One of the world’s biggest gambling companies has abandoned Australia’s peak lobbying group, just as the federal government prepares to announce tougher restrictions on betting ads.
Policy analysts believe Entain’s withdrawal from the Responsible Wagering Australia (RWA) group highlights how bookmakers would be disproportionately affected if the government restricts betting ads, as recommended by a parliamentary inquiry.
Entain – the parent company for the Ladbrokes and Neds – has confirmed it will withdraw in the coming months. RWA represents Sportbet, Bet365, Pointsbet and Unibet. Tabcorp and several smaller online gambling companies are not members.
Crossbench MPs urging the government to announce a ban – a position also held by some government MPs – have suggested Entain’s move indicated “some gambling companies are starting to realise the writing is on the wall”.
Entain’s withdrawal has been described as a commercial decision by many sources, but the company has acknowledged entrenched differences with Sportsbet on the issue of gambling advertising.
The company, which is headquartered in the Isle of Man, has rejected claims it urged Sportsbet to rein in gambling ads during football matches.
Sportbet, which is the largest online operator in Australia, has concentrated its advertising and business model on major sporting codes. The company is the AFL’s official wagering partner and its multi-bet options have been promoted by the league, despite poor outcomes and strong criticism.
Entain has announced it would no longer promote its brand on the jerseys of major sporting teams. It has instead prioritised the racing market.
Last year, Entain wrote to racing organisations to share its modelling on the effect of advertising restrictions. Those figures were used by clubs to urge their members to lobby ministers, arguing an ad ban would result in dogs suffering and animal welfare programs closing.
Sportsbet and the RWA were contacted for comment.
Freedom of information documents obtained by independent MP Kate Chaney, who was a member of the inquiry led by the late Labor MP Peta Murphy, show Sportsbet and Entain independently secured meetings with the communication minister’s staff to provide their feedback on advertising, separate to RWA’s engagement.
“Some gambling companies are starting to realise the writing is on the wall,” Chaney said. “The community wants a ban on online gambling ads and the government has the opportunity to show it will listen.”
Charles Livingston, a gambling expert at Monash university, said Entain and Sportsbet were fierce competitors and while they may agreed on many issues, it was obvious they would never agree on an issue like advertising.
“It is in Sportbet’s interest to suppress advertising to a certain extent as they already have the big customer base,” Livingston said. “They don’t need to give a leg up to others that want more advertising.
“Some firms are happy enough with greater restrictions because they’ve already got a solid market and everyone knows who they are. There are others that desperately need advertising to build up a customer base.”
Kate Griffiths, a governance researcher at the Grattan Institute, said Entain’s withdrawal was unlikely to reduce the influence of gambling companies and called for restrictions on political donations.
“The gambling industry punches above its weight in trying to influence Australian politics,” Griffith said. “Now online gambling is in the hot seat, we’re seeing the same playbook: well-timed donations, overblown claims about community benefits and heightened lobbying activity.
“It doesn’t matter whether it’s industry groups or individual companies seeking to influence government. The risk is the same: that the voices of industry are amplified above those of the community – the people being affected by gambling harms.”
The independent MP Rebekha Sharkie, who is co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Gambling Harm Reduction, said she was not surprised to see the split given their profits. She accused the government of sitting on Murphy’s report, saying the delay was “unacceptable”.
