{"id":213,"date":"2019-04-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-04-24T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/gbc.ng\/the-us-sets-new-benchmark-for-extracting-value-from-sports-betting\/"},"modified":"2019-04-24T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2019-04-24T00:00:00","slug":"the-us-sets-new-benchmark-for-extracting-value-from-sports-betting","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/gbc.ng\/index.php\/the-us-sets-new-benchmark-for-extracting-value-from-sports-betting\/","title":{"rendered":"THE US SETS \u201cNEW BENCHMARK\u201d FOR EXTRACTING VALUE FROM SPORTS BETTING"},"content":{"rendered":"

As the post-PASPA revolution rolls on, the US will \u201cset a new benchmark\u201d for how sports leagues and rights holders try to extract value from its nascent sports betting market.<\/strong><\/p>\n

That was a prediction made by\u00a0David Lampitt, Managing Director of Group Operations at Sportradar<\/strong>, as part of last month\u2019s\u00a0Betting on Football<\/strong>\u00a0conference.<\/p>\n

Speaking on the \u2018Data \u2013 do you get what you pay for?\u2019 panel, he said that while attempts by rights holders around the world to implement the mandatory use of official data have \u201cgenerally been unsuccessful\u201d, the US has seen innovation on a commercial level \u2013 particularly between operators and data providers.<\/p>\n

\u201cSports are, inevitably, trying to find new and innovative ways to get involved in the value chain of data, and to somehow monetise this to get paid as much as they possibly can for usage of that data,\u201d he explained.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe challenge is achieving this without any established legal rights. There is no IP right for sports data, so sports must find different means to achieve it.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere have been a number of attempts by right holders around the world to make it a legal requirement, to make it mandatory to use official data. Generally speaking, these attempts haven\u2019t been successful so far.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat we\u2019re now seeing is some innovation in terms of how sports can get value through commercial means, i.e. offering official data but making access to certain things \u2013 sponsorship or other commercial usage \u2013 contingent upon signing up for the official data and I think we will see that continue.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe US market could well set a new benchmark or model for how sports, and rights holders in particular, try to create value from the market.\u201d<\/p>\n

Out of what was a fractious debate around a call by the sports leagues for fees to fund sports integrity and exclusive use of official data for \u2018their\u2019 product, there has emerged an appetite for common sense and a collaborative commercial approach.<\/p>\n

The debate surrounding official and unofficial data was, inevitably, a central component of the Betting on Football panel, where Lampitt was joined by\u00a0Matt Stephenson<\/strong>\u00a0(Betgenius),\u00a0John Harlow<\/strong>\u00a0(Perform) andRoy Clements<\/strong>\u00a0(STATS).<\/p>\n

The panel highlighted the risks associated with unofficial data, which include delays through extracting data from TV or internet streams, the untimely loss of connectivity or even scouts being ejected from the stadium, which could force the operator to pull markets on a match.<\/p>\n

Lampitt added that while there is still space for the unofficial provision of such match data, the systematic scraping or direct copying of data must be stamped out.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere has to be a degree of honesty about the discussion,\u201d he continued. \u201cThe reality is, we talk about official and unofficial, but nobody sitting on this panel is only providing official data. There isn\u2019t one of our companies that has all of the rights to all of the official data for every sport around the world.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s also a bit of a nonsense to suggest that there is always a big disparity between official and unofficial data quality because we\u2019re all providing high quality data, just some of it is official and some isn\u2019t. For example, we have the official rights to the NBA,\u00a0we just secured the official rights internationally for the MLB as well. Yet, our competitors here are providing unofficial data for these leagues.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn my view, providing unofficial data is perfectly legitimate, there is a space in the market for it to happen at a particular price point. Until there\u2019s a recognition of that and a shifting of the official market to incorporate it, that will continue to be the case.<\/p>\n

\u201cHowever, that is different to someone who is scraping data systematically or copying data direct from a database, which very clearly is an infringement of the EU Database Right.<\/p>\n

\u201cRegardless of whether the data scraped or copied is official or unofficial, there are very significant risks for operators who use that data because they also leave themselves open to the legal risks associated with using IP infringed content.\u201d<\/p>\n

Finally, Lampitt echoed the panel\u2019s view that we are \u201cnot quite there yet\u201d in terms of automated data collection, but said that it will develop faster for certain sports, for example tennis \u2013 \u201ca sport that has already embraced it as part of the infrastructure of the game\u201d.<\/p>\n

Lampitt is speaking at the inaugural\u00a0Betting on Sports America<\/strong>\u00a0conference, which kicks off today at theMeadowlands Exposition Center<\/strong>\u00a0in New Jersey.<\/p>\n

He will be discussing how basketball \u2013 and specifically the NBA as the first of the major sports leagues in the US to soften its stance on betting \u2013 can work with bookmakers to develop a mutually beneficial approach to marketing, product and partnerships.<\/p>\n

\n