Beast Below

What is Beast Below?

“Our investment is going into regulated markets, and yes over time we will likely consider pulling out of certain markets. I think Playtech has done a very good job, [regulated revenues] are more than 85%.”

Meanwhile its B2C revenue, which took a significant hit last year as it offloaded the majority of its B2C operations, including Snaitech and Happy Bet, declined 22% to €32 million.

This segment is predominantly made up of Sun Bingo in the UK, a white label brand which Playtech said it was reviewing in March, due to the impact of the UK Remote Gaming Duty hike earlier this year.

What is Beast Below?

The first time I walked into an iGaming conference was daunting. I knew next to no-one in the industry and, as far as I knew, no one knew me. I was an outsider in every sense, representing an unknown product in an industry I believed would be resistant to change.

While this initially seemed terrifying, I quickly discovered that this outsider status was a gift. It has allowed me to view the industry through fresh eyes. I do not have any preconceptions about companies or products. This has become my superpower, allowing me to analyse the industry without bias and, hopefully, help shape its future.

iGaming was not the industry I set out to work in. Before 2021, I worked in finance and business – agro companies, management consultancy and investment funds, none of which were remotely linked to the industry.

About Beast Below

This particular lawsuit involving Fox Financial, one of a growing list IPI is battling, centers on an arrangement the company made with a third party, Forson Holdings. That entity had leased property from Fox in 2016, but fell behind. IPI had signed as a guarantor of that lease agreement and, as such, was responsible for covering Forson in the event payments weren’t made. However, it decided it didn’t need to follow the terms of the contract.

It seems like not a day goes by without IPI coming under fire for something else. The company’s chairwoman, Cui Li Jie, has already found herself in trouble and was previously held in contempt of court, but now has another black mark beside her name. She has been found in contempt again, this time for allegedly perjuring herself in court. A lawyer representing employees suing IPI and Cui produced evidence proving she had lied under oath, and Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona has now agreed. She issued her ruling this morning, with Cui only able to respond, through an interpreter, “I don’t know anything, I don’t understand English.”

The post Ethical questions at IPI lead lawyer to exit as chair held in contempt appeared first on CalvinAyre.com.