There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 87 comments are related to the topic:
PANORAMA/ROSS KEMP
PANORAMA/ROSS KEMP
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 87
|
By:
The high street bookies cannot be allowed to trade under the present Betting/Gaming Licences as they are archaic, and not formulated for electronic machines. Instead they ought to be operating under the same terms and conditions as those for provincial casinos - they are more casinos than traditional bookies.
And, they ought to be taxed more punitively as they do not create anything tangible or worthwhile, just sowing the seeds for future miseries for some users. |
|
By:
Totally agree impossible, don't know why bookmakers (not that several even are) can be allowed to be 'casinos' these days.
|
|
By:
Tax would at least give something back to society, agree also.
|
|
By:
since trading on stock markets is the largest (by far!) regulated form of gambling and most of our pensions, public and private, are in some way index linked, we are all gamblers - personally I'd rather take my chances with the likes of shane kelly, jim crowley and jimmy sullivan, than trust to a small group of LSE types from the shires born with silver ladels in their mouths...
|
|
By:
If you want to trace where the seeds were first sown and subsequently grew into the biggest gambling addiction epidemic in history,look no further than Leonard Bernstein.It was he who lobbied for the introduction of FOBTs into betting shops in the early 90s and believe it or not stated that the welfare of punters was a priority concern.
|
|
By:
there was a record 8,266 complaints against British bookmakers last year according to the gambling commission. most were about firms refusing to payout on winning bets or failing to operate in a socially responsible way.
Amanda, who features tonight,lost £633.000 betting online with Jackpotjoy, even betting on the day she was declared bankrupt. 1.01 no mention on Panorama of bookmakers refusing to payout bets.  |
|
By:
I'm afraid if one is trusting one's hard-earned cash (assuming it was hard-earned and not a mega lottery win or inheritance) on some dungaree-wearing City oinks then good luck to one. Personally, I trust no one with my money, and manage it as best as possible. Just remember who's paying for their expensive attire, and trappings of success.
Their word is no longer their bond! |
|
By:
Bronagh shocked at the losses.
|
|
By:
ladcrooks got the right name
|
|
By:
sorry to here your fathers died, here is a £1000 bonus.
 |
|
By:
I was wrong again —- amazed they covered horse racing in this programme.
Sorry GLENTOBY,don’t know who you mean in Leonard Bernstein. |
|
By:
Hi Pilsudski,Bernstein who became Lord Bernstein was a big noise with Stanley leisure in the early 90s.It was he who lobbied for FOBTs to be allowed into betting shops.
|
|
By:
Having watched last night's programme, which I don't think was helped by having a presenter who appeared to be something of a drama queen, I do think we need a programme that compares the way bookmakers treat winning punters compared to losing ones. That for me is the real story which needs highlighting.
|
|
By:
Absolutely, d d.
|
|
By:
Agreed
|
|
By:
good to see these purest scum counts being outed by the BBC, at last some of the licence fee is being put to good use
|
|
By:
When the fun stops we'll ring you up and encourage you to carry on losing more money.
The bloke from the gambling commission sounded like an apologist for the bookmakers. |
|
By:
I think Ladbrokes need a name change - the brand is sh1t - no longer what it once was; rid of the present lot of pr people and rebrand otherwise more shops will undoubtedly close in the near future; it's no longer a name to be trusted.
Profit, profit and more profit, regardless - that is the present Ladbrokes! |
|
By:
the worst had to be jackpot joy, calling the woman up, to be fair she wasn't overly distressed - "have you seen my account?" - but giving her £100 and £1000 free bets so she could carry on her addiction was appalling, given that they knew how much she was doing.
|
|
By:
all gambling companies care about is profit, that's what they're in the business for, we shouldn't try and pretend any differently. plus there is a degree of personal responsibility/accountability. how that asian ish looking bloke could do so much mindless gambling losing all of his friends' money, that's not the bookmakers fault, that's a dodgy wire in his brain
|
|
By:
that was the scariest thing in my opinion, the lack of self awareness that these people had not to be able to stop themselves gambling away all of that money. it's like they were possessed by some sort of demon. again it's like the gun debate. guns don't kill people, guns do. but obviously the easy access to gambling now means that people are going to gamble more and most people that gamble, especially on virtual games, are going to lose. in fact, not most, all.
|
|
By:
sorry, guns don't kill people, people do.* you know what i'm saying
|
|
By:
I havn't watched it yet
But from reading comments it just sounds like addiction I watched an interview with Dick Van **** on youtube from the 70s, talking about alcohol addiction. Its just the same, except those in the bookmaking industry know exactly how to manipulate and pull the strings of those sufferers |
|
By:
D Y K E
|
|
By:
The bloke from the Gambling Commission needs to think outside the box, and get a grip with the subtle "grooming" from the bookies; the bookies are doing to him in a manner similar to their big (clueless probably lonely) losing punter.
A revamp of the existing betting/gaming licences are long undue to reflect the new electronic games ensconced in the premises of the bookies these days. |
|
By:
agree there betting masta but i think id be insulted if id just lost 60k in a session and they offered me 100 probably wouldnt buy enough vodka to ease the blow so id say thats just made up for tv and non punter purposes
|
|
By:
trident the clowns that run the GC are all civil servants that no nothing about gambling
|
|
By:
You can open accounts and deposit and lose thousands without proof of identity, yet if you do so and win they ask for all forms of identification before you can withdraw. If you complain, they tell you it`s to safeguard you in case someone has stolen your card and are using it for fraudulent gambling. So, it`s ok for someone to steal your card and identity and no checks, as long as they are losing. All a bunch of *****.
|
|
By:
The only problem gamblers that they stop are gamblers who are a problem for them by winning.
|
|
By:
Badbooks and that online Casino firm, highlighted last night, should be ashamed of themselves allowing that guy and woman to lose hundreds of thousands without making checks as to where the money was coming from. Instead, they bombard them with FREE bets when they go missing when trying to quit.
|
|
By:
Thanks for info,GLENTOBY. But was it Leonard STEINBERG ? Not trying to be smart,l assure you.
|
|
By:
if you would like stright races . get rid of betfair and **** , ive been betting 45 years ive nerver seen so bad results , it easyer for a trainer to get em beat . be4 thay had to back em to win to make any money
|
|
By:
Oh no! If so, it would be another present as rewarding as the fobt had been for them; The Exchange can easily track the dodgy manipulating horsey related entities just like in the Stock Exchange, if the will is there. The inception of The Exchange has meant a competition for the bookies, and another platform for punters to place "back or lay bets" should one choose to do so without impunity or restriction.
Any proven dodgy horsey related entities eg trainers/jockeys/owners in the unscrupulous manipulation of race results must be given lengthy sentences eg 5 yrs or more similar to those dished out for administrating drugs to horses. |
|
By:
Jackpot joy woman was desperate, depositing £300 every 2 minutes through the night!!!
She says to the woman on the phone "have you seen my account" and the reply is, ", Yes, I know it's not been fantastic fantastic!!! But see just how desperate the company itself was to keep her hooked, they started off giving her £100 a time to keep her hooked but then, when obviously concerned she might be coming to her senses, started chucking a £1000 a time at her. Desperate stuff. The gambling commission guy was despicable, he basically thinks that the Fox should be trusted to look after the Hen coop and thinks the fact that complaints have risen exponentially is a good sign because it means that the victims are more determined!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
By:
99% of horses are trying their absolute maximum in a race, there's a bit of manipulation that goes on sure but it's nowhere near as much as you think. losing punters tend to say it's **** and it is **** but only by the bookmaker. also if you genuinely believe horse racing is **** you 100% absolutely should not be betting on it
|
|
By:
r i g g e d
|
|
By:
there should be a deal of personal accountability here though as well, like i said it's not the bookmakers forcing people to bet. that woman seemed fairly cogent on the phone and she knew the state she had got herself into but she couldn't stop herself. that's on HER, not on the bookmakers. i'm not defending bookmakers because i think they are scu m but there's got to be some personal responsibility in all of this
|
|
By:
Not rocket science identifying addicted gamblers. They know. They don`t give a ****. Bit like a drug addict trying to come off them and their dealer keeps giving them free drugs.
|
|
By:
The Irish Derby; Noble Emperor (Limerick); Melon (Punchestown Champion Hurdle) - these races were ****, and certainly not run on merit.
Addiction takes many forms, and affects even the most cogent and highly educated professionals eg medics and journalists - they are known for their addiction to alcohol; an over-ride switch will flick to enable a continuation of an addiction activity - there is no defence until the end of the cul-de-sac is reached. |
|
By:
**** = r i g g e d
|