Forum Topics RTH RTH Non Renewal of Stake Contract

Pinned straw:

Added a month ago

RTH has today announced that the Stake contract will not be renewed in Q2 2026

RAS Technology Holdings Limited (ASX: RTH) ("RAS" or the "Company"), a leading provider of fully integrated premium data and enhanced content and technology solutions to the global racing and wagering industries, advises the Complete Racing Solution contract with Stake will not be renewed at the end of its current two-year term in May 2026.

RAS will continue to focus on growth in its regulated markets of Australia, UK, Europe, Americas, and the Middle East. The Company will also further concentrate resources and expertise in accelerating growth in Racing and Sports Asia with its significant expansion runway and opportunities.

The non-renewal is not expected to have a material impact on RAS's financial performance in FY26. The Company maintains a strong pipeline of opportunities for FY27, including the recently announced deal to provide a complete racing solution to the LeoVegas Group, and remains confident in its growth trajectory.

RAS Technology Managing Director and CEO, Stephen Crispe, said: “As RAS pursues a refined strategic direction focused on core international regulated markets, our team will focus resources on the high-growth opportunities in Asia and other key regulated markets where we see significant potential for our premium data and technology solutions. We thank Stake for placing their trust in RAS to launch their global racing service and wish them well in their future endeavours.”

Director of Stake, Jarrod Febbraio, said: “We would like to sincerely thank Racing and Sports for their support in partnering with us to launch our racing offer to our Global customer base. RAS are true racing experts and have been a highly professional partner in helping us to deliver a quality service to our clients.”

- Ends – This announcement was authorised for release by the Board of RA

Disc hold small position

UncleWally
Added a month ago

Thanks to all those that shared their thoughts on todays announcement. I think you all covered it pretty well. In particular I appreciate @Wini sharing his conversation with management - another benefit of being a member of Strawman.

I'm wondering if todays announcement justifies a 20% lower market cap so like @jcmleng I topped up my RL and SM holdings.

Looking forward to February's report.



24
jcmleng
Added a month ago

Discl: Held IRL 2.25% and in SM

My thoughts, after digesting all other posts. Not a great update at all but posts from @Wini's and @reddogaustin were very helpful.

Topped up at 0.77 as my thesis still remains intact and Mr Market has offered a good top up price.

What Is Not Great

  • Contract was lost vs “we have not lost any Tier-1 Contracts”
  • “Customer needs to go to something better to exit RTH” - clearly, Bet’s solution was better for Stake for it to exit, more so after an open global tender
  • A reality check that RTH does not have a complete monopoly of Racing Solutions and data
  • Comes on the back of recent insider sales


It Does Not Break The Thesis

RTH has been around for a long 25 years, so it has a long track record and reputation.

@Wini's clarification was very important - very reassured by that as it looks like a product gap issue vs a problem-with-the-solution issue - a big difference from my perspective. The clarification around the materiality was also important. Any revenue loss will hurt, but it was not as much as I expected. The bigger impact is reputational rather than financial I think.

The original Stake deal was for 2 years - might be clutching at straws, but this may be a data point vs a 3 or 5 year deal as 2 years feels neither here-nor-there (whenever I was in doubt whether a solution would fly previously, I would mitigate the risk and keep my options by not going full-on with contract duration). This 2 year duration may have indicated that Stake was not 100% sure of RTH. This was my thinking pre-@Wini’s post, the clarification was thus very helpful as it provided good context to back up this thinking.

Am not overly concerned with the timing of management’s selldown - it was done after the LeoVegas deal, both Bet and RTH made the same announcement around Stake today, the reasons and exit do not look illogical. Given RTH’s track record of integrity etc, it would be reasonable to assume non-disclosure requirements were adhered to.

I didn’t have an issue with the lack of FY27 commentary - as this exit happens in FY26, it is right to comment on FY26. But clearly, there is no Stake contract thereafter, so the commentary around other contracts contributing to its confidence in growth trajectory in FY27 was entirely fair I thought. I did not see this to be misleading at all. I thought it was a good pragmatic compromise in words so that unreasonable trading algorithms do not hurt the share price more than is needed.


22
twee
Added a month ago

So RTH lost the Stake contract to BET.

When RTH announced the contract with Stake in 2024 it was the 'most significant to date' and yet in RTH's announcement today it is 'not expected to have a material impact on RAS's financial performance in FY26.' My interpretation is that the Stake provided plenty of opportunity but it never eventuated into the significance revenue it promised. My guess is 1-3m of revenue impact.

Negotiations for the stake deal might have been going on a while, should the recent management share sales been seen in a more sinister light?

Most importantly, does this customer loss signal a weakening of RTH's products or competitive position? I think it's too soon to tell. Non-traditional racing customers like Stake becoming RTH customers and using the full turnkey solution is part of the bull thesis.

Still digesting this one. Interested in other takes.

EDIT: after digesting, my main takeaway is a reduced impression of management quality

27

Mujo
Added a month ago

Very disappointing hit, from what i understand the LeoVegas contract is a lot bigger - but does hit the growth profile.

19

dave665
Added a month ago

This line in the announcement really bugs me.

"The non-renewal is not expected to have a material impact on RAS's financial performance in FY26."

Isn't this just because the contract ends in May, no mention of the impact in FY27 when it would have the greatest impact.

Also I think this would be considered their first tier 1 customer loss?

29

Wini
Added a month ago

@twee I had a quick chat with RTH management this morning to get some more clarity on the Stake contract and a few other things. You are correct at the time they said it had the potential to be their largest contract, but in that potential was Stake targeting up to 40% of their racing revenue in the US. However given their "lightly regulated" status Stake struggled to get approval from key racing jurisdictions like New Jersey and Nevada. Given the US is still heavily reliant on tote betting and BET offers a product in that space that RTH doesn't, Stake opted to go with BET to gain US market entry. RTH management were sceptical on whether widescale US penetration can be achieved for Stake, but they do have a better chance with BET than RTH so fair enough I suppose.

I think the revenue from Stake was $1-1.5m per year, but was struck when RTH outsourced their managed trading services function to RacebookHQ where they had a 50/50 revenue split so net revenue loss for RTH is $500-750k. Stings, but not the end of the world. I couldn't help but ask about LeoVegas and despite not giving specifics management did confirm that the revenue from LeoVegas will "comfortably" exceed the Stake loss so @Mujo is correct there.

@dave665 I completely agree, I get why management want to put a positive spin on things but the way they have phrased that is downright misleading. I passed on that feedback.

44

reddogaustin
Added a month ago

My mate chattie mc chatgpt suggested the following after a bit of uploading and prompting - so I took the robots advice and topped up below $0.80

Also. If it helps - it suggested my fiends insights and opinions are "broadly correct, and it reinforces rather than undermines the base thesis" and "adds excellent colour and materially sharpens the analysis". Chattie likes the cut of your jib Strawpeople!


Does the Stake non-renewal materially impact RTH revenue?

Short answer:

No, not materially — but it does affect the quality and risk profile of forward revenue.

What actually happened (facts)

  • RAS confirmed the Stake “Complete Racing Solution” contract will not be renewed when it expires in May 2026

Management explicitly states the non-renewal “is not expected to have a material impact on RAS’s financial performance in FY26”

RAS highlights:

  • Continued focus on regulated markets (Australia, UK, Europe, Americas, Middle East)
  • Accelerated focus on Asia, which management frames as a larger runway
  • A strong FY27 pipeline, explicitly referencing the LeoVegas Group deal as replacement growth

What this implies quantitatively

From management’s wording and the structure of RAS contracts:

  • Stake was not a top-tier revenue contributor
  • Likely low single-digit % of group revenue (sub-5%)
  • Revenue loss occurs after FY26, not immediately
  • There is >12 months to backfill with other contracts

On its own, this does not break the revenue model.


But it does change how we think about the cases

This event is best interpreted as a signal, not a shock.

Below is how it adjusts the bear / base / bull framework.


Bear Case (worsens slightly )

What the Stake exit could mean in a bear scenario:

  • Stake non-renewal is an early warning that:
  • Some Tier-2 bookmakers may churn after initial launch
  • RAS’s “Complete Racing Solution” is not fully sticky for all clients
  • Asia expansion:
  • Takes longer to monetise
  • Requires more bespoke integration, slowing margin expansion
  • Replacement contracts arrive later than expected, creating:
  • FY26–FY27 revenue flatlining
  • Margin pressure from fixed costs

Bear case revenue impact:

  • FY26: ~neutral
  • FY27: –5% to –10% vs prior expectations
  • Market multiple compresses (ARR multiple drops from ~4–5x → ~3x)

Bear takeaway:

Stake isn’t the problem — client churn risk is.

Base Case (largely unchanged)

Why the base case holds:

  • Management credibly signals:
  • Stake was not material
  • Pipeline already includes LeoVegas and other regulated operators
  • Strategic shift away from:
  • Grey-market / lightly regulated operators
  • Toward higher-quality, more durable revenue
  • Resource reallocation to Asia may improve long-term unit economics

Base case revenue impact:

  • FY26: No material change
  • FY27: Stake fully replaced
  • ARR growth continues in mid-teens to low-20% range

Base takeaway:

This is portfolio hygiene, not deterioration.

Bull Case (arguably improves )

Counter-intuitive, but important.

Why the bull case can improve:

  • Stake exit reinforces RAS’s positioning as:
  • A regulated-market infrastructure provider
  • Not a “spray and pray” vendor to every bookmaker
  • Higher-quality clients (e.g. LeoVegas):
  • Larger balance sheets
  • Longer contract durations
  • Lower regulatory risk
  • Asia focus:
  • Much larger TAM
  • Higher long-term ARR potential per client

Bull case revenue impact:

  • Short-term: negligible
  • Medium-term:
  • Higher revenue quality
  • Better valuation multiple
  • More defensible earnings base

???? Bull takeaway:

Stake churn is replaced by better clients, not just more clients.

Net assessment (for your template)

Revenue impact?

Not material to FY26

Manageable in FY27

More about mix and signal than dollars

Case framework adjustment?

  • Bear: slightly worse (churn signal)
  • Base: unchanged
  • Bull: subtly stronger (strategic focus improves)

How this fits your Price Judgment logic

This announcement:

  • Does not justify panic selling
  • Does not justify aggressive multiple expansion yet
  • Supports a “Hold / Watch” stance until:
  • Asia revenue is visible
  • FY26 replacement contracts are confirmed


16