Liverpool City Council Ban FOBTs In Betting Shops

[SodjesSixteenIncher]

So fact 1 and fact 3 tell me that betting patterns have changed in recent years and the industry has advanced to other methods of gambling. Fact 2 is not really a fact either, unless you happen to be high up in a bookmaking chain and know the ins and outs of their strategic decisions. What's your point here anyway?

High up in a bookmaking chain / can use google to find an article summarising an industry analysis report, on the first page of my search.

I'll give you 50/50 odds on which of those two is correct.

[ayrmad]

If fact 1 indicates that betting patterns have changed, then how did bookmakers make a profit previously? From selling tea and coffee? The big 3 have just gone from making £10-£15M a year in 1999 to making £200-250M a year in 2012.

Fact 2 is absolutely a fact, despite some of the naysayers on here. The evidence is overwhelming. I can't be arsed producing a report demonstrating the statistical proof.

I wouldn't waste much energy educating people if I was you MT.

[ayrmad]

Of course they do, but only a complete and utter moron would claim that because both sides are dubious, the one you sympathise with most therefore becomes 'fact'.

Which neatly summarises your contribution to the thread so far.

The difference is I know what I'm talking about, you're just posting your usual drivel.

[vikingTON]

High up in a bookmaking chain / can use google to find an article summarising an industry analysis report, on the first page of my search. I'll give you 50/50 odds on which of those two is correct.

An 'industry analysis report' by, err, an NGO pressing a political agenda in the very same field.

Yep, that's some bullet-proof impartial evidence you've found there.

[vikingTON]

The difference is I know what I'm talking about

Then be sure to help your buddies out by finding the facts demonstrating your point. They seem to be struggling.

[SodjesSixteenIncher]

So not actually a 'Fact' then, but an unproven argument put forward by politicians like Diane Abbot and a report compiled by an organisation with a clear dog in the fight. A claim contrary to the conclusions of the relevant select committee.

Lolwut? First you were theorising on government not regulating based on anything other than lobbyists, now you're discrediting a report because the Select Committee disagrees? What an absolutely baffling bit of self-contradiction.

Maybe you could find whoever wrote that report, let them know they're wrong and that you're shite at the football bets anyway so it's tomayto tomahto.

[ayrmad]

Then be sure to help your buddies out by finding the facts demonstrating your point. They seem to be struggling.

Mid-table could loss almost everyone on here put together on this subject.

1 of the things that helped me see the error of my ways was being able to see the proliferation of addictive techniques in bookies, understanding emotion is a major tool in the armoury of the big bookies.

Edited November 7, 2013 by ayrmad

[vikingTON]

Lolwut? First you were theorising on government not regulating based on anything other than lobbyists, now you're discrediting a report because the Select Committee disagrees? What an absolutely baffling bit of self-contradiction.

I suggest you read the thread again champ: at no point have I 'theorised' in such a manner; even if I had, it would still have had absolutely nothing to do with the dismantling of your Guardian article as proving a 'fact'. A claim that was directly challenged by a select committee in the exact same article you cited as proving 'fact'.

Your argument is the equivalent of taking OPEC and Greenpeace's figures on oil pollution, comparing the two, and then wildly declaring that one of them is 'fact' because you prefer it to be the case. Piss-poor logic fail.

Maybe you could find whoever wrote that report, let them know they're wrong and that you're shite at the football bets anyway so it's tomayto tomahto.

Still, at least you're taking it well.

Edited November 7, 2013 by vikingTON

[Swampy]

The machines are designed to get people hooked though with the visuals and creating the false impression of near misses.

I'm by no means defending the machines because you're absolutely right here. What I'm saying is that online casinos use many of the same techniques.

Gambling is and always has been a business about profit, that's a given, but what we're seeing now is the application of serious psychological techniques to abuse the customer. At this point it's worth asking where 'personal responsibility' actually begins and ends.

[SodjesSixteenIncher]

I suggest you read the thread again champ: at no point have I 'theorised' in such a manner; even if I had, it would still have had absolutely nothing to do with the dismantling of your Guardian article as proving a 'fact'. A claim that was directly challenged by a select committee in the exact same article you cited as proving 'fact'. Your argument is the equivalent of taking OPEC and Greenpeace's figures on oil pollution, comparing the two, and then wildly declaring that one of them is 'fact' because you prefer it to be the case. Piss-poor logic fail. Still, at least you're taking it well.

Fairer Gambling = Not to be listened to. Has 'a dog in the race'.Select Commitee = Can legitimately disregard the facts presented in said report.But oh wait...

Then the reason why crack cocaine is legislated against, while alcohol is legal and taxed, is due to lobbying presence

Just ignore that whole Government acting for lobbyists bit guys, the gambling industry don't roll like that. Those Select Committee guys have absolutely no dogs in this race.Seems the FOBT fanboys have the same problems with their betting and debating. Can't quit when they're behind.

[mid-table]

Fact 1 - Bookmakers profits are the result of people losing money gambling.

Fact 2 - Betting shops have clustered - particularly in deprived communities - because of the four FOBT per shop rule

Fact 3 - FOBTs make more than the sum total of sports gambling.

What do those three facts in conjunction tell you? I'm not saying people's anecdotal arguments about what 'the real problem is' aren't super fascinating they are mostly bollocks.

Enjoy responsibly my arse.

('Facts' provided by media coverage of this topic in recent years. I haven't read any Willy Hills annual reports.)

So fact 1 and fact 3 tell me that betting patterns have changed in recent years and the industry has advanced to other methods of gambling. Fact 2 is not really a fact either, unless you happen to be high up in a bookmaking chain and know the ins and outs of their strategic decisions. What's your point here anyway?

I quite clearly meant that FOBT betting has become the main source of income for bookmakers whereas before it was nearly solely sports betting. That shows a change in betting habit but it doesn't show anything other than that. The profits are increasing for all sorts of reasons and again, I fail to see the point you are trying to make by saying the industry is performing better these days?

I'm not sure if you have misappropriated one of your comments, but I have quoted the conversation above.

In summary;

Someone states that bookmakers profits are the result of people losing money gambling.

You state that this tells you that betting patterns have changed in recent years and the industry has advanced to other methods of gambling.

I don't know where you get this from. Bookmakers profits have always been the result of people losing money gambling. Changing betting patterns have no impact on this, the purpose of a bookmaker is to make money from an over-round, which will inevitably result in people losing money from gambling.

Sports betting profits increase from £15M to £26M. FOBT profit increases from £0M to £201M. That does not demonstrate that the profits are increasing for all sorts of reasons. It indicates that the profits are increasing for one main reason.

[Swampy]

MT, that part about FOBTS not allowing near-misses, are you absolutely certain of that? I used to play a game called Rainbow Riches occasionally and I'm pretty sure it had near-misses programmed in.

[Swampy]

The profit from sports betting looks ridiculously low, have you any evidence for that?

The rule of thumb that I heard from ~someone ITK~ four years ago was that football betting profit was 5% of football betting turnover. This seemed hugely low to me but that's what he told me. This was someone at William Hill. Was he talking bollocks? Perhaps.

[54_and_counting]

Everyone up for banning casinos then too? Same machines in there but with the added bonus of a bar and 24 hour licenses.

I have 4 bookies within a mile of my house, nearest casino is 5 miles away

[kev23]

I have 4 bookies within a mile of my house, nearest casino is 5 miles away

Nearest Casino to me in roughly 30 miles away. I would imagine there are over 50 bookies in between. Maybe closer to 100.

[mattydfc]

When i was slightly addicted to gambling the 20 minute walk to work involved me walking past 6 or 7 bookies. There were a lot more scattered around about me and id usually always end up blowing some of my wages right after a shift. Now im more sensible with gambling thankfully, but ive seen people properly ruined by these machines and its awful to watch.

[uni]

We are at a worrying time for gambling problems all because of the rise of smartphones and the fact that there seems to be more bookies than there is people. A close friend of mine made £12k and lost it all a few days later all on his phone. If you can't buy alcohol when the shops shut why can you bet when the bookies shut? It's a very dangerous addiction and I've seen what it does first hand.

[Romeo]

I've got a brother in law who keeps putting money into these machines and puggys. I have bailed him out a couple of times for the sake of his kids to feed them all. Him and his wife then shit on me from a great height over the money that I gave them,(thousands not pennies). They now get f**k all from me, the lot of them can starve as far as I am concerned, my wife knows that a divorce will be called if she gives them a single penny behind my back. I heard that he blew another £900 last week so they will probably be facing eviction again.

Same here I have a cousin who's mother had to go to the bookies and ask them not to let him bet, some did, some didn't. This guy has mental health issues and doesn't work and get a fair whack in benefits most of which he continues to spunk on these machines. Thing is though, before this it was drink, drugs, horses..just seems to be one thing after another.

[ayrmad]

I've got a brother in law who keeps putting money into these machines and puggys. I have bailed him out a couple of times for the sake of his kids to feed them all. Him and his wife then shit on me from a great height over the money that I gave them,(thousands not pennies). They now get f**k all from me, the lot of them can starve as far as I am concerned, my wife knows that a divorce will be called if she gives them a single penny behind my back. I heard that he blew another £900 last week so they will probably be facing eviction again.

Unfortunately you've got to shite on people when you're compulsive(usually those you love),Blue was excellent at educating those who wanted it on this site.

I was gambling 2 or 3 times what my mum had as weekly housekeeping many moons ago when I was 14 or 15, fortunately circumstances helped guide me away from major crime at the right time.

FOBTS accelerate the slide dramatically for some and appears to gobble up plenty of long term normal gamblers as well, the bookies are insidious b*****ds.

[Silvio]

I've just done a quick calculation in my head and I think there are 21 bookmakers in Paisley. 21.