Ça repart de plus belle entre le Mauritius Turf Club (MTC) et Globalsports Ltd (GSL). Après quelques mois de calme plat ? favorisé par l?ouverture des négociations ? entre les deux parties dans le cadre de l?entrée en opération de la deuxième compagnie de Tote, une nouvelle guerre froide les oppose.

Dans un communiqué de presse émis hier après-midi, GSL maintient qu?elle est victime de ?delaying tactics? de la part du MTC, une allégation que repousse l?organisateur des courses. GSL reproche, en effet, au MTC de ne pas lui avoir fait des propositions complètes dans une correspondance en date du 19 avril. Seul l?aspect financier y avait été abordé, alors que GSL s?attendait aussi à ce que le MTC y inclue le nombre de terminaux qui serait éventuellement mis à sa dispostion.

Selon GSL, ce n?est que le 9 mai qu?une proposition dans ce sens lui a été communiquée par le Club. D?où le retard, explique le communiqué, avec lequel la nouvelle compagnie de Totalisator System a répondu aux propositions qui lui avaient été faites le 19 avril.

GSL, mentionne aussi le communiqué, compte faire des recommandations au Horse Racing Board dans un proche avenir ?to avoid any further undue delays?.

COMMUNIQUÉ DE GSL

Globalsports Limited (?GSL?) has, on 30 May 2006, received a letter dated 29 May 2006 from the Mauritius Turf Club (?MTC?) wherein it is inter alia mentioned that the MTC sent to GSL a ?proposal? on 19 April 2006 which was only responded to on 16 May 2006(?)

GSL wishes to inform the public that the true facts are as follows:

11 April 06: MTC informs GSL that it has agreed ?in principle? to authorise a second operator and that it wishes to discuss ?terms and conditions?.

11 April 06: GSL immediately responds and asks the MTC to set up a meeting with GSL, the MTC, Automatic Systems Limited (?ASL?) and with a representative of the Horse Racing Board (?HRB?) as an observer.

12 April 2006: Despite already having given its ?in principle approval?, the MTC writes to GSL to request certain details.

12 April 2006: GSL expresses surprise at the request but furnishes the details immediately to avoid delays.

14 April 06: A meeting takes place between GSL, the MTC and ASL. During the meeting, GSL informs the MTC that it seeks equity vis-à-vis ASL and requests a copy of the full contract between MTC and ASL

19 April 06: MTC sends a ?proposal? to GSL but makes no mention of the number of terminals to be allocated to GSL, which is an essential element of the contract and which had been discussed at the meeting of 14 April 06. The ?proposal? concerns only the financial aspects.

24 April 06: GSL writes to the MTC, making reference to the letter of 19 April 2006, to request a copy of all correspondence between MTC and ASL which had varied the original contract. After the letter, GSL also verbally informs the MTC on numerous occasions that its ?proposal? of 19 April 06 was incomplete and that no mention was made on the number of terminals.

28 April 2006: the MTC finally communicates to GSL the written variation in the contract between the MTC and ASL and denies that it had agreed to ?treat GSL on an equitable basis as compared to ASL?.

9 May 2006: the MTC finally sends a proposal to GSL regarding the number of terminals to be offered to GSL within the premises of the MTC.

13 May 2006 (Being the first race-meeting after letter of MTC of 9 May 2006): Representatives of GSL make a site visit of the premises of the MTC to fully understand the proposal of MTC regarding terminals.

16 May 2006: GSL makes a comprehensive counter-proposal to the MTC, making express reference to the MTC letters of 19 April AND 9 May.

30 May 2006: The MTC replies to GSL and asks GSL to make another proposal but does not make ANY counter-proposal. Moreover, to add insult to injury, 49 days after negotiations started, the MTC only ?takes note? of the request of GSL on terminals and does not make any counter-proposal.

(?)GSL will be making representations to the HRB in the very near future to avoid any further undue delays.

Globalsports Limited 31 May 2006