Inside Asian Gaming

IAG APR 2022年4月 亞博匯 48 IAG: Are there any proposed amendments to the gaming law that you need either more clarification on or would like to see scrapped altogether? KCC: There is one point I take seriously, and I need to understand it clearly before I will know how to adapt to it, and that is the issue of joint responsibility. According to the new gaming bill, operators, promoters and agents all share joint responsibility, which means that when an issue happens, these three parties will be responsible together. An example is the recent Wynn case (when Wynn Macau and junket promoter Dore Entertainment were found jointly liable for repayment of a HK$6 million debt owed to a VIP customer). If this is the case, we can’t blame operators for not wanting to deal with promoters for fear that the amount involved could be very large. That could be a huge problem for them. This is like an activator that is making the junkets close one by one. After we calm down, we can think again about whether promoters should exist in the future. If we decide yes, then we need to look at how they can operate healthily. Recently, many people have asked me questions regarding promoters’ future and my answer is that I am observing. First, the law has not come into effect yet, and second, we must come back to the starting line and start all over again. But we have not started to run yet. Let’s be rational, the law review is a good adjustment for the long term. I just hope it can give some space to the promoters, such as removing the requirement for promoters to deal with only one operator. When the promoter has enough clients to share among the operators, why do we need to limit this development? When something is illegal, you can police it with the law, but when something is legal you can give some space and it won’t harm society. In the end, it is this gaming revenue that pays gaming tax to the government. IN FOCUS 就這方面而言，我認為中介人只會 拓展香港和東南亞市場。雖然我說要拓 展香港和東南亞市場，但不代表我可以 輕易地在相關市場發掘客源，這取決於 我是否有這能力。但這是大方向，我不 會去內地召攬賭客。 亞：就新博彩法的建議，你認為哪些內 容需進一步澄清，或希望哪些條文廢 止？ 郭： 我認為有一點是很重要的，我需要 理解清晰才能配合，這一點就是連帶責 任。根據新的博彩法案，博彩承批公 司、中介人和合作人都需負起連帶責 任，這意味著當出現問題時，這三方將 共同承擔責任。最近的永利案就是一個 例子（永利澳門和中介人多金被判定須 共同向一位貴賓廳賭客償還拖欠的600 萬港元款項）。 如果是這樣的話，若涉及巨大金 額，我們也不能怪博企不想和中介人合 作，因為這對博企來說是一個大問題。 這是導火線，讓中介人一間接一間地關 閉。我們應靜下心來，再想想未來中介 人是否應存在。如果我們認為中介人應 存在，那麼我們要想想如何令中介人健 康地運作。 最近，很多人問我關於中介人的 未來，我的回答是我在觀察中。首先是 新博彩法還未生效，其次是我們必須回 到起跑線上重新開始，但現時仍未是時 候。 我們需理性一點，長遠而言修訂法 律是一件好事，我只是希望新法可給予中 介人一些空間，例如取消中介人只能與一 間承批公司合作的規定。若中介人有足夠 多的客戶可與多家承批公司共享，為甚麼 我們要限制相關發展？若有些活動是違法 的，可以立法強行禁止，但若有些是合法 活動，應給予生存空間，因為這些活動不 會危害社會。而且博彩收入影響著博彩稅 收和政府庫房收入。