Scottsville 5 Place Investigation

R1,5 million on each.

Guarentees!Only possible answer

www.sportingpost.co.za/2013/02/17/frontpage/huge-place-pool/

Nico's comment is priceless ....."says no funny business".......... and then goes to great pains to point out the folly and futility of the wagers....................can only mean "funny business"
Can only think of a few reasons why anybody would wager R3m toget back a max of R3m ,R1.5m or nothing (R1.5m in this case)......undoubtedly a case for FICA investigation.

(interesting why they would route through SA...........lol)

(BTW well done to Vee Moodly on his action .............how soon before he gets the top job.......the only one who seems to have handle on the business!)

Einstein Wrote:

---

> R1,5 million on each.
>
> Guarentees!Only possible answer

This is the reasin I have been harping on about why we don't get a straight answer on co-mingled take-outs/commisions /guarantees.
Time for an official request for an enquiry from the gambling board.
It has never made sense..........this is just an extreme!

Someone needs to go to the gambling board.There is no transparency as to what deals are going on behind closed doors,and clearly we as the public don't get told as Phumelela knows there will be a backlash.The only way is to go to where they don't get to control the answers that we want.The gamble board must be able to get the answers,surely?

Einstein Wrote:

---

> Someone needs to go to the gambling board.There is
> no transparency as to what deals are going on
> behind closed doors,and clearly we as the public
> don't get told as Phumelela knows there will be a
> backlash.The only way is to go to where they don't
> get to control the answers that we want.The gamble
> board must be able to get the answers,surely?


Remember the very shrewd answer to the take-out question on the other thread!

rob faux Wrote:

---

> Nico's comment is priceless ....."says no funny
> business".......... and then goes to great pains
> to point out the folly and futility of the
> wagers....................can only mean "funny
> business"
> Can only think of a few reasons why anybody would
> wager R3m toget back a max of R3m ,R1.5m or
> nothing (R1.5m in this case)......undoubtedly a
> case for FICA investigation.
>
> (interesting why they would route through
> SA...........lol)
>
> (BTW well done to Vee Moodly on his action
> .............how soon before he gets the top
> job.......the only one who seems to have handle on
> the business!)

Rob did you read his reply on the other thread...:S

More from Vee

Moodley said that comingling and international betting partners was the future and he cited various jurisdictions that could contribute greatly to the betting experience and pool sizes locally.

Only benefits one party PHUMELELA, those that think it benefits the punter are being mislead by there propaganda...

Who audits Racing?

Time to make the punters aware of how they are betting into a pool that offers inconsistent returns.

For the life of me., I still cannot figure out how the payouts change, from race closed to final payouts.

Only conclusion I can arrive at is bets processed, while the race is on, or after the race is run, hence we see the payouts drop..

Computers progams, record every transaction, right down to the second.

For the sake of transparency, will P will share these transaction records ??????....... I think not

Some investigative journalism required perhaps.

The simple question is, when is the co-mingled money transacted into our pools or is ther ea delay: ie 20 seconds into the race? Doubt we will get a simple answer:S

Why that race VEE? Not any other? Ask yourself that question? Was the punter just sitting on his thumbs waiting to have a go? The rest of the day no major bets and then this Race? Strength to the Bookies and may the open bet grow.