Crown Resorts Deemed ‘Inappropriate’ to Run Perth Casino

Crown Resorts has been judged “inappropriate” to run its Crown Perth property in Western Australia by the Perth Casino Royal Commission. However, the commission decided against suggesting the removal of its license.

The commission’s report did, however, propose some other changes that would make Crown suitable, including mandatory restrictions on electronic gaming machines (EGM).

The report follows two prior investigations into Crown’s fitness to hold licenses in other regions. The Bergin Report in New South Wales examined whether Crown was suitable to run a casino in its new resort in Barangaroo, Sydney, while the Victorian Royal Commission report investigated whether Crown was suitable to operate its flagship Crown Melbourne resort.

Similar to the Perth report, both inquiries found Crown to be “inappropriate” to hold a license, but did not revoke or refuse to grant licenses.

The report found a number of shortcomings in Crown Resorts and its subsidiaries during its investigation into Crown’s suitability. Many of these shortcomings were similar to those found in previous reports, with most of the issues flagged relating to relationships with intermediaries and anti-money laundering measures, as well as governance issues.

The document indicates that Crown’s ventures in Melbourne and Perth have grown progressively dependent on intermediaries since 2013.

The document also indicates that Chairman James Packer “was not cognizant, upon his appointment, that the intermediary operation presented a greater hazard than other business units at the Perth casino, both in attracting wrongdoers and facilitating money laundering.”

The document observes that when the Western Australian Gaming Commission initially contemplated permitting intermediaries in 2009, Crown asserted it would conduct anti-money laundering verifications and would not collaborate with intermediaries deemed “high risk.”

However, the corporation “approved and sustained relationships with intermediary operators and representatives who were evaluated as ‘high risk’ from a money laundering standpoint.”

“He believed these dangers were manageable,” the document added.

Moreover, the document states that other key leadership figures possessed limited or no comprehension of how the intermediary business functioned and the associated perils.

The document discovered that in terms of corporate governance, many of Crown Perth’s key legal and compliance roles had been consolidated. Consequently, Crown Resorts’ central operations were accountable for overseeing numerous aspects of the Perth casino’s daily legal and compliance functions.

The document stated this rendered accountability more challenging.

The document indicates that Crown’s Perth branch “did not significantly participate in the evaluation or authorization of high-roller operators arriving at the Perth casino, nor did it have supervision of the evaluation and authorization processes.”

The document also mentions that there is no proof that senior management informed the subsidiary’s board of agreements made with high-roller operators like Suncity.

These problems were made worse by the fact that Chairman James Packer did not attend any board meetings of Burswood Limited, the Crown subsidiary that owns the resort, between August 2013 and his departure in 2016.

The document states, “Crown acknowledges that Packer’s absence from board meetings was inappropriate and that other members of the BL board should have voiced concerns and taken action to address the long-term absence.”

Concerning money laundering, the document discovered that cage staff had been appropriately trained to recognize possible suspicious transactions.

Crown cage and accounts general manager David Brown admitted that he “was aware of some suspicious transactions that took place in 2013 and 2014” and should have reported them to the anti-money laundering agency AUSTRAC.

At the same time, it was found that Crown’s former chief financial officer Ken Barton knew that Crown’s high-roller team requested that certain bank accounts used by high-rollers did not include Crowns name.

The document indicated that, having understood the riverbank’s purpose, the individual was unconcerned about financial transactions that might have been related to money laundering.

As a result, the document concluded that Crown and its affiliated organizations were not appropriate for “participation in or association with the organization and operation of licensed casino gambling enterprises.”

However, the Royal Commission did not withdraw its permit, instead proposing a series of improvements for Crown Perth.

The document proposed that Crown adopt “a more defined corporate structure than the current one” and clarify the responsibilities of its affiliated companies.

Moreover, Crown Perth should “implement as soon as feasible a comprehensive, mandatory, and binding pre-commitment and game time limit program for electronic gaming machine (EGM) gaming in Perth casinos.”

Under this plan, players would be required to establish weekly spending limits, and if they did not, default limits would be set for them based on research into “safe” limits. While customers might be able to increase these spending limits, the Gaming and Wagering Commission should set a “specified maximum limit.”

The maximum wager amount on these machines should be set at $10.

Meanwhile, high-stakes players must provide “documentation to demonstrate their financial position.”

In the meantime, the report also discovered that the gambling authority should be reorganized and provided with more financial resources to more effectively oversee operators.

Following a prolonged bidding process, Crown will finally be taken over by the private equity behemoth Blackstone, with the two entities reaching an A$8.9 billion agreement. Blackstone initially submitted a proposal in March 2021 and increased its offer in January 2022.

Sign up for the iGaming newsletter.