Poll: Should racing have accepted Coral's ABP offer?

The row between the bookmaking industry and British Racing took another turn last week after the sport rejected Coral’s offer to contribute 7.5% of all UK racing profits to the sport.

The bitter dispute between the two parties is the result of British Racing’s decision to implement its Authorised Betting Partner (ABP) scheme – designed to ensure operators make a “fair contribution” to the sport in respect of their growing digital businesses.

At present bookmakers make a 10.75% contribution based on their land-based UK racing profits, however, growth in digital sales has seen the sport move to grab a slice of online profits, which aren’t currently subject to a levy.

The ABP scheme requires operators to contribute 7.5% of digital profits to become a member, with non-members prevented from striking commercial deals with participating racecourses.

Writing in the Racing Post last week, Gala Coral CEO Carl Leaver branded the ABP programme as “draconian” and “unsustainable”, and argued that his firm’s racing-related costs were going up while the profitability of the sport was in decline.

At the same time, Leaver said Coral would be willing to pay a 7.5% levy, so long as this was applied to both its land-based and online profits – an offer backed by potential merger partner Ladbrokes.

However, British Racing rejected the proposal, describing the blended rate as “not a realistic starting point for negotiations”.

The sport said the offer would result in racing receiving less money from bookmakers than at present, although it could be argued the transfer of business from retail to online would see contributions rise in the longer-term.

With this in mind, this week’s eGaming Review poll wants to know whether you believe British Racing should have accepted Coral’s 7.5% blended rate offer, or whether it is right to call the bookmaker’s bluff and hold out for an improved deal.

Have your say on the right-hand side of the page.