and those businesses are currently payout out to my knowledge.

Yep. That is another problem, I posted it here before. I think it is possible that the rapidly privatized companies will have law problems with minority shareholders so betting there constitutes added risk in future.

Although the approach of Betcorp to players was awful, their approach to shareholders is much better IMO. That is not bad news; that is hope.

But I don not know anything about their investors - it is possible the situation of SBT and VIP is different from WWTS.

[marc]

Generally speaking, companies don't require shareholder approval to sell off a division of thier compnay. But when the valuse of that division exceeds a certain threshold of the companies value, shareholder approval is required. In this case we have a unique situation, where prior to the new law, the division was generating 80% of the comapnies revenue. But after the law passed, the division had to be shut down. Perhaps SPortingbet and VIP's legal team decided that because the us facing operations had to be shut down, the sale no longer required shareholder approval.

Does anyone know if Antigua has any rules. This is just another example of Antigua proving that their regualtions mean absolutely nothing.

[Lucas]

Generally speaking, companies don't require shareholder approval to sell off a division of thier compnay. But when the valuse of that division exceeds a certain threshold of the companies value, shareholder approval is required. In this case we have a unique situation, where prior to the new law, the division was generating 80% of the comapnies revenue. But after the law passed, the division had to be shut down. Perhaps SPortingbet and VIP's legal team decided that because the us facing operations had to be shut down, the sale no longer required shareholder approval.

Yes and that is the problem. The US divisions have for sure no zero or 1USD value. They will generate profits under new owners. Although betting in USA is illegal, there is nothing bad to provide betting for US customers from UK (yes it is risky because of the DOJ maddness, but that is not the point). Part of the company must be sold at the real value, unless it is called "tunelling" which is fraud. We will see...

[pags11]

damn, this isn't good at all...