One of the things that constantly gets rolled out when discussions of Affordability Checks take place is that they are causing punters to move to the dangerous mysterious world of the Black Betting Markets. It’s tough to know where to start with the ‘Black Market’ because I struggle to even define what it is. Which companies would be classified as part of the Black Market? Are we saying that all third party agents/brokers are part of the Black Market? Non GC bookies? Whats App brokers?
Given the propensity of big betting syndicates and pros to use these types of products to enable them to get on, then any numbers relating to Black Markets are potentially misleading at best. If you strip out these bets then the picture would be wildly different. Who knows what is being included in the Black Market. Very vague. I have used brokers at various points but it never felt like the Black Market that is talked about. My experience is limited though so I asked about. I don’t know any casual punter who uses a BM site fwiw.
The overwhelming feedback I got was that in the UK and Horse Racing, the Black Market simply referred to third party brokers who were able to get bets on for said individuals. It was usually via services such as What’s App. None of them have had issues getting paid etc. There is an interesting element to this in that those advocating the ‘Affordability Checks cause people to use the Black Market’ rhetoric should be aware of. These are all professional punters fwiw. The reason every single one of them is using the Black Market has nothing to do with Affordability Checks. It is because they are restricted with every bookmaker and with Betfair liquidity on the wane if they want access to the bookmaker prices/get on then they have to use these operators.
These What’s App operators have a huge networks of bookmaker accounts/shop runners where they are supposed to be hedging the bets. I am sure everyone will remember Bet Butler and how that ended up turning out. As a general rule if someone is banned from a bookmaker because of Affordability Checks why wouldn’t they just make their way to another bookmaker. Just move along the Oddschecker matrix. That is unless of course they have been restricted at all the others.
The exception to this rule is obviously if you are restricted at Betfair. Your options become pretty limited, pretty quickly. I know Joe Beevers was affected by this recently and I am sure there are a multitude of other examples. Far from ideal and disastrous for some. If someone is banned from all bookmakers because of Affordability Checks then something pretty serious must be flagging. If it is a combination of Affordability Checks and restrictions lets be honest about that. It’s not just Affordability Checks as it is currently portrayed. I remain absolutely and utterly sceptical that the driver of the Black Market is affordability checks and not account restrictions. It’s also why the Gambling Commission need to do a better job of vetting the smaller bookmakers that a site like Oddschecker would use.
Let’s look at the RP story today about Bernard Cullinane. He is someone who clearly has good contacts within the Racing industry. He says he likes to place serious bets. His circle of friends are all the same. Are we really believing he has no access to accounts because of Affordability Checks and not just normal account restrictions/slightly onerous KYC checks. His friends who are probably betting on the same information have suffered something similar. It’s a broken industry. The first paragraph,
‘The bloodstock agent behind Princess Zoe, a self-described serious bettor, has revealed he and dozens of fellow big punters in his circle have already been driven to black market bookmakers by draconian affordability and source-of-funds checks.’
Maybe I am doing both him and the Racing Post a huge disservice. Maybe I am just calling bulls**t on another fluff piece by the RP to try and big up the threat of the ‘Black Market’. Who does it benefit? Their main revenue drivers of course. The bookmakers. When I see account restrictions criticised as vociferously as affordability checks currently are, then I will change my mind. It simply doesn’t make any logical sense that it is affordability checks that are the sole driver of punters to the Black Market.
At the moment it is really just a case of seeing which MP or prominent pro bookmaker group is saying this stuff. Which questionable survey. All of them incentivised to do so. Money talks. They have no shame. I don’t think they even realise what they are saying half the time.
I would love to see the hard data between accounts that have been stake factored and accounts restricted because of affordability issues. I am assuming it is at least 90/10 in favour of Affordability Checks the way the issue is being portrayed.
I think Affordability Checks are a nonsense and have said that before. They are a huge potential issue. If you want to stop them coming in then surely a better argument can be presented. Not this wishy washy bulls**t about the Black Market and and this horrendous threat it poses.
ProPunting 