The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

A web shop chain yesterday blasted its rivals for remaining “impotent” in the battle over who has regulatory responsibility for the industry in Freeport, while also slamming the Grand Bahama Port Authority’s (GBPA) “extortionate taxation” demands.

Raymond Culmer, principal of Chances Games, criticised the failure of other web shops to join his company in the ongoing legal fight to determine whether the GBPA or the Gaming Board should regulate their Freeport-based operations.

Emphasising that neither Chances Games, nor its Freeport web shops, had closed as a result of its failure to-date to obtain an injunction against the GBPA, Mr Culmer said the quasi-governmental regulator was seeking to impose fees of $150,000 per Gaming House license, and $50,000 per Gaming Agent, on his company.

When added to the taxes and fees already being paid to the Gaming Board, Mr Culmer said Chances Games and other web shop operators will have to pay “extraordinary sums of money” if the GBPA gets its way.

Carlson Shurland, Chances Games’ attorney, echoed Mr Culmer’s “disappointment” at the failure of the wider web shop industry to join in, and support, his client’s action.

He even agreed that it would be “more attractive” for Chances Games if the Supreme Court ruled that the GBPA, rather than the Gaming Board, was the sector’s regulator for Freeport.

Mr Shurland said such a verdict would both eliminate the taxes and licensing fees Freeport-based web shops have to pay to the Gaming Board, and require the latter to pay back monies already handed over.

Messrs Culmer and Shurland, in a joint statement sent to Tribune Business, pledged that they would continue to battle in the best interests of Chances and its staff.

Mr Culmer even argued that the GBPA, since Chances was a Bahamian-owned company, needed to ‘cut us some slack’ rather than seek to impose further taxation, especially given Freeport’s dire economic climate.

“What Chances is seeking is a determination from the court on whether the GBPA can give us a Gaming License, and tax Chances on a level comparable to the Gaming Board and Government of the Bahamas,” he explained.

“The GBPA is proposing to issue Gaming House licences at a fee of $150,000 per license, and $50,000 for each Gaming Agent license. When you couple these license fees with what we have to pay the Gaming Board and Government, it translates into an extraordinary sum of money.

“Clearly, we cannot be faulted in trying to get a clear appreciation of which licensing regime governs the gaming industry in Freeport.”

Mr Culmer added that Chances Games was not immune from Freeport’s economic malaise, and said: “When we see businesses, hotels and casinos that were given major tax exemptions still closing in Freeport, and the GBPA not revitalising this economy, that ought to send a clear message that we have a high overhead and, in some cases, are working at a deficit.

“Rather than try to introduce an extortionate level of taxation against a Bahamian entrepreneur, they [the GBPA] should look at ways to “cut us some slack”.

Mr Shurland said Chances was asking the Bahamian judicial system to determine whether the GBPA has regulatory authority for the web shop gaming industry through clause 2 (23) (a) of the Hawksbill Creek Agreement.

The GBPA believes that this clause, which gives it “exclusive licensing authority for gaming and amusements” in Freeport, includes web shop gaming.

Mr Culmer, though, said Chances “core belief” is that the GBPA is trying “to usurp” the Gaming Board’s regulatory authority, and that the former has no power to issue gaming licenses in Freeport.

However, he was somewhat contradicted by Mr Shurland, who said a court verdict in favour of the GBPA having regulatory authority in Freeport would be to the advantage of Chances and other web shops.

Such a ruling would eliminate the need for them to be regulated by the Gaming Board, and Mr Shurland said: “Frankly, this is a more attractive position for Chances to be in as it would eliminate having to pay taxes and gaming licensing fees to the Government.

“Of course, what that would also mean is that the Government would have to reimburse all webs shops that are operating in Freeport any monies paid to date.”

Both men were on the same page, though, in criticising rival web shop operators for failing to join Chances in defending the industry’s interests.

“Many of our colleagues, despite our requesting their assistance in this legal fight, have remained silent and impotent on this important issue, and so Chances is left fighting this legal battle solo,” Mr Culmer said.

Mr Shurland added: “With such an important issue on the table that has far-reaching financial consequences, I am disappointed that the other Gaming Houses are not taking a more active role in bringing closure since they stand to benefit either way.

“Mr Culmer is a maverick in the gaming industry, and believes in operating within the law, but make no mistake, he will defend his rights, and no one, not even the GBPA can take theses rights away from him.”

However, Island Luck and its parent, Playtech Systems, had previously filed their own action over the GBPA’s regulatory efforts, although little has been heard of its progress.

Mr Culmer emphasised that Chances was “here to stay”, and he criticised the GBPA’s attorney, Fred Smith QC, for “inflammatory rhetoric” that was undermining its Freeport earnings by driving patrons away.

“Chances employs over 400 Bahamians, and operates approximately 80 locations throughout the Bahamas,” he added.

“Its contributions to the GNP of the Freeport economy is very significant. Apart from paying taxes, wages and salaries for the workers, money is also channelled to suppliers, landlords, charity and contributions to many social and civic organisations throughout Freeport and Nassau.”

Mr Culmer also criticised the failure of regulators to eradicate illegal, unlicensed web shops, blasting: “Why should Chances shut down when there are still illegal and rogue gambling operators doing business with impunity, and no pressure to eradicate this form of competition by the GBPA.”

Chances and its parent, Jarol Investments, had originally sought an injunction to prevent the GBPA “from interfering with and/or cancelling” its business license, and increasing its license fee, until the Supreme Court determined the main issue between the parties - who has regulatory authority for web shop gaming in Freeport.

However, Justice Petra Hanna-Weekes refused to grant the injunction on the basis that Chances/Jarol had raised “no serious issue to be tried”, since the GBPA had already rescinded the letter upon which the web shop chain’s case was based.

Mr Shurland confirmed that Chances had appealed her ruling, and hoped to obtain an early hearing date from the Court of Appeal, once all procedural matters were settled by May 8.

“We are optimistic that the Court of Appeal will see the merits in our case and find that the judge erred in not granting the injunction. In the event they don’t, there is always Plan B,”Mr Shurland said, without detailing what this is.

“Finally, you can go to bed with the sure and certain knowledge that the substantive issue will be heard, and the matter will not get struck out like Fred Smith QC is bragging about.”