Ad description
A press ad, published in the Racing Post, for a betting tipster service. Text included "£89,270 profit in 5 months These profits were achieved in the past 5 months alone from 1st July to 13th December, with every bet proofed to the Racing Post before each race*". Small print at the bottom of the ad stated "*All bets and customer quotes are proofed in advance to the Racing Post as evidence at advised prices/SP. Please note: 1. Total betting bank needed to acquire that £89,270 profit was just £500 bank. 2. Total turnover was £527,250. 3. Average bet per horse to acquire that £89,270 was just £249 staked per horse".
Issue
Lord Lipsey, a member of the Starting Price Regulatory Commission, but acting in a personal capacity, challenged whether the claim "£89,270 profit in 5 months" was misleading and could be substantiated.
Response
Isiris Racing Services (Isiris) provided a copy of a spreadsheet which they said listed all the bets made in the referenced five-month period. They said that all bets were proofed with the racing press and with a betting tipster proofing website which used an independent auditor to log this information from tipsters. Isiris said the spreadsheet demonstrated the tipped bets resulted in a profit of £89,270.82 between 1 July and 12 December 2014, based on a total stake of £527,250 from 2,127 bets; the average stake was £248 per bet.
The ASA Executive selected a number of bets at random for Isiris to provide detailed evidence, via the proofers, to demonstrate that those bets had been proofed prior to the races taking place. The evidence provided consisted of timed and dated screenshots of an odds comparison website which showed the odds available from a range of bookmakers, and a spreadsheet listing the selected bookmaker, which were emailed to the proofers by Isiris on the day of the relevant race. The betting tipster proofing website also provided the ASA access to the summary of Isiris' tips and profits which was available to their website members.
Assessment
Upheld
The spreadsheet provided by Isiris listed both winning and losing tipped bets and outcomes, including accumulated profits. From 1 July 2014 up to (but not including) 13 December 2014, the spreadsheet listed an accumulated profit of £89,270.82, a total of 2,122 bets, total stakes of £533,400 and an average bet of £251.
We compared the information in the spreadsheet with the proofing documentation. There were a number of discrepancies between the information in the spreadsheet and the supporting proofing documentation. These included two bets for which the tipster proofing website's independent auditor had not received proofing documentation, instances in which the terms for each-way bets were not visible in the screenshot of the odds comparison website and therefore did not evidence the terms stated in the spreadsheet, and differences between the odds stated in the spreadsheet Isiris had sent to the proofers and those displayed in the accompanying screenshots. We were concerned by the number of discrepancies in the substantiation.
The information stated on the tipster proofing website in relation to each of Isris' proofed bets included the odds which were available at the time the races began (the starting price odds). We compared those odds with the odds stated in the spreadsheet in relation to a selection of bets. In 95% of the selected bets, the starting price odds were less favourable than those stated in the spreadsheet. Bets placed at the starting price odds would have achieved only 55% of the profits achieved if bets were placed at the odds listed by Isiris in their spreadsheet. We considered consumers would understand that odds could change, and were outside Isiris' control. However, we also considered that for the profit claim in the ad to be substantiated, Isiris should have been able to demonstrate that that level of profit was achieved by a significant number of their members, or that the odds at which the selections were tipped were available for a significant amount of time after the tips were circulated to members so that they had reasonable opportunity to back the selections at the tipped odds.
Because there were discrepancies between the proofing documentation and the spreadsheet of tipped bets, and because the evidence did not show that the odds on which the profit claim was based continued to be available to Isiris' customers for a sufficient length of time after the tips were made (or that most of their customers had achieved the level of profit claimed), we concluded the claim "£89,270 profit in 5 months" had not been substantiated and was misleading.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising), 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation), 3.9 3.9 Marketing communications must state significant limitations and qualifications. Qualifications may clarify but must not contradict the claims that they qualify. (Qualification) and 3.11 3.11 Marketing communications must not mislead consumers by exaggerating the capability or performance of a product. (Exaggeration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Isiris Racing Services to ensure tipped bets were adequately proofed and that profit claims were based on odds that were achievable by most customers.
