{"id":6671,"date":"2012-07-20T11:51:27","date_gmt":"2012-07-20T10:51:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.betangel.com\/blog_wp\/?p=6671"},"modified":"2012-09-08T09:26:57","modified_gmt":"2012-09-08T08:26:57","slug":"judicial-review-rules-in-favour-of-betfair","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.betfairtradingblog.com\/blog_wp\/2012\/07\/20\/judicial-review-rules-in-favour-of-betfair\/","title":{"rendered":"Judicial Review rules in favour of Betfair"},"content":{"rendered":"

Full press release here: –<\/p>\n

https:\/\/corporate.betfair.com\/media\/press-releases\/2012.aspx<\/a><\/p>\n

Basically William Hill have lost their case, which was arguing that an undefined group of Betfair customers should paying levy on profits. This premise carefully ignored the fact that Betfair customers already pay levy via Betfair by proxy and brushed over a number of other contradictory issues. From my view point and that of the friend of mine who is in the legal profession, it looked more like a competitive action than a legal one. When Betfair made an announcement of funding for racing recently, that isolated William Hill even further.<\/p>\n

Hopefully racing can get on with the business of winning new, younger, technology savy customers, rather than trying to stop emergent technologies. That will ensure interest in racing continues long into the future.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

<\/path><\/svg><\/i> \"Loading\"<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n\n
Tweet<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Full press release here: – https:\/\/corporate.betfair.com\/media\/press-releases\/2012.aspx Basically William Hill have lost their case, which was arguing that an undefined group of Betfair customers should paying levy on profits. This premise carefully ignored the fact that Betfair customers already pay levy via Betfair by proxy and brushed over a number of other contradictory issues. From my […]<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

<\/path><\/svg><\/i> \"Loading\"<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1364,1465],"tags":[18,1582,1583,62],"class_list":["post-6671","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-betfair_trading_betting","category-industry-news","tag-betfair","tag-high-court","tag-judicial-review","tag-william-hill"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.betfairtradingblog.com\/blog_wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6671"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.betfairtradingblog.com\/blog_wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.betfairtradingblog.com\/blog_wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.betfairtradingblog.com\/blog_wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.betfairtradingblog.com\/blog_wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6671"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.betfairtradingblog.com\/blog_wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6671\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6673,"href":"https:\/\/www.betfairtradingblog.com\/blog_wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6671\/revisions\/6673"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.betfairtradingblog.com\/blog_wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6671"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.betfairtradingblog.com\/blog_wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6671"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.betfairtradingblog.com\/blog_wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6671"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}