An interview with We the Bookie Founder Malcom Wilkinson

Last year at the Canadian Gaming Conference I was met by two people who were preparing to launch a new sportsbook called We The Bookie. The basic concept of the sportsbook was that after each month, all winnings earned by the sportsbook would be divided with the book keeping one half of the profits and the other half of the profits would be divided among losing bettors’ play. It was a very unique idea, but basically being in a Beta test I decided to see if they were still around a year later and if they were, I would write about it. As it turns out We the Bookie is still operating in Ireland with a hope of expanding globally. So, I reached out to the founder of the company, Macolm Wilkinson, to answer questions about how the concept works, how it has done to date and what the future plans were. Here was the interview:

Hartley: Can you describe how the sportsbook works and what exactly the “WeShare” model does?
We the Bookie: The WeShare Pool builds up over a calendar month, and on the 1st of the next month, customers who lost get a rebate in real money, not bet credits. Here’s how it works:

1. We take 50% of the month’s GGR and put it in the WeShare Pool.
2. That pool is divided among losing customers based on their losses relative to others.
If every customer lost, WeShare would hit 50% although on average, it’s been 25–30%.

If we have a losing month no one gets a rebate. We have a clause to carry over losses to the next month, but we haven't done so, despite two losing months. We’d never take money from winners to cover a loss. Over time, as we grow, losing months should become vanishingly rare.

While the WeShare percentage may sound high, it is correlated to the hold rate but is also impacted by volatility. For example, if 100 bettors wager $100 on one NFL game each in a month, the hold would be about 4% and the WeShare percentage would be 2% since half the customers would be winners. But if the same 100 bettors wagered on 1,000 games each the hold would still be about 4% but the WeShare would be close to 50% since with volume there would be very few winners. Our average WeShare percentage since inception is 27%.

Hartley:  How exactly did you come up with the idea?
We the Bookie: The idea started with me and a buddy taking each other’s bets to avoid paying vig. We tried doing it over texts at first, but it got messy with confirming lines and settling up. So, we opened an online betting account together, multiplied our real stakes by 100, and let the site handle the math. This way, our vig canceled out, and we doubled our rooting interest in games. Eventually, I thought, why not create a betting site based around this model —profitable but more fun and fairer for customers?

Hartley: You currently only operate in Ireland, although you indicated when the time is right you might expand to other markets, including the UK and possibly Ontario, where you were born. Why did you chose to start the company in Ireland?
We the Bookie: I lived in Ireland for five years in my 20s and fell in love with the place. When I had the "aha" moment in 2018, sports betting wasn’t legal in Canada like it is now. Ireland already had a mature betting market, and I had connections there, so it felt like the right spot.

We launched in 2023 on a platform that wasn’t great, so we relaunched at the end of that year. This year has been more about fixing the platform than growing customers, but next year we’ll shift focus to customer acquisition and ultimately scaling globally.

It should be noted that in a conversation Wilkinson had with a podcast he mentioned that Ireland, because it is a relatively small but mature market, was an ideal place to start the operation so any necessary tweaks could be worked out without major consequences. And since it’s a mature market it is the perfect place to test the disruptive nature of the model.

Hartley: How did the launch go? Have you experienced any issues, and do you feel you can compete with the big books? Are you happy to be a small player with a small, targeted group of bettors?
We the Bookie: I believe our model will compete with the Paddy Power/William Hill/Bet365s of the world in much the same way that Uber competes with the conventional taxi industry. Having said that, most of our first-year post-launch has been troubleshooting the platform and finding our feet with a zero-budget marketing reality.

In the podcast, Wilkinson said that they expect word of mouth to enhance customer acquisition. While larger companies are spending much of their revenue on advertising and promotions, We The Bookie does not need to spend that type of money on advertising because they do not have the exact same model as traditional sportsbooks and can differentiate themselves on concept alone. FanDuel and DraftKings must spend the huge budget on advertising because they are after the exact same customer and have little to differentiate themselves. But We The Bookie, with its rebate model, is unique. Wilkinson did acknowledge that the need to spend money on acquisitions, but once a customer is with the company and starts receiving the rebates, they will be very sticky customers, so churn is significantly reduced compared to competitors.

Hartley: What have your revenues been like since your launch?
We the Bookie: This year was a testing phase with 50–100 active bettors per month and about €10k GGR (gross gaming revenue). In 2025, we’ll focus on customer acquisition and expect much better numbers. 

Hartley: You stated in a podcast you have maximum liabilities set per market. Would you change the odds or just suspend betting on that market if that liability limit is reached?
We the Bookie:Since we are a small operator, we are not able to change the odds from our provider. We can only manage the risk settings. If a max liability is reached, that market closes. But we are able to apportion a percentage of the max liability to a single customer, so one customer won’t be able to close a market himself. For example, if the max liability on a Leafs game was 10k and we set the single-customer percentage at 50%, then after a customer makes a max bet, there will still be 5k of liability available to other customers who want to bet on the Leafs game. 

Hartley: If you have a really bad potential liability on a particular future market, would you ever lay some of it off at Betfair or elsewhere?
We the Bookie: Yes, we have a corporate account with Betdaq (Irish version of Betfair) for this purpose, but we haven’t used it yet. We prefer setting risk limits over taking big bets that we’d need to lay off. Plus, laying bets externally complicates the WeShare math. 

Hartley: Can you explain the Bookie’s View feature? How often do bettors use that?
We the Bookie: The Bookie’s View feature allows our customers to see what the action is on big sporting events. For example, we show which golfers have been heavily backed in the British Open. Our customers who don’t bet on golf can then cheer according to how backed the contenders are. They don’t want We The Bookie to lose on the event since this hurts the WeShare Pool.

But the Bookie’s View will be more relevant once our customer base increases. And we need to build in some tech, which will take time and money.

I envision the Bookie’s View being available for, say, NFL Sundays or NHL Saturdays, PGA golf events, etc. We will give our customers a vested interest in these events that are popular to watch.

Hartley: How do you deal with issues like collusion where friends bet the opposite side of a game or bettors having multiple accounts? Do you use AI?
We the Bookie: For now, we monitor betting patterns manually. As we grow, we’ll integrate AI to detect sharp bettors or customers trying to game the WeShare system. We might even develop a custom solution tailored to our model.

Hartley: Can you explain the Bookie’s View feature? How often do bettors use that?
We the Bookie: The Bookie’s View feature allows our customers to see what the action is on big sporting events. For example, we show which golfers have been heavily backed in the British Open.

Hartley: You say you want to go to UK and maybe Ontario. Could you be profitable in jurisdictions charging a $100,000 yearly license fee and taking 20% or more of profits?
We the Bookie: Absolutely. While license fees and taxes are high, our model reduces profits by the amount we pay in WeShares (since they’re real cash payouts). And the licence fee will pale into insignificance if the popularity of our brand and model gets anywhere close to our expectations.

Hartley:What about casinos? Is this in the works? As I see it, if you only offered slots and slot-based table games that could work. If RTP is 95% then if casino players bet $100,000 in a month you would make $5,000 to be divided $2,500 to yourself and $2,500 to the losers. It seems most logical, no? Jackpot games are more concerning, but I believe the slot provider pays all jackpots.
We the Bookie: I completely agree with your logic there regarding slots and jackpot games. Our decision to not offer casino was more to have better brand focus. Casino can be added any time, so for now we want to have a clear brand identity as a sportsbook who offers this unique WeShare system.

Hartley: What else do our readers need to  know about We The Bookie?

Wilkinson mentioned that he is active on LinkedIn and would love to hear from anyone who is excited to be part of scaling a fun, fair, and socially responsible global brand.

Hartley: Can you explain the Bookie’s View feature? How often do bettors use that?
We the Bookie: The Bookie’s View feature allows our customers to see what the action is on big sporting events. For example, we show which golfers have been heavily backed in the British Open.

Read insights from Hartley Henderson every week here at OSGA and check out Hartley's RUMOR MILL!