Clearly something needs to be done to increase turnover and revenue. One way to increase turnover would be to require the TAB to accept bets from all customers to lose say $3,000 per bet (similar to Australian minimum bet rules). I appreciate that increased turnover doesn't guarantee increased revenue, but my understanding from the Australian states where minimum bet rules have been introduced, is that it has increased revenue to the industry.
Furthermore, most restricted punters have had these restrictions in place from when the old TAB platform was in operation. The main reason given in the past for most restrictions was that punters were able to beat the TAB when fixed odds prices changed, due to the TAB having to manually set odds. The new TAB fixed odds platform has eliminated this issue so there should be no reason for many of the restrictions.
So my question is - why don't you require the TAB to accept fixed odds bets from all customers to lose $3,000 per bet to see if this would have a beneficial impact on revenue? This could be implemented over night and monitored closely to see what impact it had on turnover (which would certainly increase) but more importantly revenue.
Leicthin
The TAB’s approach is in line with standard bookmaking practices and RITA does impose betting restrictions on a small number of customers, whilst we don't have a minimum ‘bet to lose amount’, by international standards are limits are generous, particularly on race day.