Forums

General Betting

Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Da Daddy
17 Mar 10 11:15
Joined:
Date Joined: 28 Apr 06
| Topic/replies: 51 | Blogger: Da Daddy's blog
ASA Adjudication on William Hill Organisation Ltd

Date: 17 March 2010
Media:National press, Point of sale
Sector:Leisure
Number of complaints:1
Complaint Ref:110859

Ad
a. One ad, in the Racing Post, was headed
Pause Switch to Standard View ASA Adjudication against William Hill
Show More
Loading...
Report donemyconkers March 17, 2010 10:52 AM GMT
Interesting - I saw that Ad in one of Hill's windows the other day and thought they were on shakey ground.
Report Da Daddy March 17, 2010 10:55 AM GMT
Their advertising in their shop windows are not within the ASA's remit. So they can continue misleading people in their shop windows regardless of this decision!
Report donemyconkers March 17, 2010 10:57 AM GMT
What a ridiculous state of affairs !
Report Da Daddy March 17, 2010 11:01 AM GMT
I completely agree.

I guess someone would have to make a separate complaint to Trading Standards in order for the shop windows to be looked at. That said, Trading Standards would have different terms of reference to the ASA and would also not necessarily have an appetite to deal with it. So William Hill will probably be able to carry on trumpeting "BEST PRICES FACT" in all of their shop windows for the forseeable future.
Report Lori March 17, 2010 11:09 AM GMT
Would be great if other bookies could follow suit with "William Hill facts exposed" in their shop windows :^0
Report The Betfairy March 17, 2010 11:13 AM GMT
Action
The ads must not appear again in their current form.

That punishment is a little harsh, imho.
Report Lori March 17, 2010 11:14 AM GMT
LOL Betfairy, the same thought crossed my mind.
Report The Betfairy March 17, 2010 11:16 AM GMT
Thus confirming that it's okay to con people, so long as you don't do it again.
Report IanP March 17, 2010 5:30 PM GMT
What happens if they just ignore the adjudication as bet365 have done with their TV ad ?
Report The Investor March 17, 2010 5:33 PM GMT

donemyconkers 17 Mar 11:52
Interesting - I saw that Ad in one of Hill's windows the other day and thought they were on shakey ground.


I though the same when I saw it!
Report askari1 March 19, 2010 1:45 AM GMT
'Honesty', 'Truthfulness' and 'Other'--priceless!
Report BOG DARKING March 19, 2010 6:58 AM GMT
:0
Report Paul888 March 20, 2010 12:43 PM GMT
These ASA rulings are pointless without the companies concerned being fined.

A few year's ago I owned a magazine, and a rival magazine claimed to be have the largest circulation in its niche to attract advertisers. It of course didn't and I got an ASA ruling against it, but what did it cost them? Nothing, because nobody reads ASA rulings or cares. They just remember the advert.

So get some teeth ASA or give it up.....or go look at ebay and all of those "established", "unique", or "moneymaking" websites people are selling.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com