Citizen Walsh - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK harm-plan harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



Citizen Walsh - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Citizen Walsh  (Read 138190 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7733
« 2012-Jul-26, 06:36 PM Reply #75 »
Why do some here think rebates are "evil"?

Most wholesale/manufacturering businesses pay "rebates" to their biggest customers.

In fact the big retailers, Woolies, Westfarmers, Metcash, Myer, DJ's etc insist on it.

As I very well remember saying:

No one cares about kickbacks to overseas criminals for Player versus House Casino junkets.

But Totes are Player versus Player!

Zeljko's obscene kickbacks not only adversely affect all other players, but also allow him to stitch up the scene so that he and only he is on a positive proposition, while everyone else is behind the eight-ball!

If this news ever hit the mainstream media and enough punters behaved rationally, Totes, Keno and Lotto industries would be destroyed!



Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8878
« 2012-Jul-26, 06:39 PM Reply #76 »
The ATO may look into taxing rebates however any income(or losses) from the actual betting have to be considered also.  They are a function of one another.

Example - Player A gambles $1million dollars for the year and recieves a 5% rebate.
              He loses $150,000 on his outlay and recieves $50,000 in kickbacks leaving a net loss of $100,000 for the year.
              I seriously doubt that the ATO can tax him on the $50,000 rebate on top of the $100,00 he is already in the red.
              He could argue that the rebate was simply a "discount".
  

The ATO approach might reason " if the rebates exceed the losses , the net profit be taxable", if losses exceed rebates ( as above ) I imagine they will backtrack and they will not be interested

If in the example above, if that punter had  lost $30,000 but received rebates of $50,000 he could taxed on $20,000,on the other hand  if he lost $60,000 and received $50,000 in rebates he will have to wear the $10,000  loss, and the ATO would not be interested.

Online JWesleyHarding

  • Group 1
  • User 231
  • Posts: 22733
« 2012-Jul-26, 06:44 PM Reply #77 »
Pardon my ignorance, but how do the rebates affect other punters?

Aren't they paid from the operators' funds?

If so, they might affect others if the rebates would otherwise be "given back" to the others by reduced rakes.

But that ain't gunna happen.

Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7733
« 2012-Jul-26, 06:54 PM Reply #78 »
Pardon my ignorance, but how do the rebates affect other punters?

Aren't they paid from the operators' funds?

If so, they might affect others if the rebates would otherwise be "given back" to the others by reduced rakes.

But that ain't gunna happen.

You are ignorant about the same atrocity I happen to see protruding like Tasmanian Devil testicles.

Zeljko can manipulate Exotic markets over the 3 Totes to guarantee a post kickback sub 100% market. For only him.

Leaving everyone betting into negative edge markets.





Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8878
« 2012-Jul-26, 06:57 PM Reply #79 »
JWH

I suggest you go back and read all the postings on this thread dating from December 2010 and the thread on "Zeljko Exposed" from February 2010,and you might have a better understanding of why rebates effect other punters.If after digesting all those postings, you still do not understand ,you should stick posting to the Soap Box and leave Racing to those who have some idea of punting.

Online JWesleyHarding

  • Group 1
  • User 231
  • Posts: 22733
« 2012-Jul-26, 07:13 PM Reply #80 »
Bubba, thanks, but no thanks.

But for the ignorant you'd have no one to talk to.

Imagine a world populated by only those who know as much as you do.

jfc

I take it from what you say, it's not the rebate money, per se, that causes the problem for other punters, but it is that he is betting so much to obtain the rebates that it distorts the market.

Is that so?

And it is the exotics where this activity has the major impact?

Plus those races that Vo used to highlight?

Does he really have a significant impact on the win/place totes on Saturday horseraces?

Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7733
« 2012-Jul-26, 07:36 PM Reply #81 »
Bubba, thanks, but no thanks.

But for the ignorant you'd have no one to talk to.

Imagine a world populated by only those who know as much as you do.

jfc

I take it from what you say, it's not the rebate money, per se, that causes the problem for other punters, but it is that he is betting so much to obtain the rebates that it distorts the market.

Is that so?

And it is the exotics where this activity has the major impact?

Plus those races that Vo used to highlight?

Does he really have a significant impact on the win/place totes on Saturday horseraces?

Yes, yes, yes and yes.

This is not some theoretical hallucination.

I've personally experienced both the pre-Zeljko and the Zeljko-unbound days.

I see the fiscal impact of his obscene deals on me on screens, as I type.

The AFR left little to the imagination when it noted that after Zeljko got sick of being banned by gambling operators, he simply colluded with his former foes to wipe out his fellow competitors.

Others beside me (GregA, DarkTarget and sorry for whoever I've omitted) have attested to the palpable detrimental impact he has had on Supertab returns.

Bubba is correct in that all this has already been canvassed here and subject to peer review.

Furthermore enough people here seem to be aware of Bubba's track record, so you'd be well advised to heed his constructive advice.




Online JWesleyHarding

  • Group 1
  • User 231
  • Posts: 22733
« 2012-Jul-26, 07:49 PM Reply #82 »
so you'd be well advised to heed his constructive advice.

Thanks for the considered reply.  emthup

As for Bubba's "constructive advice" for me to piss off, and only post to the Soap Box, I've done a quick calc and see that, on a percentage basis, he posts there more than I.

As for the relative wisdom in those posts, I'll leave that to others to judge  :biggrin:

Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7733
« 2012-Jul-27, 07:18 AM Reply #83 »
http://theconversation.edu.au/sex-death-and-taxes-how-should-the-tax-system-treat-mona-founder-david-walsh-8463

"It was March last year when I sat down in the chaotic New York office of a leading international tax attorney to conduct an interview for a book I was writing on the campaign against tax havens. "

Wouldn't it have simpler just to ask Walsh who is on record in Hansard as being very conversant with tax havens?

For Phrygian Attis' sake professor, this is how you spend our tax money!

We don't pay you to be a fawning art critic.

You job is to provide an objective review of the ATO implications in question.

It would also be interesting for you to opine on the plausibility of Walsh's spiel.

Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8878
« 2012-Jul-27, 10:03 AM Reply #84 »
I have downloaded this from the other forum and I consider it to be a succinct explanation of Walsh's situation...

'The Australian Taxation Office have every right to expect Tax to be paid on Income. It has been clearly stated by both TATTSBET and TABCORP that the REBATES Do Not come out of the TAB Pools.  They are taken from the TAB Profits that result from their  WAGERING business.

This is a business arrangement established under the TAB AFFILIATE Program, and is a COMMISSION paid to a select group of punters.These REBATES are clearly INCOME, as they are not a component of the bet wagered.

The BET is independently placed in the Wagering Pool that you and I bet into, according to the TAB's and is not impacted at all by rebates.

If it was a part of the wagering pool, then both you and I would also be receiving rebates, which we don''t.

It is a clear separate income stream, that all parties who receive should have to declare as Income and pay TAX on, as a TAXABLE EARNINGS, just like you and I do when we receive a dividend on our shares."


If the ATO pursue Walsh purely on the rebates received that negates losing punters claiming  their losses as tax offsets.
If those rebates were not paid by Tatts or Tabcorp they would be included in those company's profits and would be taxable, therefore  by giving /transferring the rebates to Walsh, surely they are transferring their tax liability onto the other party ( Walsh ) .
« Last Edit: 2012-Jul-27, 10:12 AM by Bubbasmith »

Offline ledgerr77

  • Group 2
  • User 279
  • Posts: 1060
« 2012-Jul-27, 10:23 AM Reply #85 »
 :clap2: amazing....must have been some interesting figures coming off tote tas...when this was occurring...terrible practise....i expect some Tab employees who approve such arrangements....would be open to all sorts of tastey treats from the bottom feeders... :no:

Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8878
« 2012-Jul-27, 10:28 AM Reply #86 »
:clap2: amazing....must have been some interesting figures coming off tote tas...when this was occurring...terrible practise....i expect some Tab employees who approve such arrangements....would be open to all sorts of tastey treats from the bottom feeders... :no:

There have been unsubstantiated rumours of a few tastey treats :shy: :shy:

Offline Authorized

  • Group 1
  • User 18
  • Posts: 31348
« 2012-Jul-27, 10:30 AM Reply #87 »
JWH

I suggest you go back and read all the postings on this thread dating from December 2010 and the thread on "Zeljko Exposed" from February 2010,and you might have a better understanding of why rebates effect other punters.If after digesting all those postings, you still do not understand ,you should stick posting to the Soap Box and leave Racing to those who have some idea of punting.

That's an interesting post. I have asked you and jfc before to name one horse that is running on a Saturday. I do not recall getting an answer.

Personally racing is about horses not numbers.

Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7733
« 2012-Jul-27, 10:34 AM Reply #88 »
That's an interesting post. I have asked you and jfc before to name one horse that is running on a Saturday. I do not recall getting an answer.

Personally racing is about horses not numbers.

Personally I consider numbers are all that count.

Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8878
« 2012-Jul-27, 10:44 AM Reply #89 »
Authorised

From my point of view racing has never been about horses but about betting. I would not know one horse from another, never have or never will. I never went to the races for 25 years full time to look at the horses, I went for the challenge of beating the odds. I have a mathematic background, and the form of horses, the trainers, the jockeys etc play no part in my betting, maybe that is why I am still in the game of punting on the odds and not punting on my opinion.

Hope that gives you a bit of insight of how one can approach racing from a different perspective.Each to their own.

Offline Authorized

  • Group 1
  • User 18
  • Posts: 31348
« 2012-Jul-27, 10:57 AM Reply #90 »
I appreciate the fact yourself and jfc are numbers men and it has clearly worked for you. I just took ( ever so slightly ) offence to the above comment.

Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7733
« 2012-Jul-27, 11:16 AM Reply #91 »
I appreciate the fact yourself and jfc are numbers men and it has clearly worked for you. I just took ( ever so slightly ) offence to the above comment.

Think about how hard it is for us to control our throbbing veins when the issues that have been done and dealt with over and over again resurface.

Personally, I'm under no illusions that retribution will not come for me, for raising stuff in the public interest that is on the public record.

Hundreds would know of the sociopathic antics of the Z Team, but prefer to let self-preservation and self-interest trump the altruistic end of the Edmund Burke maxim.


Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8878
« 2012-Jul-27, 12:56 PM Reply #92 »
I appreciate the fact yourself and jfc are numbers men and it has clearly worked for you. I just took ( ever so slightly ) offence to the above comment.

Authorised what comment, slightly offended you ?

Offline Authorized

  • Group 1
  • User 18
  • Posts: 31348
« 2012-Jul-27, 02:13 PM Reply #93 »
JWH

I suggest you go back and read all the postings on this thread dating from December 2010 and the thread on "Zeljko Exposed" from February 2010,and you might have a better understanding of why rebates effect other punters.If after digesting all those postings, you still do not understand ,you should stick posting to the Soap Box and leave Racing to those who have some idea of punting.

It's nothing really.

Offline Dark Target

  • Class6
  • User 1667
  • Posts: 90
« 2012-Jul-27, 04:04 PM Reply #94 »
Alan Woods boasted he only knew the name of one horse from his time betting in Hong Kong, and that was only because of the enormous overlay he got on it.

I could barely tell you the name of one runner in the market that I bet in.

Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8878
« 2012-Jul-27, 06:11 PM Reply #95 »
Alan Woods boasted he only knew the name of one horse from his time betting in Hong Kong, and that was only because of the enormous overlay he got on it.

I could barely tell you the name of one runner in the market that I bet in.

ditto.

Online jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7733
« 2012-Jul-28, 06:03 AM Reply #96 »
http://afr.com/p/national/how_ex_wives_club_nailed_david_walsh_FfWQPtD3QkKTDqBH53eA0K

New hard to find article with eye-catching title.

I'll need to study properly before commenting.

And here's an intriguing have to pay one.

http://afr.com/p/national/walsh_journey_from_dog_track_to_lEEAMNiknvNpYBOiDFH8BJ

Guess I'm off for a bitterly cold walk to the newsagent.

Offline fours

  • Group 1
  • User 704
  • Posts: 10093
« 2012-Jul-28, 08:01 AM Reply #97 »
jfc,

Thats a quality peice of journalism from Hannah.

jfc I have a job for you suited to your numbers skills which may require a little computing nouse as well... if you are interested.

It is my view that the absolute second last and absolute last in the betting is over represented in the exotics due to market maniplation. That is somethig that should be say 8th in the market order, in a 12 horse field, is deliberately pushed out to 11th and or 12th position.

Now of course in smaller mid week pools keeping a horse at 40/1 plus takes relatively little money and dutch book rebaters will get much of this money back anyway. However the real prize, the cream, comes from the dramatically boosted exotic returns when these horses surprise most punters but not some!

I suggest if I am right than this can be statistically proven. Should be a walk in the park for you!

Fours
« Last Edit: 2012-Jul-28, 08:49 AM by fours »

Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8878
« 2012-Jul-28, 10:25 AM Reply #98 »
Fours

You are correct , to some degree, but you would be well aware, the odds of long priced runners, are far less about running the drum once short priced runners finish first & second.

Offline innerwiz

  • Class 4
  • User 972
  • Posts: 42
« 2012-Jul-28, 10:38 AM Reply #99 »
Tall Poppy Syndrome Gone Wild!

These guys have pulled off what every poster on this forum dreams of.  What every punter dreams of becoming when they place their bets.  

And all we have here is snivelling, jealous whinging from those that want but could never do.

JFC, now that their syndicate has had their accounts seized and are out of the market, what's stopping you using that vast intellect of yours to beat the races now?

Hell, the devil is out of the game, he was the reason you weren't winning.  What's stopping you now?  You must be pulling those riches in.

And yes, you better pay your TAX bill on those winnings and your admitted past winnings or else YOU TOO are guilty of (paraquote) "Depriving hospitals, schools, and children from their deserved share".

Pathetic.



BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap