We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
I'd like to know what are the views of the Gambling Commission regarding the Bet365 advert(keep backing those winners and we'll keep giving you free bets)on CH4. I am told that they are forcefully persuade course bookmakers not to accept or encourage betting from minors or vulnerable persons yet this advert appeals to both those groups of people and others.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 8
|
By:
Keep backing those winners and we'll keep chinning you to a pittance
|
|
By:
How is that appealing to u18's when they can't open an account and have a bet?
|
|
By:
The advert was banned by the ASA but it appears to carry no weight.
ASA Adjudication on Bet365 Group Ltd Bet365 Group Ltd t/a Bet356.com Hillside Festival Way Stoke on Trent Staffordshire ST1 5SH Date: 27 January 2010 Media: Television Sector: Leisure Number of complaints: 3 Complaint Ref: 109236 Ad A TV ad for Bet365 stated “Back any single winner at 4/1 or more on any race shown live on Channel 4 and we’ll give you a free bet to the same stake on the next live Channel 4 race. Your free bet also wins at odds of 4/1 or more, you qualify for a free bet on the next Channel 4 race. Keep backing those winners and we’ll keep giving you free bets!” Issue Three viewers challenged whether the ad was misleading, because after winning one free bet they were told they could no longer take part in the promotion. BCAP TV Code 5.1.25.2.3 Response Bet365 said they believed the three viewers had unusual betting patterns and were exploiting the free offer. They believed two viewers were using betting exchanges whereby they could offset the risk of a bet and gain a free bet without risking any of their own money. Bet365 contended that an examination of the customers accounts showed that they bet on races with the same odds and, because they did not bet on all races, said it appeared they were systematically selecting races that allowed them to exploit the free bet offer. Bet365 stated that the third viewer also made selective bets and suspected they used a betting exchange. They believed the viewer backed horses each way, effectively giving them a bet on the horse both to win and lose, and they were unlikely to lose any money, which was "bad business". Bet365 said their terms and conditions made clear that promotional offers were only available for recreational players and explained they would only take the step of excluding a customer from the offer after a full investigation of their account and historic betting activity. Bet365 said only 2.5% of customers on their database were deemed to be non-recreational and were excluded from offers. Clearcast said the ad was not directed toward professional gamblers and considered the specific issues raised by viewers about their accounts was a matter between them and the advertiser. Assessment Upheld The ASA considered that the ad was likely to be interpreted as encouraging viewers to place successive bets on the condition that if they won they could place a further bet for free. We understood that Bet365 excluded a proportion of customers who they deemed to be non-recreational players; however, we considered that without defined criteria, it appeared that Bet365 had excluded customers from the offer when they were winning or were no longer profitable. We noted the ad did not state that customers who made each way bets, won frequently on similar bets, or used betting exchanges would be excluded from the offer. Although we understood that Bet365 believed the viewers were exploiting the offer, in the absence of qualification in the ad to make Bet365s limitations on the offer clear, we concluded the ad was likely to mislead. The ad breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Code rules 5.1.2 and 5.2.3 (Misleading advertising.) Action The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Bet365 to make the limitations of offers clear in future. |
|
By:
Does the ad. still appear in its "current form " ?
|
|
By:
As far as I can tell, yes.
|
|
By:
Thank you to IanP and others for their replies. However,what I'd really like to know is where do the Gambling Commission stand on this advert which, in my opinion is persuading members of the public to bet, which is what The Commission is supposed to be against, especially the vulnerable. Will The Commission come on here and explain? I doubt it.
|
|
By:
The ad had to be revised before it could be shown again.
But as far as I can make out, the revision is in very small type at the bottom of the screen. |
|
By:
GC will say what they usually say on any matter " nothing to do with us "
or we our only after the little man |