Ive read through this thread and I mostly see OP posting random letters, am I right in thinking the original posts have been edited out ?
I'm afraid so, yes. For whatever reason, he worked through the thread and deleted all his posts, substituting a single letter in each case. So the thread was destroyed by a piece of vandalism on the OP's part. To be fair to him, he later apologised, saying he had a cob on when he did it.
He told me he was closing his account, & sought my help in doing it. I explained the drill, helpfully & politely. The next time I looked, he had deleted all his posts & was regged for 4 upcoming Freerolls.
So I mentioned that he was bellyaching about Sky Poker & the RNG, asking for help closing his account - but was now regging for Freerolls left right & centre, which struck me as a bit, well, you know, odd. So he got all defensive again & said he had every right so to do.
Then it became clear that the incidents he was claiming did not happen 4 times, they happened twice.
It was then that he decided to destroy all the evidence by deleting his posts. Except the Forum "back-end" retained them all........
Absurd, absurder, and absurderer.
The shame is that when the new forum started, people were not able to edit aged posts, but many people, quite reasonably, complained. So I went on hands and knees to the Sky Techs and implored them to reinstate editing abilities, which they did, but I promised them it would not be abused. So the thread did me no favours with the Suits.
The poker table chat boxes have been full of ironic references to this thread for the last 3 or 4 days, everyone whimsically blaming the RNG which is, seemingly, getting worse, or better.
Last night, @dragon1964 topped the lot though. I did not C & P the chat, but this was the gist of it;
Hey Guys, quick heads up for you. The RNG is terribly - definitely getting worse - on mobile, but works much better on the laptop.
Thanks for taking the trouble again to reply to my query regarding priority of creditors. I note that you are not in a position to provide a definitive answer and would prefer not raise the question internally. I understand your view and will not press you further.
My knowledge of the financial standing of Bonne Terre Limited is very limited. I don't think that the consolidated accounts for Bonne Terre Limited are publicly available as would be the case if it were incorporated in the UK, and hence my knowledge is based solely on an impression. I would hasten to add I suspect that the net cash generated from operating activities would be good. I don't think CVC Capital Partner publish any information either on SB&G other than a note on its CVC Capital Partners website that it has Turnover of £185M. If you could point me in the direction of gaining a better understanding of the financial results of SB&G or even a set of results I would be grateful.
Having never seen a balance sheet for Bonne Terre Limited I cannot comment on the creditors. However, I did have a brief look at The Stars Group Inc balance sheet as at 30th September 2017 (in its Q3 results) as thought this might illustrate what percentage clients deposits represented in relation to total creditors. Total creditors amount to $3.06Bn of which just $353M related to customer deposits held.
For the avoidance of any doubt I do not have any concerns about Sky Poker, playing on Sky Poker or the RNG. Anyone who wants to check my sharkscope to see how often I play on Sky (almost daily) and that I am not a losing player finding an excuse for my poor play is very welcome to. However, I do think that improvements could be made in the industry generally and as Sky is receptive to feedback, comments and questions I have chosen this opportunity to express my views.
Just a couple of suggestions I would like to see in the industry:
1) Client deposits placed in a trust account and clients to have priority over all creditors in relation to such money even post insolvency.
2) Regulators to state the frequency of the testing of all licence holder software / hardware including the RNG and for the results of the annual test / audit to be published on the licence holder's website - something similar to a report of an auditors in an annual set of accounts.
Finally, and slightly off track, in an ideal world I would like an improvement in hand histories. Often I review my play and run hands through odds calculators to assess my play on various streets. For those hands which go to showdown, could Sky add the percentage chance of each hand winning at each stage of play - pre flop, flop, turn and river? I would find it useful, but appreciate that this might not be viable, cost effective or even a priority over other improvements. However, if you don't ask you don't get.
Firstly, it would be improper of me to tell you anything that is not in the domain. We get told all the numbers, but we are expected to keep them private, so anything I write here is in the domain, I must make that clear.
Looking at Bonne Terre Ltd won't tell you much, & as you will shortly see, the figure you quoted of "£185 million turnover" is not accurate, or does not mean what you might think it does. Did you also look up "Hestview Ltd"? I'm not going into detail as to where & how Bonne Terre, Hestview & SB&G all sit relative to each other, but they are all part of the picture.
I think the best thing you can do is as follows, them you can have a good read at your leisure;
Go to google search & type in "Sky Betting & Gaming Financial Results".
The top result should be "(PDF) Sky Betting and Gaming Annual Report, 2017".
Have a good peruse of that, though I warn you, it runs to 60 pages.
For those that cba to wade through 60 pages of corporate speak & balance sheets, in the year ended 30th June 2016 revenue was up 38% @ £516 million, with EBITDA also up 38% @ £146 million. All of which suggests the turnover figure you quoted is extremely misleading.
Anyway, that should fully occupy your weekend. Happy reading, & I hope you emerge more comfortable with SB&G's financial strength.
Whilst a little off-topic, there's a figure in that Annual Report which always fascinates me.
I should first tell you that internally, the SB&G Business is split, principally, into two profit centres;
1) Bet
2) Gaming (Vegas, Casino, Bingo, Poker etc)
And here's the stat which just blows me away. In the year ending 2017, Sky Bet's peak bets per second were 350.
Try to imagine that - 350 bets per second. That's 21,000 bets per minute.
Apply whatever average bet size you think is right, then imagine how much cash pours into Bet in a single hour. Most of it flows out a few hours later. Not all of it though......
And that excludes all the Gaming Products.
So I really don't think anyone should worry too much about any SB&G businesses not being able to satisfy customer balances.
And finally, for those that cry "the RNG is rigged", if you really think a Business where such strong growth has arisen for the last 5 years, which is making around £150 million per annum, (it will be much more this FY), & has a worth measured in billions if ever sold, then I suggest you think again.
Do you really think a Business that valuable is gonna mess around with the RNG to supposedly swizzle a few poker players?
Thanks for pointing in the direction of the SB&G accounts. I was not aware of the group structure beforehand, but now have a clearer view up to Cyan Blue Topco Limited and its subsidiaries for which the SB&G consolidated accounts represent.
I agree that it looks like the management has done a good job in growing the business and EBITDA has grown too. However, it is worth highlighting other aspects too. The 2017 consolidated accounts also show that it has made a loss before tax in each of the last two years (£3.0M in 2017 and £37.8M in 2016) primarily due to amortisation and high finance costs associated with the funding of the acquisition in 2015. I recognise that some of the finance costs are not actually payable, but accrue until repayment of the debt in question.
The balance sheet also shows total equity of just £52.7M and net debt of £670M (I have not deducted the restricted cash of £28.5M in relation to customer accounts balances from the net debt figure). I also note that the bank debt is secured, although the vendor loans (Sky plc) are not secured and nor are the loans from Cyan Blue Topco Limited's parent which I presume is essentially a CVC Capital Partners vehicle set up for the acquisition.
I was also interested by the very last note in the accounts regarding events post balance sheet date. If my interpretation is correct, together with a comment earlier in the accounts, this seems to suggest that after the balance sheet date, the £340M secured bank loan was refinanced and new loans of £475M and $450M were raised. This seems to have been to facilitate a transaction allowing a dividend of £540M to be paid to the parent of Cyan Blue Topco Limited. Presumably the payment of the dividend will have resulted in a reduction of the total equity figure which was just £52.7M at the balance sheet date.
Total creditors were £1.01Bn of which just £28.5M related to client customer deposits.
Therefore, I think in light of the above my question regarding priority of claims was not unreasonable or frivolous.
However, I will make no further comments as I feel that I have taken up more of your time than necessary and I do remain grateful for your time taken and for answering my questions.
I only play poker on Sky this days and have no intention of changing this. I enjoy my time on the site and Sky Bet probably appreciate my inability to back a winner. I am grateful for your assistance in helping bring to light some of this information so that if people want to they can take a view on the information themselves.
Thanks for pointing in the direction of the SB&G accounts. I was not aware of the group structure beforehand, but now have a clearer view up to Cyan Blue Topco Limited and its subsidiaries for which the SB&G consolidated accounts represent.
I agree that it looks like the management has done a good job in growing the business and EBITDA has grown too. However, it is worth highlighting other aspects too. The 2017 consolidated accounts also show that it has made a loss before tax in each of the last two years (£3.0M in 2017 and £37.8M in 2016) primarily due to amortisation and high finance costs associated with the funding of the acquisition in 2015. I recognise that some of the finance costs are not actually payable, but accrue until repayment of the debt in question.
The balance sheet also shows total equity of just £52.7M and net debt of £670M (I have not deducted the restricted cash of £28.5M in relation to customer accounts balances from the net debt figure). I also note that the bank debt is secured, although the vendor loans (Sky plc) are not secured and nor are the loans from Cyan Blue Topco Limited's parent which I presume is essentially a CVC Capital Partners vehicle set up for the acquisition.
I was also interested by the very last note in the accounts regarding events post balance sheet date. If my interpretation is correct, together with a comment earlier in the accounts, this seems to suggest that after the balance sheet date, the £340M secured bank loan was refinanced and new loans of £475M and $450M were raised. This seems to have been to facilitate a transaction allowing a dividend of £540M to be paid to the parent of Cyan Blue Topco Limited. Presumably the payment of the dividend will have resulted in a reduction of the total equity figure which was just £52.7M at the balance sheet date.
Total creditors were £1.01Bn of which just £28.5M related to client customer deposits.
Therefore, I think in light of the above my question regarding priority of claims was not unreasonable or frivolous.
However, I will make no further comments as I feel that I have taken up more of your time than necessary and I do remain grateful for your time taken and for answering my questions.
I only play poker on Sky this days and have no intention of changing this. I enjoy my time on the site and Sky Bet probably appreciate my inability to back a winner. I am grateful for your assistance in helping bring to light some of this information so that if people want to they can take a view on the information themselves.
Morning.
Balance sheets - as you & I well know - need reading between the lines before a view is formed. Safe to say I disagree strongly with the sombre picture you paint.
Anyone who thinks their money is not safe with SB&G is being, shall we say, somewhat over-cautious. There are risks associated with everything, & I'd rather my cash was sat with SB&G than any other poker site.
Let's leave it at that though, this thread has caused me more work than enough. Amazing how a negative thread title generates so much debate. Personally, I can spend that time on positive stuff, negativity ain't ever gonna float my boat.
Thanks for pointing in the direction of the SB&G accounts. I was not aware of the group structure beforehand, but now have a clearer view up to Cyan Blue Topco Limited and its subsidiaries for which the SB&G consolidated accounts represent.
I agree that it looks like the management has done a good job in growing the business and EBITDA has grown too. However, it is worth highlighting other aspects too. The 2017 consolidated accounts also show that it has made a loss before tax in each of the last two years (£3.0M in 2017 and £37.8M in 2016) primarily due to amortisation and high finance costs associated with the funding of the acquisition in 2015. I recognise that some of the finance costs are not actually payable, but accrue until repayment of the debt in question.
The balance sheet also shows total equity of just £52.7M and net debt of £670M (I have not deducted the restricted cash of £28.5M in relation to customer accounts balances from the net debt figure). I also note that the bank debt is secured, although the vendor loans (Sky plc) are not secured and nor are the loans from Cyan Blue Topco Limited's parent which I presume is essentially a CVC Capital Partners vehicle set up for the acquisition.
I was also interested by the very last note in the accounts regarding events post balance sheet date. If my interpretation is correct, together with a comment earlier in the accounts, this seems to suggest that after the balance sheet date, the £340M secured bank loan was refinanced and new loans of £475M and $450M were raised. This seems to have been to facilitate a transaction allowing a dividend of £540M to be paid to the parent of Cyan Blue Topco Limited. Presumably the payment of the dividend will have resulted in a reduction of the total equity figure which was just £52.7M at the balance sheet date.
Total creditors were £1.01Bn of which just £28.5M related to client customer deposits.
Therefore, I think in light of the above my question regarding priority of claims was not unreasonable or frivolous.
However, I will make no further comments as I feel that I have taken up more of your time than necessary and I do remain grateful for your time taken and for answering my questions.
I only play poker on Sky this days and have no intention of changing this. I enjoy my time on the site and Sky Bet probably appreciate my inability to back a winner. I am grateful for your assistance in helping bring to light some of this information so that if people want to they can take a view on the information themselves.
Morning.
Balance sheets - as you & I well know - need reading between the lines before a view is formed. Safe to say I disagree strongly with the sombre picture you paint.
Anyone who thinks their money is not safe with SB&G is being, shall we say, somewhat over-cautious. There are risks associated with everything, & I'd rather my cash was sat with SB&G than any other poker site.
Let's leave it at that though, this thread has caused me more work than enough. Amazing how a negative thread title generates so much debate. Personally, I can spend that time on positive stuff, negativity ain't ever gonna float my boat.
Comments
I'm afraid so, yes. For whatever reason, he worked through the thread and deleted all his posts, substituting a single letter in each case. So the thread was destroyed by a piece of vandalism on the OP's part. To be fair to him, he later apologised, saying he had a cob on when he did it.
He told me he was closing his account, & sought my help in doing it. I explained the drill, helpfully & politely. The next time I looked, he had deleted all his posts & was regged for 4 upcoming Freerolls.
So I mentioned that he was bellyaching about Sky Poker & the RNG, asking for help closing his account - but was now regging for Freerolls left right & centre, which struck me as a bit, well, you know, odd. So he got all defensive again & said he had every right so to do.
Then it became clear that the incidents he was claiming did not happen 4 times, they happened twice.
It was then that he decided to destroy all the evidence by deleting his posts. Except the Forum "back-end" retained them all........
Absurd, absurder, and absurderer.
The shame is that when the new forum started, people were not able to edit aged posts, but many people, quite reasonably, complained. So I went on hands and knees to the Sky Techs and implored them to reinstate editing abilities, which they did, but I promised them it would not be abused. So the thread did me no favours with the Suits.
Seen in the Chat Box
The poker table chat boxes have been full of ironic references to this thread for the last 3 or 4 days, everyone whimsically blaming the RNG which is, seemingly, getting worse, or better.Last night, @dragon1964 topped the lot though. I did not C & P the chat, but this was the gist of it;
Hey Guys, quick heads up for you. The RNG is terribly - definitely getting worse - on mobile, but works much better on the laptop.
Firstly, it would be improper of me to tell you anything that is not in the domain. We get told all the numbers, but we are expected to keep them private, so anything I write here is in the domain, I must make that clear.
Looking at Bonne Terre Ltd won't tell you much, & as you will shortly see, the figure you quoted of "£185 million turnover" is not accurate, or does not mean what you might think it does. Did you also look up "Hestview Ltd"? I'm not going into detail as to where & how Bonne Terre, Hestview & SB&G all sit relative to each other, but they are all part of the picture.
I think the best thing you can do is as follows, them you can have a good read at your leisure;
Go to google search & type in "Sky Betting & Gaming Financial Results".
The top result should be "(PDF) Sky Betting and Gaming Annual Report, 2017".
Have a good peruse of that, though I warn you, it runs to 60 pages.
For those that cba to wade through 60 pages of corporate speak & balance sheets, in the year ended 30th June 2016 revenue was up 38% @ £516 million, with EBITDA also up 38% @ £146 million. All of which suggests the turnover figure you quoted is extremely misleading.
Anyway, that should fully occupy your weekend. Happy reading, & I hope you emerge more comfortable with SB&G's financial strength.
Whilst a little off-topic, there's a figure in that Annual Report which always fascinates me.
I should first tell you that internally, the SB&G Business is split, principally, into two profit centres;
1) Bet
2) Gaming (Vegas, Casino, Bingo, Poker etc)
And here's the stat which just blows me away. In the year ending 2017, Sky Bet's peak bets per second were 350.
Try to imagine that - 350 bets per second. That's 21,000 bets per minute.
Apply whatever average bet size you think is right, then imagine how much cash pours into Bet in a single hour. Most of it flows out a few hours later. Not all of it though......
And that excludes all the Gaming Products.
So I really don't think anyone should worry too much about any SB&G businesses not being able to satisfy customer balances.
And finally, for those that cry "the RNG is rigged", if you really think a Business where such strong growth has arisen for the last 5 years, which is making around £150 million per annum, (it will be much more this FY), & has a worth measured in billions if ever sold, then I suggest you think again.
Do you really think a Business that valuable is gonna mess around with the RNG to supposedly swizzle a few poker players?
Thanks for pointing in the direction of the SB&G accounts. I was not aware of the group structure beforehand, but now have a clearer view up to Cyan Blue Topco Limited and its subsidiaries for which the SB&G consolidated accounts represent.
I agree that it looks like the management has done a good job in growing the business and EBITDA has grown too. However, it is worth highlighting other aspects too. The 2017 consolidated accounts also show that it has made a loss before tax in each of the last two years (£3.0M in 2017 and £37.8M in 2016) primarily due to amortisation and high finance costs associated with the funding of the acquisition in 2015. I recognise that some of the finance costs are not actually payable, but accrue until repayment of the debt in question.
The balance sheet also shows total equity of just £52.7M and net debt of £670M (I have not deducted the restricted cash of £28.5M in relation to customer accounts balances from the net debt figure). I also note that the bank debt is secured, although the vendor loans (Sky plc) are not secured and nor are the loans from Cyan Blue Topco Limited's parent which I presume is essentially a CVC Capital Partners vehicle set up for the acquisition.
I was also interested by the very last note in the accounts regarding events post balance sheet date. If my interpretation is correct, together with a comment earlier in the accounts, this seems to suggest that after the balance sheet date, the £340M secured bank loan was refinanced and new loans of £475M and $450M were raised. This seems to have been to facilitate a transaction allowing a dividend of £540M to be paid to the parent of Cyan Blue Topco Limited. Presumably the payment of the dividend will have resulted in a reduction of the total equity figure which was just £52.7M at the balance sheet date.
Total creditors were £1.01Bn of which just £28.5M related to client customer deposits.
Therefore, I think in light of the above my question regarding priority of claims was not unreasonable or frivolous.
However, I will make no further comments as I feel that I have taken up more of your time than necessary and I do remain grateful for your time taken and for answering my questions.
I only play poker on Sky this days and have no intention of changing this. I enjoy my time on the site and Sky Bet probably appreciate my inability to back a winner. I am grateful for your assistance in helping bring to light some of this information so that if people want to they can take a view on the information themselves.
Question: What do @TOOTRUE and @markycash have in common? Discuss.
You get a F.
Extra homework for you too
I wrote "an" then edited my post too because I couldn't decide which was correct. One looked wrong and the other sounded wrong.
I was obviously doing the thing that Jeremy Clarkson does sometimes, where he uses the wrong one deliberately.
@TOOTRUE great questions and research results.
Balance sheets - as you & I well know - need reading between the lines before a view is formed. Safe to say I disagree strongly with the sombre picture you paint.
Anyone who thinks their money is not safe with SB&G is being, shall we say, somewhat over-cautious. There are risks associated with everything, & I'd rather my cash was sat with SB&G than any other poker site.
Let's leave it at that though, this thread has caused me more work than enough. Amazing how a negative thread title generates so much debate. Personally, I can spend that time on positive stuff, negativity ain't ever gonna float my boat.
Take care now, & happy pokering.
Ps, when do I start?