Jingle Balls

What is Jingle Balls?

Global operator Bet365 has confirmed plans to cut around 340 jobs in response to increased regulatory and tax-related costs.

The job cuts, which represent approximately 3% of Bet365’s workforce, will be made across the company’s offices in Stoke-on-Trent, Malta and Gibraltar.

Bet365 attributed the job cuts to a “highly competitive trading environment, plus increased regulatory and tax-related costs”.

About Jingle Balls

He also questioned the government’s involvement with the state-owned entities Holland Casino and Nederlandse Loterij, especially in its assessment on how to limit gambling harms.

Holland Casino CEO Petra de Ruiter last week told iGB that she was proud of the player protection efforts in place across Holland Casino’s products.

Holland Casino has a responsible gambling board, which includes scientists, experts with lived experience and their own RG executives. They meet with the board every few months to talk over current processes, and the board challenges the operator’s ideas and implementations, 

What is Jingle Balls?

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.

IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”

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.