Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
21 Jan 18
08:40
Joined:
Date Joined:
14 Dec 17
add your message hereaccording to report
FOBTs: options set out by the governemnt included stakes of £50, £30, £2 and a split of £20 for games such as roulette and £2 for slots
FOBTs: options set out by the governemnt included stakes of £50, £30, £2 and a split of £20 for games such as roulette and £2 for slots
1 of 1
By Jack Haynes
UPDATED 7:57AM, JAN 21 2018
The gambling industry is set for significant change with the government intending to reduce the maximum stake on fixed odds betting terminals (FOBTs) to £2, according to a newspaper report.
The Sunday Times claim the overwhelming response to the public consultation regarding the maximum stakes for FOBTs has been to reduce the maximum bet from £100 to £2.
An ally to new culture secretary Matt Hancock, whose West Suffolk seat includes Newmarket racecourse, told the Sunday Times that Hancock views the betting terminals as a social blight.
The ally said: "The analysis that he is pro-gambling because he is pro-horseracing is completely wrong. Matt wants the new stake for FOBTs to be at the bottom of the range.
"His attitude to FOBTs is very negative because it takes money from reasonable, mature betting, like on the horses. He thinks these machines are a social blight."
The options originally set out by the government included stakes of £50, £30, £2, and also a split of £20 for games such as roulette and £2 for slots.
The public consultation closes on Tuesday but it is unlikely an announcement will be made for several weeks.
A Gambling Commission report last year found that 43 per cent of people who bet on FOBTs were problem gamblers or at risk of becoming one.
The Association of British Bookmakers has previously claimed there would be drastic consequences should the government reduce stakes at all – and not just for bookmakers.
The ABB claimed a £2 maximum stake would lead to 4,500 shop closures and the loss of 21,000 jobs by 2020, along with the loss of £1.1 billion in tax receipts for the Treasury and £290m in lost levy and media rights payments for racing.
FOBTs: options set out by the governemnt included stakes of £50, £30, £2 and a split of £20 for games such as roulette and £2 for slots
FOBTs: options set out by the governemnt included stakes of £50, £30, £2 and a split of £20 for games such as roulette and £2 for slots
1 of 1
By Jack Haynes
UPDATED 7:57AM, JAN 21 2018
The gambling industry is set for significant change with the government intending to reduce the maximum stake on fixed odds betting terminals (FOBTs) to £2, according to a newspaper report.
The Sunday Times claim the overwhelming response to the public consultation regarding the maximum stakes for FOBTs has been to reduce the maximum bet from £100 to £2.
An ally to new culture secretary Matt Hancock, whose West Suffolk seat includes Newmarket racecourse, told the Sunday Times that Hancock views the betting terminals as a social blight.
The ally said: "The analysis that he is pro-gambling because he is pro-horseracing is completely wrong. Matt wants the new stake for FOBTs to be at the bottom of the range.
"His attitude to FOBTs is very negative because it takes money from reasonable, mature betting, like on the horses. He thinks these machines are a social blight."
The options originally set out by the government included stakes of £50, £30, £2, and also a split of £20 for games such as roulette and £2 for slots.
The public consultation closes on Tuesday but it is unlikely an announcement will be made for several weeks.
A Gambling Commission report last year found that 43 per cent of people who bet on FOBTs were problem gamblers or at risk of becoming one.
The Association of British Bookmakers has previously claimed there would be drastic consequences should the government reduce stakes at all – and not just for bookmakers.
The ABB claimed a £2 maximum stake would lead to 4,500 shop closures and the loss of 21,000 jobs by 2020, along with the loss of £1.1 billion in tax receipts for the Treasury and £290m in lost levy and media rights payments for racing.
Show More
Whats Vegas got to do with it,???
i wouldn't give a to55 if FOBT machines were £2000 a spin, as long as you could get a decent bet over the counter as well, if they want FOBT'S but won't lay a bet, then they should open up a casino, with a casino licence, and have the shops for real betting, where people choose there selection and not have it randomly chosen for you
i wouldn't give a to55 if FOBT machines were £2000 a spin, as long as you could get a decent bet over the counter as well, if they want FOBT'S but won't lay a bet, then they should open up a casino, with a casino licence, and have the shops for real betting, where people choose there selection and not have it randomly chosen for you
and anyone who thinks gambling on scratch cards, bingo , raffles, lottery, on an arcade claw machine ffs, is the same as gambling roulette on an fobt must also be a looney nut job .
Pablo spot on if you haven't been in the bookies and not seen 1st hand what these machines do please don't comment on nothing you know about.
I've never seen a bookmakers TV advert promoting the FOBT's is it allowed.
because people are saying the machines lights etc are brain washing people into playing.
it comes to something when people on a forum who daily risk losing a grand to win a knicker ,hold themselves up as arbiters of who,s an addict and who isnt
it comes to something when people on a forum who daily risk losing a grand to win a knicker ,hold themselves up as arbiters of who,s an addict and who isnt
because people are saying the machines lights etc are brain washing people into playing.
who said brain washing ?
who said brain washing ?
doing the lottery, 4 spins a week, is addictive to some...wont change numbers in case they come out ...etc
but spinning £100 every 20 seconds on fobt is more addictive, as was plaing 10p fruit machines to some folk,
its due to drop, etc etc
loads of addicts cant control themselves, not just gambling, and if it has a negative impact of their life then spills over
into general life then theres a duty of care somewhere to help folk
of course some will not be helped...some folk still smoke
hey ho
but spinning £100 every 20 seconds on fobt is more addictive, as was plaing 10p fruit machines to some folk,
its due to drop, etc etc
loads of addicts cant control themselves, not just gambling, and if it has a negative impact of their life then spills over
into general life then theres a duty of care somewhere to help folk
of course some will not be helped...some folk still smoke
hey ho
surely the bigger issue at play here isn't that a few gamblers can get huge bets on in the shop but that a nannying state is reducing our civil liberties by putting a limit on what can and can't lose.
of course it's fairly sad that some people lack the discipline to swear off these machines but should the government have anything to do with it?
I've never played these machines in my life preferring to lose my unhardearned on sports betting. I must be in the 10 percent of betting shop customers who can say that. Almost everyone seems to be playing them.
of course it's fairly sad that some people lack the discipline to swear off these machines but should the government have anything to do with it?
I've never played these machines in my life preferring to lose my unhardearned on sports betting. I must be in the 10 percent of betting shop customers who can say that. Almost everyone seems to be playing them.
1st time poster has gone from comparing the FOBTs to strong lager and wine, losing laying 1.01 shots, losing laying 1000 shots, losing on the 2 o clock at Brighton, losing at Thirsk in an afternoon, thinks it takes a doctorate in maths to cover every number to take the same loss, now we are onto lottery, scratchcards and Las Vegas.
To say he is a sandwich short of a picnic is an understatement. He's forgot the basket and blanket.
To say he is a sandwich short of a picnic is an understatement. He's forgot the basket and blanket.
think this has all been leaked by the mp's to panic simon into sending round the deluxe hampers ...
1st time poster has a vested interest in the level not being £2. clearly.
In my local bookies there were a few old timers who gambled horses for years just saturdays when the good horses were out and they enjoyed doing there lucky15 singles douubles placepot and they were set up for the day now they play the fobts at 830 in the morning and have lost their money in 10 mins most times sometimes they win a few quid but the enjoyment isn't there anymore these things are too addictive.
hulk never been in a betting shop for 20 yrs .never been on a fobt,no shares in bookmakers,i just don't like
people risking a grand to win a knicker
skanks in training stealing coppers on injured horses
people with fast pics robbing mugs of their hard earned
etc,etc,
taking the moral high ground on labling people problem gamblers etc
people risking a grand to win a knicker
skanks in training stealing coppers on injured horses
people with fast pics robbing mugs of their hard earned
etc,etc,
taking the moral high ground on labling people problem gamblers etc
Gambling act was a 'mistake' confesses senior Labour politician
06 AUG 2012 NEWS RELEASES
Share
The Gambling Act was a ‘mistake' and the consequences are ‘ruining the High Street and people's lives', Harriet Harman MP tells Channel 4 Dispatches.
This is a stark confession from a senior member of the government that passed the Gambling Act, who's now deputy leader of the Labour Party. In an interview to be aired on Channel 4 tonight (Monday 6th August at 8pm) Harriet Harman MP criticised elements of the Gambling Act that has allowed the clustering of betting shops and the introduction of high-stakes roulette machines known as Fixed Odds Betting Terminals (or FOBT machines) on the High Street.
Harriet Harman MP says: "If we had known then what we know now [about the clustering of Betting Shops], we wouldn't have allowed this, because it's not just ruining the High Street it's ruining people's lives," she says.
"I got the most heart-rending letters and emails and calls that I've ever had in thirty years of being an MP. Just saying, please do something about this. It's ruined my life, it's ruined my family, it's really dangerous and the problem is it's getting worse and that's why we need the law to be changed so that something can be done about it."
"Well I think we were wrong, we have made a mistake and this result is the consequence and we need to do something about it", she adds.
Labour admitted sometime ago that they made a mistake on this issue.
06 AUG 2012 NEWS RELEASES
Share
The Gambling Act was a ‘mistake' and the consequences are ‘ruining the High Street and people's lives', Harriet Harman MP tells Channel 4 Dispatches.
This is a stark confession from a senior member of the government that passed the Gambling Act, who's now deputy leader of the Labour Party. In an interview to be aired on Channel 4 tonight (Monday 6th August at 8pm) Harriet Harman MP criticised elements of the Gambling Act that has allowed the clustering of betting shops and the introduction of high-stakes roulette machines known as Fixed Odds Betting Terminals (or FOBT machines) on the High Street.
Harriet Harman MP says: "If we had known then what we know now [about the clustering of Betting Shops], we wouldn't have allowed this, because it's not just ruining the High Street it's ruining people's lives," she says.
"I got the most heart-rending letters and emails and calls that I've ever had in thirty years of being an MP. Just saying, please do something about this. It's ruined my life, it's ruined my family, it's really dangerous and the problem is it's getting worse and that's why we need the law to be changed so that something can be done about it."
"Well I think we were wrong, we have made a mistake and this result is the consequence and we need to do something about it", she adds.
Labour admitted sometime ago that they made a mistake on this issue.
Fobts do not require promoting - it self promotes, and a very good job too; its owners neither, why? One does not promote "crack cocaine", for obvious reasons.
effectively when you think about it though the bookmakers are complaining about not being able to win more money off poor people
essentially they are saying that 2 quid is a disgustingly low amount for them to win... greedy lot want 100 quid a time off these losers, who have zero chance of being ahead in the long term.
essentially they are saying that 2 quid is a disgustingly low amount for them to win... greedy lot want 100 quid a time off these losers, who have zero chance of being ahead in the long term.
Exactly Lewisham Ranger. Also the bookies bleat on about how much damage it will do to horse racing in general. So, racing is reliant on funding from some of the poorest in society to fund it and keep the show on the road is it? Its morally wrong the poor should fund a sport that is predominantly the domain of the wealthy. How about horse racing stand on its own 2 feet a bit more?
As always, on so many threads on every forum, someone tries to make a (usually "it's Labour's fault") political point on every subject.
The fact is these things were not invented until the late 90's and were seen as an extension to allowing slot machines in betting shops which happened in 1995.
NO-ONE knew what effect they would have, nor could they have known how much they would move OTC money to the guarantee now provided.
It wasn't any political party's fault.
There is no doubt they should have acted sooner, but then so could subsequent governments.
In fact my MP, John Whittingdale. was the secretary responsible who about 5 years ago said
"They [fobts] are not only not the cocaine of gambling, they're not even the cannabis"
The Gambling Act which created the Gambling Commission in 2005 was a pile of badly thought out poop.
But in (I think) 1991 and then 1995, new laws regarding deregulation of betting shops and allowing; first, live pictures and then, slot machines.
These were contribution factors to what we now have.
There is no political point scoring available.
The levy was always supposed to fund Horse racing. Until horse racing priced itself too highly and media and bookies lost interest.
The poorest pay for EVERYTHING in society.
The fact is these things were not invented until the late 90's and were seen as an extension to allowing slot machines in betting shops which happened in 1995.
NO-ONE knew what effect they would have, nor could they have known how much they would move OTC money to the guarantee now provided.
It wasn't any political party's fault.
There is no doubt they should have acted sooner, but then so could subsequent governments.
In fact my MP, John Whittingdale. was the secretary responsible who about 5 years ago said
"They [fobts] are not only not the cocaine of gambling, they're not even the cannabis"
The Gambling Act which created the Gambling Commission in 2005 was a pile of badly thought out poop.
But in (I think) 1991 and then 1995, new laws regarding deregulation of betting shops and allowing; first, live pictures and then, slot machines.
These were contribution factors to what we now have.
There is no political point scoring available.
The levy was always supposed to fund Horse racing. Until horse racing priced itself too highly and media and bookies lost interest.
The poorest pay for EVERYTHING in society.
How much of the Money going in them is Crooked Money ?? You can play the same games on a Phone or Pc wtf would you be going into a shop to play Them ?
racing post starting to come out will the spill 2,500 to 3,000 shops to close so be it
The one single reason FOBTs became possible is the same reason Betfair became possible: Gordon Brown (Labour, Dunfermline, E.)switching bookmaker taxation from turnover to gross profits.
The people running the biggest bookies have also got so wrapped up in the idea that FOBTs are cash cows that they've forgotten a few things:
People stopped betting over the counter.
The machines cost money to rent.
The duty payable on machine is more than on betting.
The opening hours will be reduced, saving them wages.
Shops can reopen in community areas.
People stopped betting over the counter.
The machines cost money to rent.
The duty payable on machine is more than on betting.
The opening hours will be reduced, saving them wages.
Shops can reopen in community areas.
That, screaming, is carp.
They weren't around before then. They didn't exist.
They weren't around before then. They didn't exist.
The switch from turnover to profits had been lobbied for years, it was an unfair tax.
FOBTs were not born from that in any way shape or form.
In fact the earliest ones (and I had them in MY shop, before roulette was around) were taxed on turnover too, but only a few bookies had taken them on.
FOBTs were not born from that in any way shape or form.
In fact the earliest ones (and I had them in MY shop, before roulette was around) were taxed on turnover too, but only a few bookies had taken them on.
screaming is correct. FOBTs were not viable, because of the low margins, when tax was based on turnover not gross profit. A punter could turnover £1000 whilst losing £100. Tax was levied on the £1000. Unviable. Now it's on the £100. Viable.
lewisham ranger's post described it perfectly. These "bookmakers" have become accustomed to making such obscene amounts of risk-free cash from high speed fobts that they are up in arms at the prospect of making profits at a slower rate.
Hopefully they'll soon have their noses dragged away from the trough and be made to think about going back to the thing that they were given licences for, which is bookmaking, taking bets and taking a few risks.
Hopefully they'll soon have their noses dragged away from the trough and be made to think about going back to the thing that they were given licences for, which is bookmaking, taking bets and taking a few risks.
If it means less junkies,wasters, and bawbags in the shops ladcrooks and co might find their footfall will increase.
flushgordon1 22 Jan 18 22:28
If it means less junkies,wasters, and bawbags in the shops ladcrooks and co might find their footfall will increase.
Not with their shocking prices they won't (NAP)
If it means less junkies,wasters, and bawbags in the shops ladcrooks and co might find their footfall will increase.
Not with their shocking prices they won't (NAP)
Panic on the high street lol The millions they spend on all the mps who will be lobbying like never before to get the fobt stakes up with all the false stories and panic set in , big surprise if its £2 but hope it is they will then have to change the business model and horseracing will be better served, rubbish that 3000 will close they will re adjust and maybe give a little better service to the horse racing lot about time
in my honest view if it is 2.00 I would of thought the share price would be through the floor
down less than 8 per cent mmmmm
not to worry yosa you still about
sweet dreams.
Ronnie.
down less than 8 per cent mmmmm
not to worry yosa you still about
sweet dreams.
Ronnie.
Not read whole thread so soz if repeating but their is no chance this gov will drop this to £2 for any number of reasons - the main one being the ideology of the Tories, i.e when have they ever made a decision that would restrict (legal) business like this? Not to mention the immense lobbying by the bookies - all those free lunches and tickets to sporting events mean something after all, as do the silly stories by the bookies stooges in the meeja. The limit will be something like a 'provisional' £10 which will please enough people and then it will rise after a shortish period of time. £2 no way!
Hills share price going back up this morning :-(
People in gambling firms making money betting on it's own shares shock!
I thought racing's contribution was determined by gross profits on horse racing bets?
if someone were to tell me theres 1000,s of racing,sports punters waiting to be cherry picked from betting shops to do their business online,mobile,telephone etc ,I would well believe it, anyone thinking theres 1000,s of people either not betting, orbetting online at home,by mobile off course etc waiting to be seduced into going back into betting shops is living in lah,lah land,imo
racing post of course have a vested interest in that they will sell less copies if there are shop closures
the message the big firms will soon get min 20p max £2 .were getting it for long enough!!
Betting shops will survive if they want to, they will have to promote other forms of gambling, like horses, dogs, football etc etc. they survived and thrived for years without FOBTS, if they offer value, and their traders and odds compilers want to try and make a book, and pit their wits against the betting public, then great. for far too long they have been lazy, relying on the poor and weak to fill there coffers via the FOBTS, and cherry picking, who they want to bet with them, ie clueless pro footballers who throw thousands away every afternoon..
Now its time to grow a pair, and do what it says on your licence, BOOKMAKING, the worry for them is, that over the years they have employed accountants, and NOT TURF ACCOUNTANTS..
Now its time to grow a pair, and do what it says on your licence, BOOKMAKING, the worry for them is, that over the years they have employed accountants, and NOT TURF ACCOUNTANTS..
They'll have to ditch the instant coffee and bring in the in-store mini branches of Costa if they want to get the snowflake horseracing and sports punters back.
other than giving free money everyday ,from a bloke who used to go to cleveland park 3 times a week bet at hackney dogs for 2 hrs on a Saturday morning,i,ll tell you theres absolute no chance of attracting a single person who doesn't already to bet on greyhound racing, its at toaster on a sat morning and I wouldn't turn off Saturday kitchen or a sweeney repeat to even consider watching it never mind betting on it
How many people under 35 bet on horse racing in betting shops or horse racing full stop? How many people under 30 use cash generally? The trend will continue regardless of FOBTs. These days odds are just software generated from foreign price feeds on football tennis and the like. No one compiles, they just copy. In horse racing you can't rely on copying foreign odds feeds based on millions of pounds worth of turnover, they rely on £250 matched on here. Far too difficult and risky.
It's like SS always banging on about the Premier League. One giant repetitive advert for the easiest route to profit.
It's like SS always banging on about the Premier League. One giant repetitive advert for the easiest route to profit.
yes great post dambuster
however if people believe that a £2 max stake on the FOBT will force firms into going back to traditional bookmaking then they are wrong imo
it is far far more likely they will just turn their attention into making sure the FOBT roulette addicts get hooked onto slots instead (smaller but faster losses)
and scratch cards, bingo, virtual racing etc all that bowlarks is likely to get an even bigger push than it is now
however if people believe that a £2 max stake on the FOBT will force firms into going back to traditional bookmaking then they are wrong imo
it is far far more likely they will just turn their attention into making sure the FOBT roulette addicts get hooked onto slots instead (smaller but faster losses)
and scratch cards, bingo, virtual racing etc all that bowlarks is likely to get an even bigger push than it is now
£2 limit or £100 limit, they'll still turn the volume up on the fecking things louder than the racing.
Clydebank, racing also gets revenue via media rights from each individual bookmakers shop. I'm assuming the only way some of the new shops can meet the cost per shop is via the profits made from the FOBTs. So, here we have a situation whereby the poorest and vulnerable in society have been partly funding the game. Time for the racing industry to stand on its own 2 feet a bit more and bookmakers to change their business model and stop being so lazy and reliant on profits made from FBOTs. They will have to go back to being ACTUAL bookmakers again. Of course there will be shop closures but there is far too many of them as there is.
headline in the print version of the RP today is CATASTROPHIC in huge letters. A new low for Bruce,,,
the business model of "bookmakers" and of racing in general has been flawed for years
Jan 23, 2018 -- 1:20PM, TheFear wrote:
headline in the print version of the RP today is CATASTROPHIC in huge letters. A new low for Bruce,,,
but all too predictable from the bookies puppet master
The Racing Post should be given away free in bookmakers such is the agenda of that paper.
well a looney tory mp on the daily politics on about a sugar tax ,said they are not in the business of stopping people enjoying the taste of chocolate, so instead of introducing a tax they,ll wait for someone to invent a chocolate that tastes the same ,but without the calories [true quote ], so maybe this mp will try to keep the fobt,s but use matchsticks instead of money, 
I'm struggling to see any logic at all in the theory that this legislation would make bookmakers more likely to take horse racing bets that they currently refuse to take. It would seem to imply that they are currently missing out on loads of free money
its low margin business that's the problem
FOBT is high margin and risk free
no wonder they are squealing like b1tches
FOBT is high margin and risk free
no wonder they are squealing like b1tches
thy prefer low hanging fruit in the race to the bottom
if that fruit isnt available they will have to invest and make a new business structure
Whether they would or whether investors want to go backwards to keep going forwards is a big question.
They had/have large debts on the books already generally from what I recall
if that fruit isnt available they will have to invest and make a new business structure
Whether they would or whether investors want to go backwards to keep going forwards is a big question.
They had/have large debts on the books already generally from what I recall
As GoBallistic says, business like laying bad each way at best price, customers with information and laying arbs is loss making business. They are not turning down free money because it's low margin or too difficult to establish whether it's a good bet to take or not. If anything, with a stake reduction in Fobts they are going to be looking at their margins even closer and knocking even more bad business back!
if they want to survive pixie it(horses,dogs) will be their main income stream?
What gets me is that there's obviously a ton of bolox printed and reality covered/distorted to everyone outside of racing but those inside must believe it's gospel as they surely would've called the rp on their relentless s h i te at some stage.The journos/editor would need some kind of validation or how could they face these people on a regular basis.
From the outside it's like everyone in racing is in their own bubble and are clueless to realty or know they are treat different and keep their mouths shut.
What do trainers think of the likes of Birchy/Seagal etc. do they believe these are the top tipsters of the times which punters live and die by betting wise,do they think there aren't enough people wanting to bet on racing (which we know is not true) explaining levy/prize money shortfalls,whay aren't trainers/owners speaking out on betting issues,how can they win for donkeys' years and have no trouble getting on.You could go on forever....
From the outside it's like everyone in racing is in their own bubble and are clueless to realty or know they are treat different and keep their mouths shut.
What do trainers think of the likes of Birchy/Seagal etc. do they believe these are the top tipsters of the times which punters live and die by betting wise,do they think there aren't enough people wanting to bet on racing (which we know is not true) explaining levy/prize money shortfalls,whay aren't trainers/owners speaking out on betting issues,how can they win for donkeys' years and have no trouble getting on.You could go on forever....
For them to survive they need more mugs, Kavvie - and that can't happen. It is impossible for an odds compiler to price up every race, every day, with no ricks on the early prices so the alternative is to go back to not pricing every race up like before, but that's hugely unlikely as they would be at a trading disadvantage to any firm that continues to price up but refuses shrewd money. So what's left open to them? Shop closures.
They'll bring in more virtual stuff. Penalty shoot-outs possibly with football being more popular among younger punters.
That's for certain, Mouse Muldoon. TRP will be starting it's own virtual racing in March/April so virtual content is set to double anyway.
pixie • January 23, 2018 2:03 PM GMT
For them to survive they need more mugs, Kavvie - and that can't happen. It is impossible for an odds compiler to price up every race, every day, with no ricks on the early prices so the alternative is to go back to not pricing every race up like before, but that's hugely unlikely as they would be at a trading disadvantage to any firm that continues to price up but refuses shrewd money. So what's left open to them? Shop closures.
mouse muldoon • January 23, 2018 2:04 PM GMT
They'll bring in more virtual stuff
absolutely
For them to survive they need more mugs, Kavvie - and that can't happen. It is impossible for an odds compiler to price up every race, every day, with no ricks on the early prices so the alternative is to go back to not pricing every race up like before, but that's hugely unlikely as they would be at a trading disadvantage to any firm that continues to price up but refuses shrewd money. So what's left open to them? Shop closures.
mouse muldoon • January 23, 2018 2:04 PM GMT
They'll bring in more virtual stuff
absolutely
as i said elsewhere pixie theres too many shops.they are open for a reason that isnt in their trading description.we do a lot wrong in ireland but we didnt allow in these things..
kavvie, do people in ireland have the same trouble getting bets on as reported in the UK ?
yes its the very same as all the bookies here(except boyles i think?) have a presence on the high street in britain so the easy crack cocaine fbot money is there for them
but boyles just dont lay anybody over 10e.all they want as far as i can see are 2 euro soccer accum or 2e dog forecast people.
The Racing Post is a sh1t racing paper with sh1t journalism - lazy journalism of the utmost category. It ought not be allowed to operate given who their paymasters are and the conflict of interests of their journalists.
What the Racing Post have spounted since the "probable" max limit of fobts was purported to be are ABSOLUTE CARP and completely one-sided. But true racing followers and enthusiasts like myself know why. The Racing post is not fit for purpose!
What the Racing Post have spounted since the "probable" max limit of fobts was purported to be are ABSOLUTE CARP and completely one-sided. But true racing followers and enthusiasts like myself know why. The Racing post is not fit for purpose!
If the £2 limit does come in the irony of it all is that it will be the bookmakers who are limited to 2 quid instead of the punters.
Indeed, a taste of their own medicine. They'd need to wait 50x longer for the same profit (eventually).
Anyone not able to grasp the idea or understand and see why these crack cocaine machines of the gambling industry must not be allowed in the high street betting shops beggars belief, and possibly needs certification of some sort; fobts are evil, and does not contribute one iota to the gambling industry - the claim that the Racing Levy will be affected is nothing but a ruse spinned off by the voice boxes and head honchos of betting entities.
Horse racing, the sport of the rich, should/ought never to be funded by the least privileged, deprived and sick, period!
Anyone not able to grasp the idea or understand and see why these crack cocaine machines of the gambling industry must not be allowed in the high street betting shops beggars belief, and possibly needs certification of some sort; fobts are evil, and does not contribute one iota to the gambling industry - the claim that the Racing Levy will be affected is nothing but a ruse spinned off by the voice boxes and head honchos of betting entities.
Horse racing, the sport of the rich, should/ought never to be funded by the least privileged, deprived and sick, period!
same argument saying racing and racecourses shouldn't be funded by music fans but it is, there aint enough racing punters left to fund racing
The addicts and deadheads will just do something else if they don't do FOBTS smoke illicit stuff like spice would drink meths in the olden days with slosh red wine (was good whilst it lasted made me turn blue that might have been the anti - freeze added as ice and slice mind you) these Ministers are hopeless and haven't got a clue keep it at £100 a pop and legislate that bookmakers have to lay everything to £200 at advertised prices additionally big three or four (not smaller indies) cough up couple million each and each year to treat the treatable. Jobs a good un. We don't want shops shut and people on the sausage.
dambuster is right bookmakers will have to diversify and modernise to survive. They can't simply rely on fobts to meet their bottom line. entire businesses, not just shops will go to the wall. Only the fittest will survive.
I can see a shift to more betfair style betting and perhaps a modernisation of in-running betting being offered to punters both online and in the shops. But what is being lost here in this debate is that the government is simply restricting these particular machines to £2 a time, there's nothing going to be written that they can't come up with imaginative ways to fleece gullible punters of their money.
My concern is if the bookmakers struggle then it becomes even more difficult to get any kind of bets on. Sure for some it's impossible anyway but there's still positive things like BOG and the ability to get a decent bet on in shops on certain markets. That all might be taken away if their profits are tightened to a large degree.
I can see a shift to more betfair style betting and perhaps a modernisation of in-running betting being offered to punters both online and in the shops. But what is being lost here in this debate is that the government is simply restricting these particular machines to £2 a time, there's nothing going to be written that they can't come up with imaginative ways to fleece gullible punters of their money.
My concern is if the bookmakers struggle then it becomes even more difficult to get any kind of bets on. Sure for some it's impossible anyway but there's still positive things like BOG and the ability to get a decent bet on in shops on certain markets. That all might be taken away if their profits are tightened to a large degree.
Hills up 0.61% not £2 is it be real. Bit like mushroom management by the government leak or two some adjustment they cannot lose the revenue in tax don't want people on the dole will be £50 a spin.
I think some of us are missing the point.
Fobts should not be available on the high street operating under the existence betting shop licence where the footfall is at its highest given fobt's high level of addiction and its consequences to society; fobts can be available in an industrial estate with impunity, for all I care, but not on the high street!
Whatever the users of fobts do post its new max limit is entirely up to them, but £100 per spin on a crack cocaine gaming machine in the high street is ridiculously high and unjustifiable - it only exacerbates the predicaments.
If horse racing needs funding another source must be sourced but not from fobt as claimed by the head honchos of betting entities. Horse racing has done without fobts in the past, so why now? A ruse used to satisfy shareholders and bolster the pay packets of head honchos and their gravy train colleagues perhaps.
Horse racing is in steep competition with other sporting events. And as a long time follower of horse racing as a racegoer and punter I've cut back enormously on trips to racecourses mid-week and weekends because of the exorbitant prices charged and sometimes 2nd rate facilities, but mainly the sh1tty races put on for the sole benefit of the bookies; if fewer but higher quality race meetings as a result post its new max limit sobeit, and I'd be gladly prepared to pay the present costs too. One has to cut one's cloth to suit to achieve the result (eventually) otherwise, more pain in the near future.
Fobts should not be available on the high street operating under the existence betting shop licence where the footfall is at its highest given fobt's high level of addiction and its consequences to society; fobts can be available in an industrial estate with impunity, for all I care, but not on the high street!
Whatever the users of fobts do post its new max limit is entirely up to them, but £100 per spin on a crack cocaine gaming machine in the high street is ridiculously high and unjustifiable - it only exacerbates the predicaments.
If horse racing needs funding another source must be sourced but not from fobt as claimed by the head honchos of betting entities. Horse racing has done without fobts in the past, so why now? A ruse used to satisfy shareholders and bolster the pay packets of head honchos and their gravy train colleagues perhaps.
Horse racing is in steep competition with other sporting events. And as a long time follower of horse racing as a racegoer and punter I've cut back enormously on trips to racecourses mid-week and weekends because of the exorbitant prices charged and sometimes 2nd rate facilities, but mainly the sh1tty races put on for the sole benefit of the bookies; if fewer but higher quality race meetings as a result post its new max limit sobeit, and I'd be gladly prepared to pay the present costs too. One has to cut one's cloth to suit to achieve the result (eventually) otherwise, more pain in the near future.
hills up a fraction merely value hunters getting involved after the organisation was ripped to pieces yesterday ...
We'll have to agree to disagree hulk lobby is more powerful and influential than you imagine. Money as we know talks.
The British Horseracing Authority’s submission to the government consultation on betting-shop gaming machines known as fixed-odds betting terminals warns of “unintended consequences to British racing and the wider rural economy” if the maximum stake is reduced from £100 to £2, a spokesman for the regulator said on Monday.
It seems they're all peeing in the same pot despite the FACT that the current attitudes of the bookmakers have driven many genuine punters away from betting on the sport leading to a smaller levy with less to go round,how can keeping shops open when they don't take bets have a consequence on rural areas?.All these tales of woe will be relentless from now til the decision is made most of them will be made up because we all know that they haven't got a clue how else to generate money without having to take bets which is seemingly their only strategy desperate times etc.
The BHA are a bunch of dimwits with no clue to organising a piss-up let alone funding for horse racing. What an abhorrent thought funding the sport of kings with proceeds from fobts? It is wholly and socially unacceptable.
The BHA needs to engage their brains (if not ship out), and fingers out to come up with a long term workable solution, and not relying solely of ill-gotten proceed from fobts. Fobts = miseries and sufferings for those users related.
The BHA needs to engage their brains (if not ship out), and fingers out to come up with a long term workable solution, and not relying solely of ill-gotten proceed from fobts. Fobts = miseries and sufferings for those users related.
The BHA has been the puppet of bookmakers for a long time.
Of course the Rust connection will be a HUGE factor here
As pointed out the lobby of parliament mps who for lots of year and is deeply entrenched they get paid in serious money and favours they have made sure that what bookmakers want they usually get, money does talk unless there has been a change then we aint going to see £2 I think the very powerful lobby will be pulling out all the strings they can, a lot of money at stake I hope im wrong but history is not in the £2s favour
All these firms ought to be called Catch22 Bet - You'd be crazy not to take advantage of their enhanced odds, enhanced place terms and BOG but if you do then they'd be crazy not to shut you down.
just BAN the ******* fobt's and send them to landfill, let Lads and Hills go to the wall or have to up their current risk ratio from 0.1%
Bookies, media, BHA, GC and government all in cahoots anyway
Bookies, media, BHA, GC and government all in cahoots anyway
"Bookies, media, BHA, GC and government all in cahoots anyway"
I think you have left out the biggest partner-in-crime ie The Racing Post!
I think you have left out the biggest partner-in-crime ie The Racing Post!
RP would be under the media tab in the 'loose' sense of the word
If you like carp coffee and giving your money away fobts are your game, if you are stupid enough to play them you are a feckin idiot.
Bookie share prices static today --pp only one to drop 1.8%
great for tradesman to launder cash jobs thats about all there are good for
WHEN IS THE DECISION going to be announced. does anyone know
Talk about burying the news! Looks like they're taking tips from our trans atlantic snakes "cough" I mean cousins
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539