Background

Summary of Council decision:

Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.

Ad description

A press ad, published in the Racing Post, for a betting tipster service, seen on 27 May 2017, included text which stated “Make a 4-figure profit or continue with us FREE until you do. We have had 30 bets in the past 2 months (April/May)* and only 3 outright losers for a 90% strike rate and very large profits too of course…27 out 30 bets were successful for a 90% strike-rate of ISIRIS clients returning to the payout counter to collect”. Small text at the bottom of the ad stated “List of 30 races commencing from 6th April. All bets proofed to the Racing Post at advised prices/SP”.

Issue

Lord Lipsey, a member of the Starting Price Regulatory Commission, but acting in a personal capacity, challenged whether the following claims were misleading and could be substantiated:

1. “Make a 4-figure profit”; and

2. “27 out 30 bets were successful for a 90% strike-rate of ISIRIS clients returning to the payout counter to collect”.

Response

1. & 2. Isiris Racing Services acknowledged the complaint and said there were not more than 30 bets. Instead they said there were exactly 30 bets as stated – and the proofing sheet clearly stated where some bets were "split". They also said the 10/1 horse (As de Mee) was indeed 5th in the grand national – where every bookmaker was paying out on 5 places – so the bet did provide a profit as stated.

Racing Post provided us with the full set of data given to them by Isiris Racing Services to verify the claims.

Assessment

1. Upheld

We considered consumers would interpret the claim “Make a 4-figure profit” as an indication that they would be likely to make such a profit if they were to pay for membership of the service. We acknowledged that the claim was followed by the text “or continue with us FREE until you do”. However, in the context of the ad and the claims made about Isiris Racing Services’ past performance, we considered consumers would understand the claim as an indicator of future performance. Isiris Racing Services had not provided any documentary evidence to support the profit claim.

Because of that, we therefore concluded that the claim “Make a 4-figure profit” had not been substantiated and was misleading.

On this point 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) and  3.11 3.11 Marketing communications must not mislead consumers by exaggerating the capability or performance of a product.  (Exaggeration).

2. Upheld

We considered consumers would understand the listings in the ad represented all 30 bets made by the advertiser in the period of April and May 2017, starting from 6 April 2017. We further considered that consumers would understand that 27 out of 30 of these bets had been successful. Racing Post provided a spread sheet listing all of the horse racing selections that Isiris Racing Services had proofed with Racing Post. That spread sheet identified a number of the bets referred to in the ad.

We compared the listings in the ad with the proofing documentation sent to us by Racing Post. We were concerned the documentation appeared to show other bets had been proofed which indicated to us that Isiris Racing Services had placed more bets than the 30 represented in the ad.

In addition, we understood that the sixth bet quoted in the ad was included in the 90% strike-rate and was an each way bet – “6. EW (2nd) at 10/1”. We understood that an each way bet was made up of two parts: the ‘Win' and the ‘Place'. Each part was an equal stake, e.g. a £1 Each Way bet would have £1 on the ‘Win' and £1 on the ‘Place' (a total stake of £2). The ‘Win' part of the bet was on a horse to win the event, and the ‘Place' part was on a horse to finish either first or in one of the number of places; for this bet it was for the horse to finish in second place. However, we referred to the spread sheet Isiris Racing Services had sent to Racing Post and noted that the horse bet on had finished in fifth place, not second. Therefore, the sixth bet quoted in the ad was a losing bet and should not have been included in the 90% strike-out claim, which consequentially brought the statistic down. We noted Isiris Racing Services’ explanation for these discrepancies, but also noted that they had not provided any documentation or information to support that position.

Because it seemed that Isiris Racing Services had placed more than 30 bets during the period of time quoted in the ad and that the sixth bet listed in the ad had been applied to the winning strike-rate despite being a losing each way bet, we concluded that the claim “27 out 30 bets were successful for a 90% strike-rate of ISIRIS clients returning to the payout counter to collect” had not been substantiated and was misleading.

On this point 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) and  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).

Action

The ad must not appear again in the form complained of. We told Isiris Racing Services that profit claims must be based on odds that were achievable by most customers and needed to be substantiated. We also told them to ensure they held adequate substantiation for claims made about strike rates and bets placed in their advertising.

CAP Code (Edition 12)

3.1     3.11     3.7    


More on