Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
11 Feb 13
12:49
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Jan 10
Dirk Vennix, from the association, said the vast majority of gamblers in the UK bet "safely and responsibly" and suggested that less 1% of people who had a problem.
"It is wrong to suggest that these machines are the highest contributor to problem gambling," he said.
Now aren't we glad that's all cleared up.
"It is wrong to suggest that these machines are the highest contributor to problem gambling," he said.
Now aren't we glad that's all cleared up.
Show More
A truely ignorant response WFT.Unbelievable how posters get on their high horse when disagreeing with a post.
So you have decided I have neither friends nor money,and are concerned about my spacing and punctuation.
Oh well,shows ,yet again,how misguided you can be,going with an assumption again.
I meant to say....
I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. I was beginning to think you didn't have any.
PS It's spelt "truly"
PPS You should put a space after a full-stop as well.
So you have decided I have neither friends nor money,and are concerned about my spacing and punctuation.
Oh well,shows ,yet again,how misguided you can be,going with an assumption again.
I meant to say....
I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. I was beginning to think you didn't have any.
PS It's spelt "truly"
PPS You should put a space after a full-stop as well.
If bookmakers dont give gamblers a bad name then the new casinos on streets will make it a certainty long term
meanwhile the cash machine keeps rolling.
meanwhile the cash machine keeps rolling.
spot on WFT - morons like unbiased preaching make my ar*e hurt....... and anybody daft enough to repeatedly lend their own money to friends who have lost more money than they can afford on horse racing wants their nut looking at - jog on unbiased you clown.
a very small number of people are contributing half of the bookmakers profits ?
Seemingly yes. The latest figures show 1% of the adult population play FOBTs at least once a month.
Rcing - Why would any business target people without money?
Seemingly yes. The latest figures show 1% of the adult population play FOBTs at least once a month.
Rcing - Why would any business target people without money?
playing fixed odds and revolving your cash at 97% per turnover equates to 1% after an hour so if that
wont cause gambling problems then sharks don't eat small fish!
Pretty much what the commission does on here.
wont cause gambling problems then sharks don't eat small fish!
Pretty much what the commission does on here.
WFT,it will take a lot more than nonsense from an anonymous forum to hurt my feelings.
I am more concerned about your pedantry,with regard to commas,spaces etc.,as I am trying to work out how that is involved with the issue of FOBTs.Perhaps it isn't.
My secretary doesn't work on Monday's,so I am having to type my responses myself.
I am more concerned about your pedantry,with regard to commas,spaces etc.,as I am trying to work out how that is involved with the issue of FOBTs.Perhaps it isn't.
My secretary doesn't work on Monday's,so I am having to type my responses myself.
WFT must have a picture of Gandalf on his wall. He posts a load of nonsense but he does it in a grammatically correct manner.
My secretary doesn't work on Monday's,so I am having to type my responses myself.
Too much, my face hurts with laughing.
Here's a clue. When you type in the reply box, and it underlines the word and goes red, you've made a mistake. You can then right click on it and it will yell you what you've done wrong.
Failing that, ask the secretary, or one of your law colleagues, for a few English lessons.
Too much, my face hurts with laughing.
Here's a clue. When you type in the reply box, and it underlines the word and goes red, you've made a mistake. You can then right click on it and it will yell you what you've done wrong.
Failing that, ask the secretary, or one of your law colleagues, for a few English lessons.
WFT must have a picture of Gandalf on his wall. He posts a load of nonsense but he does it in a grammatically correct manner.
Perhaps you might like to point out the nonsense bits, instead of spouting your increasing, pathetic, attempts at responding.
PS I'm Gandalf The White. The only thing grey about me is the sparse remnants of what I used to call hair.
Perhaps you might like to point out the nonsense bits, instead of spouting your increasing, pathetic, attempts at responding.
PS I'm Gandalf The White. The only thing grey about me is the sparse remnants of what I used to call hair.
Rcing - Why would any business target people without money ?
they wouldn't clive . good point . but explain why it is that there are more people gambling in betting shops in poorer areas compared to richer areas ?
they wouldn't clive . good point . but explain why it is that there are more people gambling in betting shops in poorer areas compared to richer areas ?
clive82 11 Feb 13 15:14
a very small number of people are contributing half of the bookmakers profits ?
Seemingly yes. The latest figures show 1% of the adult population play FOBTs at least once a month.
____________
do you have the % of bookmakers customers who play them
and what % of the adult population go into bookies
a very small number of people are contributing half of the bookmakers profits ?
Seemingly yes. The latest figures show 1% of the adult population play FOBTs at least once a month.
____________
do you have the % of bookmakers customers who play them
and what % of the adult population go into bookies
rcing,unless you are a newcomer,you will know that to have always been the case.Betting shops have always been the domain of the working man,since created.
"do you have the % of bookmakers customers who play them
and what % of the adult population go into bookies"
Why would that be relevant? The figures show 1% of the adult population play FOBTs at least once a month. To do so they have to go in LBOs and some of them no doubt also place bets as well. These are not my figures by the way they come from the 'Omnibus survey into participation in Gambling' which is publically available.
They are independent of any commercially interested group such as bookies, casinos or even muppets on here who think banning FOBTs will help them get their arbs on.
and what % of the adult population go into bookies"
Why would that be relevant? The figures show 1% of the adult population play FOBTs at least once a month. To do so they have to go in LBOs and some of them no doubt also place bets as well. These are not my figures by the way they come from the 'Omnibus survey into participation in Gambling' which is publically available.
They are independent of any commercially interested group such as bookies, casinos or even muppets on here who think banning FOBTs will help them get their arbs on.
...They are independent of any commercially interested group such as bookies, casinos or even muppets on here who think banning FOBTs will help them get their arbs on.
You were doing so well up to that point Clive82!
You were doing so well up to that point Clive82!
That wasn't a bite.
I was just commenting that it does nothing to advance your argument.
I was just commenting that it does nothing to advance your argument.
It shows the inherently dishonest posturing that goes on, on here.
None of the usual posters on here have a genuine concern about problem gambling. They use that as a proxy for their true agenda which arises out of the twisted logic that if you ban FOBTs, bookies will be more inclined to accept unprofitable bets.
Despite repeatedly asking nobody has been able to explain why they think removing half the bookies profits will make them more inclined to reduce OTC margins.
At least the faith group prohibitionists do it out of principle, rather then personal greed.
None of the usual posters on here have a genuine concern about problem gambling. They use that as a proxy for their true agenda which arises out of the twisted logic that if you ban FOBTs, bookies will be more inclined to accept unprofitable bets.
Despite repeatedly asking nobody has been able to explain why they think removing half the bookies profits will make them more inclined to reduce OTC margins.
At least the faith group prohibitionists do it out of principle, rather then personal greed.
clive , if fobts were banned , do you think OTC profits on horse racing would go up ?
It shows the inherently dishonest posturing that goes on, on here.
Do you really believe the fact that you are dishonest that all other people must be too ?
None of the usual posters on here have a genuine concern about problem gambling. They use that as a proxy for their true agenda which arises out of the twisted logic that if you ban FOBTs, bookies will be more inclined to accept unprofitable bets.
This "twisted logic" only seems to belong to you. You keep mentioning it which might just give rise to the fact that you might believe it yourself. Personally, I don't believe it. There's no way dishonest bookmakers are ever going to back to operating a fair book.
Despite repeatedly asking nobody has been able to explain why they think removing half the bookies profits will make them more inclined to reduce OTC margins.
Again, it's only you that repeats this.
At least the faith group prohibitionists do it out of principle, rather then personal greed.
I'm surprised you can even spell "principle", and I bow to your obvious knowledge of personal greed.
Do you really believe the fact that you are dishonest that all other people must be too ?
None of the usual posters on here have a genuine concern about problem gambling. They use that as a proxy for their true agenda which arises out of the twisted logic that if you ban FOBTs, bookies will be more inclined to accept unprofitable bets.
This "twisted logic" only seems to belong to you. You keep mentioning it which might just give rise to the fact that you might believe it yourself. Personally, I don't believe it. There's no way dishonest bookmakers are ever going to back to operating a fair book.
Despite repeatedly asking nobody has been able to explain why they think removing half the bookies profits will make them more inclined to reduce OTC margins.
Again, it's only you that repeats this.
At least the faith group prohibitionists do it out of principle, rather then personal greed.
I'm surprised you can even spell "principle", and I bow to your obvious knowledge of personal greed.
It shows the inherently dishonest posturing that goes on, on here.
None of the usual posters on here have a genuine concern about problem gambling.
Clive82, you are generalising though aren't you? Yeah sure, some have been transparent enough to voice their disdain for these machines, believing that the bookmakers decision to close them down was influenced by the lucrative profits that the Fobts generate. You cannot use that slur and apply it to everybody.
As a reformed arber, I can speak freely. I knew that my time was short lived, I was always going to be stopped and the fact that 4 machines stood in the corner of an LBO was irrelevant.
Not everybody will take the small margin that I was happy to and some are just out to get the best price available. Arbers have unfortunately tarnished the image of a punter that seeks value and the bookmakers are quick to flag such individuals.
Now I have admitted to being an arber, that has no influence on my concerns for the new demographic of punters entering the LBO's. Considering the small sample of the LBO'S I have worked in, the decline concerning OTC horse racing bets was tangible, this within the triangle of the NH stables of Nicholls, Pipe and Hobbs. Yes, the industry has evolved and I have to say that I have dealt with problem gamblers from both products (fobt/otc), though it was noticeably lopsided towards the fobts, at the time of my departure from the industry. High majority of those excluding were below the age of 25, having never contacted a problem gambling helpline. I spoke to each individual, that is where my concern stems from... it may be misguided and certainly is not empirical but it is a narrative that I personally had to deal with.
Your assertion that I, as a former arber, will be feigning concern to advance my own personal agenda is naive and frankly ignorant. I worked in the industry and left due to my belief that the industry was losing integrity, not just concerning this issue, I hasten to add! I know that there is no going back to the days I was placing large wagers over the counter, I have moved on and adapted.
My concern towards problem gambling remains and has done so for many a year prior to my arbing. I too, have flirted with the issue personally (though I have never touched a casino product). Fortunately, I had the ability to recognise and address it at an early stage, I fear that many don't realise those implications.
None of the usual posters on here have a genuine concern about problem gambling.
Clive82, you are generalising though aren't you? Yeah sure, some have been transparent enough to voice their disdain for these machines, believing that the bookmakers decision to close them down was influenced by the lucrative profits that the Fobts generate. You cannot use that slur and apply it to everybody.
As a reformed arber, I can speak freely. I knew that my time was short lived, I was always going to be stopped and the fact that 4 machines stood in the corner of an LBO was irrelevant.
Not everybody will take the small margin that I was happy to and some are just out to get the best price available. Arbers have unfortunately tarnished the image of a punter that seeks value and the bookmakers are quick to flag such individuals.
Now I have admitted to being an arber, that has no influence on my concerns for the new demographic of punters entering the LBO's. Considering the small sample of the LBO'S I have worked in, the decline concerning OTC horse racing bets was tangible, this within the triangle of the NH stables of Nicholls, Pipe and Hobbs. Yes, the industry has evolved and I have to say that I have dealt with problem gamblers from both products (fobt/otc), though it was noticeably lopsided towards the fobts, at the time of my departure from the industry. High majority of those excluding were below the age of 25, having never contacted a problem gambling helpline. I spoke to each individual, that is where my concern stems from... it may be misguided and certainly is not empirical but it is a narrative that I personally had to deal with.
Your assertion that I, as a former arber, will be feigning concern to advance my own personal agenda is naive and frankly ignorant. I worked in the industry and left due to my belief that the industry was losing integrity, not just concerning this issue, I hasten to add! I know that there is no going back to the days I was placing large wagers over the counter, I have moved on and adapted.
My concern towards problem gambling remains and has done so for many a year prior to my arbing. I too, have flirted with the issue personally (though I have never touched a casino product). Fortunately, I had the ability to recognise and address it at an early stage, I fear that many don't realise those implications.
Clive my good man, have a browse at ladbrokes horse prices on oddschecker, its finished dont you get it, exchanges for sports enthusiasts, little fruit machines, roulette and bingo for the big four, everyone i know walks past the high street bookies takes in a latte with sprinkles in neros and goes to betfair, no refusals, no demands for DNA, life can be so simple, you are a deluded chap if you think anyone wants to get a bet on with the likes of the tragic sign.............. richard glynn, the dream is over, the only bet is, how will he fail with ****, it seems like it would be hard, but ladbrokes can screw anything up.........you are indeed naive, people do care about problem gambling, you like so many others are paranoid everyones arbing .......... who are you anyway ? are you involved with one of the fobt reliant businesses, got to run, emmerdales on, but seriously GET REAL . and tell me who you are old chap xx
Feb 11, 2013 -- 2:10PM, Big Boss wrote:
no skill in these machines, one very large button 2ft x 2ft across with the word SPIN U MUG on it underneath a roulette wheel screen covered in bulletproof glass
brilliant
Eggpresident their business model is to get rid of anyone with a modicum of knowledge and fawn over the mugs. I would argue that they have been pretty effective at doing that.
They don't want the sort of people who use BF. Their business now has a higher percentage of mug money that at any time in history. I imagine they are very pleased about that.
They don't want the sort of people who use BF. Their business now has a higher percentage of mug money that at any time in history. I imagine they are very pleased about that.
ALL THE GAMBLERS THAT I USED TO KNOW THAT WENT IN THE BOOKIES ,ALL HAD PROBLEMS WITH GAMBLING AND SO DID I ,I THOUGHT I WAS ONE OF THE NICEST PROBLEM GAMBLERS IN THE COUNTRY ,AT LEAST I NEVER KICKED ANYTHING WHEN MY BETS HAD LOST
PROBLEM GAMBLERS ARE GOOD AT TELLING LIES AND COVERING MISDAMENOURS UP
WELL THEY THINK THEIR GOOD UNTILL THEY GET FOUND OUT
banned banks, i agree with you 100 per cent,(its what im saying) my point is i dont care and it will never change, im banned from the shops and online for showing a profit but those were the days when you could get a bet on, its never going back, it will get worse, i dont even try and place a bet in the likes of freds, 50 at 9s got refused and offered sp as the trader decided it was perilously close to the exchange price, it wasnt even for me, just an old chap with a mobility scooter outside (my good friend art c!)............ its OVER, AND AS LONG AS IM NOT SHOVED IN FRONT OF A FOBT AND GLUED TO A CHAIR TO DIE OF BOREDOM IVE ACCEPTED IT, i suggest everyone does the same.... please never ever hold the insane notion they will ever change , however there will be a change in your local shop, there will be more fobts someday soon ..........
Banned-banks..
Tell us what you think of the rancid clive82 again.I recall that you once said that he was not involved in the industry.
For what it is worth he has to be the most pathetic specimen ever to post on here.He has changed his picture again He did not like the association with Oscar Wilde.
I know that you agree with him that if FOBTS were banned it would not make the slightest bit of difference to how the "Bookmakers" would trade."If" they were banned perhaps one of you could inform us how the "Bookmakers" would sustain their profits.
Tell us what you think of the rancid clive82 again.I recall that you once said that he was not involved in the industry.
For what it is worth he has to be the most pathetic specimen ever to post on here.He has changed his picture again
He did not like the association with Oscar Wilde.I know that you agree with him that if FOBTS were banned it would not make the slightest bit of difference to how the "Bookmakers" would trade."If" they were banned perhaps one of you could inform us how the "Bookmakers" would sustain their profits.
clive 82
"Seemingly yes. The latest figures show 1% of the adult population play FOBTs at least once a month."
That is an astounding statement.The vast majority of "Bookmakers" profits come via these machines.
From such a tiny minority of people.
EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO PUTS MONEY IN THOSE MACHINES MUST BE DOING THEIR BOLL OCKS...
You have eloquently described in such a simple fashion why those machines have to go.
"Seemingly yes. The latest figures show 1% of the adult population play FOBTs at least once a month."
That is an astounding statement.The vast majority of "Bookmakers" profits come via these machines.
From such a tiny minority of people.
EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO PUTS MONEY IN THOSE MACHINES MUST BE DOING THEIR BOLL OCKS...
You have eloquently described in such a simple fashion why those machines have to go.
if fobts were banned shops would close. end of, and i like to go in and chat and have a coffee, times change and the company you are posting your thoughts on now changed it............. and i for one would rather have this than some half arsed chain of halfwits like the tragic sign ............ long live raunbow riches for the bozos and gruss for the sports trader....... **** eastenders is on !
Prof Jim Orford: "2% of lottery money comes from problem gamblers, 7% of takings on horses, 10% of takings from sports and 23% from FOBTs."
Homefortea I think that clive82 is a grade A wind up merchant and to be honest I think he is pretty good at it.
Not sure about that Bon-Viveur he never posts about anything else but.....
He has an identity problem though with his pictures.
I am sure that I once saw him in a Ladbrokes T-shirt holding up a cigarette lighter at an Elton John concert....
Of course I was a Bouncer...
He has an identity problem though with his pictures.
I am sure that I once saw him in a Ladbrokes T-shirt holding up a cigarette lighter at an Elton John concert....
Of course I was a Bouncer...
Prof Jim Orford: "2% of lottery money comes from problem gamblers, 7% of takings on horses, 10% of takings from sports and 23% from FOBTs."
Incredibly selective use of questionable statistics. Even if it is agreed that they are correct then why not mention the product that apparently takes the highest percentage of it's profit from problem gamblers?
I suspect the reason is because the answer, according to the same set of stats quoted above, is dog racing at 27%!!
I'm off to start a "Ban the BAGS" campaign.
Incredibly selective use of questionable statistics. Even if it is agreed that they are correct then why not mention the product that apparently takes the highest percentage of it's profit from problem gamblers?
I suspect the reason is because the answer, according to the same set of stats quoted above, is dog racing at 27%!!
I'm off to start a "Ban the BAGS" campaign.
Prof Jim Orford: "Statistical analysis in the US of the 2007 Prevalence Survey found FOBTs to be the most addictive form of gambling."
The figure I have quoted is from one of his own published papers. Of course he will never quote the dog figure as that is not his target at the moment.
I couldn't care less pal - anyway the Daily Mail are on the case now and once they get their teeth into something they won't let it go - they have direct influence on the Cabinet.
I don't care either about FOBTs as I will never use them. I do however care about other sections of the gambling world and I can guarantee that if action is taken against the machines it will be the thin end of the wedge as the anti gambling groups will not stop until they have banned everything.
They have openly admitted that they feel that the iternet is a bigger problem but tactically it was easier to go for FOBTs first as they are visible.
They have openly admitted that they feel that the iternet is a bigger problem but tactically it was easier to go for FOBTs first as they are visible.
Banned-banks really.
I have to go now but have you been sacked ?
Has clive82 been chosen to carry the baton - and I am not talking about the 100m relay although clive 82 would love to accept it....
I have to go now but have you been sacked ?
Has clive82 been chosen to carry the baton - and I am not talking about the 100m relay although clive 82 would love to accept it....
They are hardly going to say at the outset that they want to ban/restrict all forms of gambling. Far better to pick a product that they know is easy to get support to tackle. Once they have momentum they will expand to other areas.
You have to remember that many of them are anti gambling per se so won't stop at FOBTs.
You have to remember that many of them are anti gambling per se so won't stop at FOBTs.
if fobts are banned ill arrive naked and put a monkey in reel king (found the name on the net)... these things bring in revenue for the government, nuff said
eggpresident 11 Feb 13 21:53 Joined: 19 May 03 | Topic/replies: 63 | Blogger: eggpresident's blog
if fobts are banned ill arrive naked and put a monkey in reel king
For the love of god, don't ban them
... **** morality, no one deserves to see that!
if fobts are banned ill arrive naked and put a monkey in reel king
For the love of god, don't ban them
... **** morality, no one deserves to see that!
The only thing that stops the inept big five from disappearing up there own exhaust pipes from
continual and complete lack of innovation and enterprise, complacent attitude to keep inefficient high street shops milking
problem gamblers that even if they could win, wouldn't get in the door, is the fact that they continue to put
money in tax persons and ministers pockets via Automated addiction machines in full view of the youth of the nation as they seem to of easily paid the right people to get the windows open on the dens of inequity, mean while the effect and damage builds up continually to the great pleasure of the government that already tax the rear end off alcohol and tobacco sales as this all nicely pigeon holes gambling into the "lets tax it good and proper bracket because its not legislated correctly and the voting public is getting steamed up about it".
"Personally I hope the owners of the big five all come to a sticky end and for that matter a few bent ministers thrown in for good measure"
continual and complete lack of innovation and enterprise, complacent attitude to keep inefficient high street shops milking
problem gamblers that even if they could win, wouldn't get in the door, is the fact that they continue to put
money in tax persons and ministers pockets via Automated addiction machines in full view of the youth of the nation as they seem to of easily paid the right people to get the windows open on the dens of inequity, mean while the effect and damage builds up continually to the great pleasure of the government that already tax the rear end off alcohol and tobacco sales as this all nicely pigeon holes gambling into the "lets tax it good and proper bracket because its not legislated correctly and the voting public is getting steamed up about it".
"Personally I hope the owners of the big five all come to a sticky end and for that matter a few bent ministers thrown in for good measure"
And when something is done and the dust finally settles, let it be known which betting companies are fair and decent
and have given betting a modern and raised profile.
and have given betting a modern and raised profile.
I`ve been in betting shops and witnessed promotions for these machines. FREE goes and £25 betting voucher to person who accumulates the most pts profit. I find this immoral. Trying to hook punters who wouldn`t play them in the first instance.
Regards the 1% problem gamblers findings, what a load of old tosh. 33% minimum if my local is your average betting shop.
Regards the 1% problem gamblers findings, what a load of old tosh. 33% minimum if my local is your average betting shop.
I have found the same in the past and generally I refuse to play them when offered freebie plays as
I always assumed they were turf accountants as I don't like casinos or this type of mindless and dangerous indulgence
into corruptible greed.
I always assumed they were turf accountants as I don't like casinos or this type of mindless and dangerous indulgence
into corruptible greed.
One wonders how many ministers are offered "free play" when buissness needs that little bit of a boost?
The problem here is FOBT's and the crux of the issue is their combination of high stakes and rapid play. In the 'good old days' of mainly horse racing, a little application by the betting shop punter meant he would be in with a chance of winning, or would at least lose minimal amounts as 'payment' for his hobby. Furthermore, with races lasting anything from 1 to 8+ minutes and with a 15-minute gap between races, the pace of activity was more relaxed. This gave the punter who was losing too much time to reflect and walk away. There were still gambling addicts of course, but far fewer.
FOBT's exist for one reason. To mechanically strip their players of the maximum amount of cash in the shortest possible time. No skill, no sport, no fun. Those who play do NOT do so for pleasure, virtually ALL of them are addicted to some degree. They are designed to come up with various 'near miss' scenarios for the credulous and to press the right neurological buttons for the weak.
The quoted 97% payout is absolutely correct, but the rapid play ensures rapid stake degradation to the extent that the most common overall 'session' result is a 100% loss.
I know my betting and I can absolutely guarantee you that these machines are destroying people's lives and blighting entire communities.
FOBT's exist for one reason. To mechanically strip their players of the maximum amount of cash in the shortest possible time. No skill, no sport, no fun. Those who play do NOT do so for pleasure, virtually ALL of them are addicted to some degree. They are designed to come up with various 'near miss' scenarios for the credulous and to press the right neurological buttons for the weak.
The quoted 97% payout is absolutely correct, but the rapid play ensures rapid stake degradation to the extent that the most common overall 'session' result is a 100% loss.
I know my betting and I can absolutely guarantee you that these machines are destroying people's lives and blighting entire communities.
Well put typhoon ginger, await Banned Banks's measured reply.
If they are programmed to deliver non random near misses they are illegal. If true a quick call to the relevant authorities would bring the whole thing tumbling down and result in some spectacular fines and sanctions against the individuals and firms concerned.
I trust that was quick enough for you.
Out of interest CG can you show me anything I have posted on this topic that is not factually correct? Also I would be intrigued to know what you think my stance is regarding the machines and what issue you have with it?
Out of interest CG can you show me anything I have posted on this topic that is not factually correct? Also I would be intrigued to know what you think my stance is regarding the machines and what issue you have with it?
If all that the high street LBOs can do to compete with online operators and other leisure pursuits of the masses
is create Amusements that allow you to spin your wages away in one minute then I pity anyone buying shares in those companies in the hope of long term profits!
is create Amusements that allow you to spin your wages away in one minute then I pity anyone buying shares in those companies in the hope of long term profits!
Unless of course you have the goverment in your pocket and it has been done in the states so you have an even money chance of pulling it off here as many useless ministers will even sneeze in unision with idols across the pond!
Feb 12, 2013 -- 10:52AM, Banned_Banks wrote:
If they are programmed to deliver non random near misses they are illegal. If true a quick call to the relevant authorities would bring the whole thing tumbling down and result in some spectacular fines and sanctions against the individuals and firms concerned.
baldfred were running a **** game online for years - no action taken against them
baldfred were running a **** game online for years - no action taken against them
they still are, the Tote Win market, the bald C NU T
they still are, the Tote Win market, the bald C NU T
baldfred were running a **** game online for years - no action taken against them
Not a UK based company.
Surely you can see that with the current climate over here that such a proven allegation against FOBTs would be catastrophically damaging to the UK firms?
Not a UK based company.
Surely you can see that with the current climate over here that such a proven allegation against FOBTs would be catastrophically damaging to the UK firms?
Lottery money goes to charitee in the UK, FOBT money goes to the likes of Sandy Lane 
Whats this about Bookies resetting the Key Bet game and taking the accumulated pot for themselves? Surely they wouldn't be so blatent?
There have been many threads of this nature, thanks to Anaglogs Daughter (keep up the good work by the way), and we have a number of people who constantly repeat the same messages about how these machines are not dangerous. What we never hear is from a FOBT plater who actually enjoys playing them. Strange given their "popularity" according to the apologists ?
We have to ask why. Is it because the ones that enjoy themselves are too engrossed playing them ? Is it because they are frightened to admit they are winners in case their partners see this, and want in ? Is it because they have made so much money that they're now living the dream in a paradise where Betfair hasn't infiltrated (yet) ?
Or is it really because they don't exist ?
So come on, FOBT winners, join the discussion, and tell us of your wonderful experiences beating the system !
We have to ask why. Is it because the ones that enjoy themselves are too engrossed playing them ? Is it because they are frightened to admit they are winners in case their partners see this, and want in ? Is it because they have made so much money that they're now living the dream in a paradise where Betfair hasn't infiltrated (yet) ?
Or is it really because they don't exist ?
So come on, FOBT winners, join the discussion, and tell us of your wonderful experiences beating the system !
Feb 12, 2013 -- 11:28AM, Banned_Banks wrote:
baldfred were running a **** game online for years - no action taken against them Not a UK based company.Surely you can see that with the current climate over here that such a proven allegation against FOBTs would be catastrophically damaging to the UK firms?
balfred made a fortune from the illegal game year after year and haven't ended up in court- why do you think they wouldn't use the "oh it was the naughty men who supplied the game" excuse again?
Lottery money goes to charitee in the UK
More lottery money goes in profits to Camelot and tax than is lost on FOBTs. The charity money is on top of this.
More lottery money goes in profits to Camelot and tax than is lost on FOBTs. The charity money is on top of this.
"I pity anyone buying shares in those companies in the hope of long term profits!"
Have you looked at the PLCs results lately?
Have you looked at the PLCs results lately?
"Strange given their "popularity" according to the apologists ?"
Who is saying they are popular? The omnibus survey suggests 1% of adults play them at least once a month. I wouldn't define that as particularly popular. However if that is what 1% of adults want to do with their time and money who are you to deny them?
Some people might think it's odd to sit on a gambling internet forum all day complaining about gambling. But we tolerate you don't we.
Who is saying they are popular? The omnibus survey suggests 1% of adults play them at least once a month. I wouldn't define that as particularly popular. However if that is what 1% of adults want to do with their time and money who are you to deny them?
Some people might think it's odd to sit on a gambling internet forum all day complaining about gambling. But we tolerate you don't we.
WFT 11.53.
All these fobts winners are not actually falling over themselves posting on here,maybe you raised the bar too high and should have settled for break even or just losing a little.
All these fobts winners are not actually falling over themselves posting on here,maybe you raised the bar too high and should have settled for break even or just losing a little.
Who is saying they are popular? The omnibus survey suggests 1% of adults play them at least once a month. I wouldn't define that as particularly popular. However if that is what 1% of adults want to do with their time and money who are you to deny them?
You and your bookmaker buddies obviously find them popular, Clive. You lot are keen to make them more popular by flooding every High Street in Britain with more of your filth.
Some people might think it's odd to sit on a gambling internet forum all day complaining about gambling. But we tolerate you don't we.
Hoisted by your own petard, methinks. Thanks for your tolerance, by the way. ***shakes head in disbelief***
You and your bookmaker buddies obviously find them popular, Clive. You lot are keen to make them more popular by flooding every High Street in Britain with more of your filth.
Some people might think it's odd to sit on a gambling internet forum all day complaining about gambling. But we tolerate you don't we.
Hoisted by your own petard, methinks. Thanks for your tolerance, by the way. ***shakes head in disbelief***
All these fobts winners are not actually falling over themselves posting on here,maybe you raised the bar too high and should have settled for break even or just losing a little.
I'd settle for some people who actually say they enjoy paying them, win or lose.
Come on FOBT players ! That fictional 1% must contain some of you reading this, or are you all getting your fix ?
I'd settle for some people who actually say they enjoy paying them, win or lose.
Come on FOBT players ! That fictional 1% must contain some of you reading this, or are you all getting your fix ?
Cut down again by the wit and wisdom of WFT.
Fictional 1%?
Fictional 1%?
Cut down again by the wit and wisdom of WFT.
Fictional 1%?
You should be used to it by down, Clive. I suspect you quite like it.
Fictional, yes. Any figures produced by the ABB, and Dirk Vennix particularly, should be taken with a large pinch of salt. It's not like bookmakers would benefit from their association producing low figures, would it ?
Even you, Clive, don't really believe it.
Fictional 1%?
You should be used to it by down, Clive. I suspect you quite like it.
Fictional, yes. Any figures produced by the ABB, and Dirk Vennix particularly, should be taken with a large pinch of salt. It's not like bookmakers would benefit from their association producing low figures, would it ?
Even you, Clive, don't really believe it.
More lottery money goes in profits to Camelot and tax than is lost on FOBTs
more rubbish from banks , do you just make this stuff up ?
camelot made around £50 million last year
how are you coming to these figures ?
more rubbish from banks , do you just make this stuff up ?
camelot made around £50 million last year
how are you coming to these figures ?
I like CLive and D!CK FECKIT agree they are adults let them choose .. BUT (and that's a big but) Bookmakers can't have it both ways were they let punters punt their brains on FOBTs but limit them to £1 bets on horse and dogs . . No you can't do it and get away with that
think everyone agrees, bookies are a business not a charity, I have no issue in regards to that.
what I can't abide is the double standards shown by them ,they want everything in their favour 100%, FOBTs and casino/games players welcomed with open arms, winning OTC/online sports punters treated like lepers is the reality.
what I can't abide is the double standards shown by them ,they want everything in their favour 100%, FOBTs and casino/games players welcomed with open arms, winning OTC/online sports punters treated like lepers is the reality.
more rubbish from banks , do you just make this stuff up ?
Every statistic I quote is from a published source.
Of the total stakes on the national lottery 50% goes in prizes and 28% to good causes leaving 22% in tax and profits to Camelot and the retailers.
Total stakes are £6,503,000,000 based on 2011/12 published stats. 22% of this is £1.43bn which is almost exactly the same amount as is lost on FOBTs.
Therefore exclusing prizes and the amount given to good causes there is as much lost on the national lottery as lost in FOBTs.
Not so much "rubbish" rather you refusing to believe any statistic that doesn't suit your argument.
Every statistic I quote is from a published source.
Of the total stakes on the national lottery 50% goes in prizes and 28% to good causes leaving 22% in tax and profits to Camelot and the retailers.
Total stakes are £6,503,000,000 based on 2011/12 published stats. 22% of this is £1.43bn which is almost exactly the same amount as is lost on FOBTs.
Therefore exclusing prizes and the amount given to good causes there is as much lost on the national lottery as lost in FOBTs.
Not so much "rubbish" rather you refusing to believe any statistic that doesn't suit your argument.
Banned_Banks 12 Feb 13 12:00 Joined: 29 Apr 12 | Topic/replies: 1,181 | Blogger: Banned_Banks's blog
More lottery money goes in profits to Camelot and tax than is lost on FOBTs. The charity money is on top of this.
that is what you said . the tax figure has nothing to do with it .
simply post camelots profit compared to all the bookmakers profit on fobts .
More lottery money goes in profits to Camelot and tax than is lost on FOBTs. The charity money is on top of this.
that is what you said . the tax figure has nothing to do with it .
simply post camelots profit compared to all the bookmakers profit on fobts .
Every statistic I quote is from a published source.
Perhaps, you should quote your source. I'm sure not even you, believes every statistic that is published. Mistakes are made, lies are predominant. As someone with a grasp of statistics, I know how easy it is to conjure the figures to support a case, but Dirk Vennix suggesting 1% to support his rancid argument, and expecting to be believed, is taking the biscuit.
Perhaps, you should quote your source. I'm sure not even you, believes every statistic that is published. Mistakes are made, lies are predominant. As someone with a grasp of statistics, I know how easy it is to conjure the figures to support a case, but Dirk Vennix suggesting 1% to support his rancid argument, and expecting to be believed, is taking the biscuit.
Camelot / retailers deserve the money for the excellent service and administration they put into the lottery.
Bookies deserve to be machine gunned down, simply plugging in four machines into a wall and employing a chimp behind the counter to do a 14 hour shift.
Bookies deserve to be machine gunned down, simply plugging in four machines into a wall and employing a chimp behind the counter to do a 14 hour shift.
rcing you must surely be on a wind up. You can't remove half of my sentence to make it read better for you!
fair enough banks , it seems i have learned a few tricks from you .
so you would agree that bookmakers make far more profit from fobts than camelot does from the lottery , or not ?
Come on FOBT players, your silence is deafening.
You can't all be shooting up on roulette ?
You can't all be shooting up on roulette ?
WFT try reading the thread and engaging your brain before you engage your keyboard. The 1% I am referring to is from the omnibus survey on participation in gambling. The less then 1% the ABB are quoting is from the prevalence survey on problem gambling. Both are publically available, published research which carries a little more credibility then a half-witted armchair expert such as yourself.
AD - Bookmakers like any business have to be able to choose who and on what terms they transact with. The fact they don't always accomodate people as you would like may be frustrating to you, but it is ridiculous to suggest that justifies you dictating to FOBT players what they spend their time and money on. Seems remarkably arrogant and selfish that just because you don't get what you want other unconnected individuals are penalised.
AD - Bookmakers like any business have to be able to choose who and on what terms they transact with. The fact they don't always accomodate people as you would like may be frustrating to you, but it is ridiculous to suggest that justifies you dictating to FOBT players what they spend their time and money on. Seems remarkably arrogant and selfish that just because you don't get what you want other unconnected individuals are penalised.
Bookmakers like any business
no they are not . not all businesses need to obtain a licence .
no they are not . not all businesses need to obtain a licence .
WFT try reading the thread and engaging your brain before you engage your keyboard. The 1% I am referring to is from the omnibus survey on participation in gambling. The less then 1% the ABB are quoting is from the prevalence survey on problem gambling. Both are publically available, published research which carries a little more credibility then a half-witted armchair expert such as yourself.
That reminds me of a quote from Denis Healey about Geoffrey Howe back in the 70's. "It's like being savaged by a dead sheep".
So, you're quoting from surveys conducted by organisations, supported by British bookmakers, and expect the gullible to believe their figures, but shun any statistics produced by anyone who isn't a bookmaker. That'll be fair.
Still not one happy FOBT player ? Can't you get one of your colleagues to come on here and support your incredulous beliefs, or are they not prepared to lie for you ?
That reminds me of a quote from Denis Healey about Geoffrey Howe back in the 70's. "It's like being savaged by a dead sheep".
So, you're quoting from surveys conducted by organisations, supported by British bookmakers, and expect the gullible to believe their figures, but shun any statistics produced by anyone who isn't a bookmaker. That'll be fair.
Still not one happy FOBT player ? Can't you get one of your colleagues to come on here and support your incredulous beliefs, or are they not prepared to lie for you ?
AD - Bookmakers like any business have to be able to choose who and on what terms they transact with. The fact they don't always accomodate people as you would like may be frustrating to you, but it is ridiculous to suggest that justifies you dictating to FOBT players what they spend their time and money on. Seems remarkably arrogant and selfish that just because you don't get what you want other unconnected individuals are penalised.
Clive, do you really believe repeating this same diatribe actually does your case any good. Do you really expect us to believe that bookmakers encouraging some customers to bet, but stopping others, is a description of how a business should be run ? Can you tell me what other business turns its customers away on such a regular basis ?
Your repeated assertions are actually doing your "case" considerable harm, but you just don't see it, do you ?
Clive, do you really believe repeating this same diatribe actually does your case any good. Do you really expect us to believe that bookmakers encouraging some customers to bet, but stopping others, is a description of how a business should be run ? Can you tell me what other business turns its customers away on such a regular basis ?
Your repeated assertions are actually doing your "case" considerable harm, but you just don't see it, do you ?
Clive 14.55
"Bookmakers like any business have to be able to choose who and what terms they transact with"
Fair enough,they don,t transact if there is the possibility they might lose,what you are saying in essence the fobts are such a good bet for the bookmaker that they are no restrictions on them.(outside max £100 spin). So by your own words a person is basically a mug if they play a fobt.
"Bookmakers like any business have to be able to choose who and what terms they transact with"
Fair enough,they don,t transact if there is the possibility they might lose,what you are saying in essence the fobts are such a good bet for the bookmaker that they are no restrictions on them.(outside max £100 spin). So by your own words a person is basically a mug if they play a fobt.
WFT you seem to believe you know how a betting business should be run better then the PLCs. Try looking at their most recent results to see just how badly they are messing it up! Let me guess these are made up stats as well?
Lapsy - Firstly the restricting of customers is wildly exaggerated on here. There are plenty of mug punters both OTC and on the machines. Unfortunately people seem to want to take all the advantages technical advancements have provided them to turn a profit,but expect bookies to remain in the dark ages.
If people want to play machines good luck to them, if they want to bet on cartoon racing or greyhounds so be it. It's called freedom of choice.
Incidentally WTF i think the Howe v Healey comparison is very apt!
Lapsy - Firstly the restricting of customers is wildly exaggerated on here. There are plenty of mug punters both OTC and on the machines. Unfortunately people seem to want to take all the advantages technical advancements have provided them to turn a profit,but expect bookies to remain in the dark ages.
If people want to play machines good luck to them, if they want to bet on cartoon racing or greyhounds so be it. It's called freedom of choice.
Incidentally WTF i think the Howe v Healey comparison is very apt!
WFT you seem to believe you know how a betting business should be run better then the PLCs. Try looking at their most recent results to see just how badly they are messing it up! Let me guess these are made up stats as well?
I couldn't possibly tell them how to run their business. They just wouldn't listen to anyone with a hint of integrity.
Lapsy - Firstly the restricting of customers is wildly exaggerated on here. There are plenty of mug punters both OTC and on the machines. Unfortunately people seem to want to take all the advantages technical advancements have provided them to turn a profit,but expect bookies to remain in the dark ages.
Wildly exaggerated ? Have the bookmakers published some stats on this ? I don't think so.
If people want to play machines good luck to them, if they want to bet on cartoon racing or greyhounds so be it. It's called freedom of choice.
So why do bookmakers try to influence "freedom of choice" by using promotions such as free spins ?
Incidentally WTF i think the Howe v Healey comparison is very apt!
It's good to see you're happy being a dead sheep, Clive.
I couldn't possibly tell them how to run their business. They just wouldn't listen to anyone with a hint of integrity.
Lapsy - Firstly the restricting of customers is wildly exaggerated on here. There are plenty of mug punters both OTC and on the machines. Unfortunately people seem to want to take all the advantages technical advancements have provided them to turn a profit,but expect bookies to remain in the dark ages.
Wildly exaggerated ? Have the bookmakers published some stats on this ? I don't think so.
If people want to play machines good luck to them, if they want to bet on cartoon racing or greyhounds so be it. It's called freedom of choice.
So why do bookmakers try to influence "freedom of choice" by using promotions such as free spins ?
Incidentally WTF i think the Howe v Healey comparison is very apt!
It's good to see you're happy being a dead sheep, Clive.
So why do bookmakers try to influence "freedom of choice" by using promotions such as free spins ?
Is this a serious question or just a further demonstration of your business acumen.
Is this a serious question or just a further demonstration of your business acumen.
So why do bookmakers try to influence "freedom of choice" by using promotions such as free spins ?
Is this a serious question or just a further demonstration of your business acumen.
Yes, ultimately it's down to the individual to become suckered in, so that can be described as freedom of choice in your definition of the term, but drug dealers often give their potential customers a free one to get them on the hook.
If it was all fair, the bookmakers wouldn't feel the need to promote their ghastly product. It's an abysmal practice akin to the drug dealer.
As far as business acumen, you might be quite surprised that I worked in business for over 30 years, which allowed me to "retire" at 48. I doubt whether your business acumen will reward you to the same level.
Is this a serious question or just a further demonstration of your business acumen.
Yes, ultimately it's down to the individual to become suckered in, so that can be described as freedom of choice in your definition of the term, but drug dealers often give their potential customers a free one to get them on the hook.
If it was all fair, the bookmakers wouldn't feel the need to promote their ghastly product. It's an abysmal practice akin to the drug dealer.
As far as business acumen, you might be quite surprised that I worked in business for over 30 years, which allowed me to "retire" at 48. I doubt whether your business acumen will reward you to the same level.
Banned banks I wager that there is a new "boy" in town...
Surely this gruff, non-heterosexual,"Bookmakers" apologist who goes (!) by the name of Clive82 is the new voice....
And you dismissed him/her as an attention seeker.....
Surely this gruff, non-heterosexual,"Bookmakers" apologist who goes (!) by the name of Clive82 is the new voice....
And you dismissed him/her as an attention seeker.....
i was told this story today a punter walks in shop with £20k in plastic carrier bag he says to counter staff keep this behind the counter i will be having some big bets on 1st one £10k on odds on lost 2nd one £10k on odds on lost punter walked out with empty plastic bag question is has he got a gambling problem
Funny enough I heard that story as well sickly.....
Then I woke up.
Then I woke up.
clive82 should cut down on the amount of rainbow riches he has in his breakfast as he clearly has the ability to
plop out gold bricks .
plop out gold bricks .
As stated one hundred and seventy eight times ''There is almost no limit to losses that can be run up on FOBTs''. Try losing 100 quid on the horses . . you'd have to back 50 losers with Ladbroke and 75 with Will Hills and yes that is fact because i have every bet on my PC. .So if you want the prove...just ask
We need to wake up to the behaviour of bookmakers in UK
http://www.stopthefobts.org/we-need-to-wake-up-to-the-behaviour-of-bookmakers-in-uk/
This may be in Australia, where they are experiencing the same problems with “Pokies” as we are with FOBTs, but interesting how gambling companies suddenly flood political parties with donations when they are faced with a clamp down.
We will have the same problem in the UK.
The current “independent” research being commissioned by the Responsible Gambling Trust (whose boss just happens to be an ex-Coral chief and a loyal industry insider) will stretch out until the end of 2014. This takes it right up to the run in of the 2015 General Election. By which time bookmakers’ cheque books, including Goulden’s who just happens to be a Labour donor, will be wide open ready to flood money into cash strapped political parties. In return for what though – no restrictions and more FOBT profits?
Philip Davies MP, who wants bookmakers to have more FOBTs, has already been caught out receiving hospitality and subscriptions worth over £10,000 from bookmakers and companies associated with them.
When will politicians get wise, or are they already looking at gambling tax revenue as a replacement for declining tobacco revenue?
Interesting that Dirk Vennix, head of the Association of British Bookmakers was formerly Communications Director for the Tobacco Industry.
We all need to wake up as to what is going on with the gambling industry in this country
http://www.stopthefobts.org/we-need-to-wake-up-to-the-behaviour-of-bookmakers-in-uk/
This may be in Australia, where they are experiencing the same problems with “Pokies” as we are with FOBTs, but interesting how gambling companies suddenly flood political parties with donations when they are faced with a clamp down.
We will have the same problem in the UK.
The current “independent” research being commissioned by the Responsible Gambling Trust (whose boss just happens to be an ex-Coral chief and a loyal industry insider) will stretch out until the end of 2014. This takes it right up to the run in of the 2015 General Election. By which time bookmakers’ cheque books, including Goulden’s who just happens to be a Labour donor, will be wide open ready to flood money into cash strapped political parties. In return for what though – no restrictions and more FOBT profits?
Philip Davies MP, who wants bookmakers to have more FOBTs, has already been caught out receiving hospitality and subscriptions worth over £10,000 from bookmakers and companies associated with them.
When will politicians get wise, or are they already looking at gambling tax revenue as a replacement for declining tobacco revenue?
Interesting that Dirk Vennix, head of the Association of British Bookmakers was formerly Communications Director for the Tobacco Industry.
We all need to wake up as to what is going on with the gambling industry in this country
banned banks and clive82....what a pair of bookmaker lickspittle rats
Feb 12, 2013 -- 8:51PM, homefortea wrote:Funny enough I heard that story as well sickly.....Then I woke up.
i was told that by a shop manager he said its the worst loser he had dealt with thats what he told me was he lying possibly was he telling the truth possibly is your next meal made from horsemeat possibly wiil you get alzheimers possibly will you get ran over by a bus possibly will you get sacked possibly will you get a life NO
If you buy a packet of cigarettes the shops have to now hide the packets from the view of the general public
and are plastered with health warnings.
When the public passes a high street bookmaker the windows are wide open now, the machines are on display and any
punter entering will be enticed into playing machines that allow you to lose thousands of pounds at a rate
of under even normal play of expecting only 1% of your investment on average after an hour of play!
This fact about the dangers of playing machines that have fixed and unfair odds is not displayed on the machines, only a tiny gamecare sticker on the side of the machine is the only hint that something you are playing may totally
change your life in a highly negative,addictive and destructive manner.
and are plastered with health warnings.
When the public passes a high street bookmaker the windows are wide open now, the machines are on display and any
punter entering will be enticed into playing machines that allow you to lose thousands of pounds at a rate
of under even normal play of expecting only 1% of your investment on average after an hour of play!
This fact about the dangers of playing machines that have fixed and unfair odds is not displayed on the machines, only a tiny gamecare sticker on the side of the machine is the only hint that something you are playing may totally
change your life in a highly negative,addictive and destructive manner.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539