IBJNews

Indiana panel approves lottery outsourcing deal

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 Indiana's lottery commission voted Wednesday to hire a private company to run the lottery's marketing, sales and distribution services in the hopes that it will boost the game's profits by about $100 million a year.

The commission voted 3-0, with two members absent, to approve a 15-year contract with Rhode Island-based GTECH that is expected to make $1.7 billion in profit over five years — a $500 million increase over state projections. GTECH already provides and maintains vending machines for the Hoosier Lottery.

In exchange for running the lottery's marketing and other services, GTECH will be paid a management fee that hasn't yet been determined as well as a share of the lottery profits. The state received $188 million in lottery proceeds last year.

Officials expect profits to increase by about $500 million above what they otherwise would have been over the first five years of the contract, said Karl Browning, the Hoosier Lottery's executive director. Over the 15-year life of the contract, the amount of money the lottery nets the state is expected to increase by 50 percent over projections, he said.

"I can't find a scenario in which no matter what, the taxpayer isn't better off," Browning said.

Browning said part of the increased revenue would come from a plan to "broaden the player base," which would likely be done by expanding sales to grocery stores, big box stores and discount stores.

GTECH could earn a $1 bonus for every dollar over a revenue threshold set by the state, but it would have to pay the state if the threshold isn't met, Browning said.

GTECH's bid was selected over a proposal from New York-based Scientific Games, which currently provides the central online lottery system, terminals and instant tickets for the Hoosier Lottery.

Two foreign companies dropped out of the bidding last month. One of them, Camelot Global Services, which runs the national lottery in the United Kingdom, claimed the agreement proposed by the state encouraged bidders to set expected revenue levels artificially high.

Browning said Wednesday that he believed the use of revenue thresholds would motivate the contractor to make accurate forecasts to maximize its profits.

"The idea was to create a risk-sharing arrangement," Browning said.

Gov. Mitch Daniels, who has championed corporate involvement in government services, praised the commission's decision.

"In eight years, this may be the easiest and most obvious decision the state has had to make," Daniels said in a statement. "With this contract, the only question is how much more money Indiana will receive than under the current system."

But a similar outsourcing deal in neighboring Illinois hasn't turned out the way officials expected.

In its first year, Northstar Lottery Group, a partnership between GTECH and Scientific Games, brought in record revenue but fell nearly $100 million short of the $825 million it had promised to Illinois officials. The company and the state are in arbitration over the issue.

Illinois Lottery Superintendent Michael Jones criticized Indiana's search for a private lottery manager in August, saying Indiana officials didn't seem to have learned from Illinois' problem-plagued lottery outsourcing effort.

New Jersey and Pennsylvania also are researching whether to outsource their lotteries.

Daniels' privatization efforts have drawn both praise and criticism. A 75-year lease of the Indiana Toll Road to a private Spanish-Australian consortium in 2006 garnered the state $3.8 billion for a massive 10-year highway construction plan, but most of that money has been spent. Meanwhile, a 2006 decision to outsource the processing of welfare recipients to a team of private contractors led to widespread complaints and a protracted lawsuit.

Hoosier Lottery officials have been careful not to refer to the outsourcing as "privatization" due to a 2008 U.S. Justice Department opinion that states could not legally lease their lotteries.

Private companies already handle 88 percent of Indiana's lottery operations and the outsourcing proposal would increase that to 95 percent, Browning said. The state would retain executive management and ownership of the lottery, he said.

Lottery profits pale compared with those from Indiana's 13 privately owned casinos, which generated $829 million in wagering and admissions taxes for the state last year. Those casinos are regulated by the Indiana Gaming Commission.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Your man Mitch did it again
    Don't be fooled!!! GTECH might be based in Rhode Island, but it is ultimately owned by De Agostini...a company from ITALY. Yes, more property of our own Indiana, USA, sold by old Mitch, to a foreign entity. Way to go Mitch...is Purdue next??????
  • Face in palms
    Why have the state get all the revenue from the state lottery when you can siphon some of the money for corporate profits? Sure, maybe they'll bring in more revenue, but do we really want the even more predatory marketing campaigns that are sure to come with this privatization?
  • Why Is The Selling Price So Low?
    Why is Governor Mitch Daniels Giving Away Future Hoosier Lottery Internet Gaming Profits To An Italian Firm With Political Connections? http://www.npr.org/2012/01/24/145647048/online-lottery-could-be-coming-to-a-state-near-you
  • Thanks Mitch
    No chance Mitch was going to let this opportunity get away. Let's see if he can still get the Family Services portfolio privatized before January. BTW what do we do w/ the new Lottery HQ?

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT