When William Hill threw out a cheeky three-way merger proposal from the Rank Group and 888 Holdings a couple of months ago, its chairman, Gareth Davis, explained robustly that the bookmaker would not be doing a deal based on “risk, debt and hope”.

Quite right, too. Life has become tougher for William Hill over the past year, and it has lost its chief executive on the way, but there was no reason to panic.

But now comes a deal the board wants to look at – a potential “merger of equals” with Amaya, the Canadian company whose PokerStars website dominates the world of online poker. But, using Davis’s own yardsticks, the appeal looks wobbly at best.

On risk, Amaya brings at least two big ones. The more obvious is a $870m (£704m) penalty in the US state of Kentucky. Amaya is probably correct in thinking it will not end up paying anything like that sum, but one can never be sure given US authorities’ past (baffling) attempts to combat online poker.

The other risk is that William Hill ends up with too much exposure to unregulated markets, meaning those where gambling is either banned or the rules are so unclear that your local operation can legislated out of existence. At the moment, William Hill’s exposure to unregulated territories is an admirably low 5%. After a merger with Amaya, the ratio would rise to about a quarter of the business. Big difference.

On debt, Amaya would bring a bundle. The combined group’s borrowings would be about 3.5 times the top-line profits. Historically, William Hill has aimed for under two times. If high levels of debt are not your bag, Amaya is a strange choice of partner.

The hope element is that cross-selling will do wonders for both companies – that Amaya’s poker players will want to bet on sport with William Hill, and vice versa. That seems plausible, but the degree is untested.

Add it up and we can agree that Amaya looks a better gamble than the complex Rank/888 proposal, where the debt ratios would have been even higher. The Canadian company is a fearsome generator of cash and it is digital and international – qualities prized by William Hill. All the same, there’s a whiff of desperation in the idea that an overdose of online poker, a game that’s barely growing these days, is the thing to fire up William Hill.

Note the limp reaction in the share price, up just 3%. In poker terms, Amaya is offering a marginal hand. William Hill’s investors may fairly feel the self-help cards are stronger.

Clock ticking on RBS inquiry

Facebook Twitter Pinterest RBS has admitted it did not always meet its own standards when dealing with small business customers. Photograph: Hannah Mckay/EPA

The bad smell around Royal Bank of Scotland’s global restructuring group (GRG) refuses to go away. Lawrence Tomlinson, an adviser to then-business secretary Sir Vince Cable, was the first to allege that the unit routinely ripped off small business customers, forced healthy companies into insolvency and then bought their assets for a song. That was back in 2013.

RBS has admitted it “did not always meet our own high standards” when dealing with small business customers but it has always vehemently denied (and did so again on Monday) the ugly charge of crashing viable businesses for its own gain. The bank has also commissioned two inquiries, both of which cleared the bank on the central allegations. And yet material keeps coming. Witness Buzzfeed and BBC Newsnight’s coverage of documents in which an RBS official wrote about a “dash for cash”.

In the end, it is only the Financial Conduct Authority, armed with powers of investigation, that can make sense of the tale. Its inquiry was launched in January 2014 after Tomlinson’s report and was initially promised by the end of 2015. That deadline came and went. This month’s update from the regulator said its review has been “complex and lengthy” and that it was therefore “important that we do not rush the final stages of this process”.

Well, yes, it’s better to be accurate than to be quick. But the FCA is still pushing the limits of acceptability on timing. Andrew Bailey, the organisation’s new boss, has hinted that he is aiming for publication by the end of this year. Better to make that a firm commitment and work some overtime. Delay has not helped small firms that may or may not be due compensation – and it’s not doing much for RBS either.

Mitie lessons to learn from ‘prickly peer’

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Ruby McGregor-Smith is stepping down as Mitie CEO. Photograph: Yui Mok/PA

Mitie Group wants you to know that Ruby McGregor-Smith is leaving of her own volition. News of her departure after 10 years at the helm was presented as an “update on CEO succession plans”. Phil Bentley, formerly of Cable & Wireless Communications, has been hired after a process that started “late last year” – in other words, before the profits warning that sent the outsourcer’s share price to a seven-year low.

Amid the tributes to Lady McGregor-Smith, there wasn’t even room to refer to the profits shocker in the official statement. “A challenging time for the sector” was the closest Bentley came. His first task, one can deduce, is to challenge a corporate hostility to criticism that earned McGregor-Smith the wonderful nickname “the prickly peer”.