TH.. wont affect anyone wanting a bet..? Have you seen the liquidity here lately, its already decimated the exchange model.

The problem I have with all these kinds of reports is alluded to in the first few paragraphs from the link you

gave. These problem gamblers usually have other problems. Let me put it this way, by example:

Someone who is obese is far more likely to suffer serious health problems than someone who is not. They are

likely to be obese because of varios factors,e.g. they smoke, they don't exercise, they drink too much alchohol,

and have a poor diet and eat too much. A report on say, the harmful effects of drinking would come to similar

conclusions as the gambling report without allowing for other factors. I drink a bit more than the recommended

amount of alchohol per week. However I cycle a minimum of 6000 miles a year, I walk a lot (haven't owned a car

for 25 years) and am constantly active. I eat quality food and don't smoke.

Should I have to justify my ability to afford that 2nd or 3rd bottle of wine within a given period of time

because there are people harming themselves by living a lifestyle that includes smoking, poor diet and a lack

of exercise? Am I a problem drinker?

Another problem I have is the tendancy in such reports of estimating effects. They say harmful gambling is

costing society up to 1.27 Billion. Where on earth does that figure come from? How accurate is it?

How on earth have they decided who is a 'problem gambler' and who isn't. I maintain it's impossible to say.

It seems to me that when a report is commissioned to look into the effects on society of harmful gambling

it is bound to be biased and to (conciously or sub-conciously) to exaggerate the results.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that people who have a gambling problem are very likely to have other serious

problems. Stopping them from gambling will make little difference unless those other problems are addressed.

TH- With all respect I think most on here can get round the rules but exchange is 95% of my punting so I've had to jump through the hoops or get cancelled, I do think it's the start of a slippy road.

TH, the point being there are not other places to bet due to anyone showing an ounce of thought process cannot get a bet on.

TH is talking about overseas accounts but that don't add up to me! If punters aren't willing to give their details to betfair which is in its 23rd year and has an excellent record in deposits and withdrawals do you really think they will deposit to an unknown overseas acccount.

There needs to be a survey, what limits have customers got if you refused to give details.

Roggrain pretty much hit the nail on the head, though I’d add this…

This report reads like confirmation bias of a hand wringer….is it 1.27bn net of all the advantages gambling brings, or just a systemic attack on something deemed a vice?

It essentially says if you have mental problems, low IQ and drink, don’t bet.
Well the poorly educated feckless who honestly think they stand a chance long term by guessing are the outcome of the education system’s failings, so arn’t they partly responsible?
Alcohol topped the list of the list of drug harms relative to a single use, yet there are no end of opportunities to buy it, and no papers need to be produced like nazi Germany.

I’ve long said it that a loser is a loser is a loser, it doesn’t matter how many ways you attempt to stop them losing they will always find another way because not everyone is equal. If you fashion society around safeguarding the daft (and frankly ignorant) then the bar of equilibrium has to be lowered so low at to render all parts of life pointless and controlled.

So movewiththetimes, you are saying that the davos globalists are shutting you down, but after checks you can deposit as much as you want everywhere?

That Tony Bet Story......

An online betting firm has been fined £442,750 for demanding ID from winning punters before it would give them the cash, while failing to carry out similar checks on potentially vulnerable people depositing money.

The Gambling Commission punished TonyBet, which is based in Estonia but has a licence to operate in Great Britain, for imposing unfair terms and failures in anti-money laundering and social responsibility measures.

The online casino told customers it had the right to request identification documents for “all withdrawals” despite not having insisted on those same checks earlier, potentially hampering withdrawals but not deposits.

Kay Roberts, the executive director of operations at the Gambling Commission, said: “Not only does this case illustrate our drive to clamp down on anti-money laundering and social responsibility failures, but it also highlights action we will take against gambling businesses who fail to be fair and open with customers.”

The fine highlights a practice that seldom attracts the attention of regulators. Gamblers have often alleged that strict checks are demanded of customers only when they win, with no equivalent scrutiny of whetherthey are suffering financial and mental harm.

The government is expected to publish a white paper on gambling reform within weeks, which could include much stricter requirements on operators to perform affordability checks after a string of cases where addicted gamblers lost huge sums.

Industry lobbyists, such as the Betting and Gaming Council (BGC), have repeatedly voiced opposition to the prospect of any measures that would be “intrusive”.

TonyBet will pay a fine of £442,750 after the transgressions were discovered during an audit in 2021. The company, which is not a member of the BGC, is an Estonia-based online casino carved out of a business founded by the Lithuanian businessman and professional gambler Antanas Guoga, known in the gambling world as Tony G.

TonyBet also told winning punters their cash could be confiscated if they did not provide anti-money laundering documentation within 30 days. While the business demanded that winners went through such hurdles to collect, the commission found it failed to conduct adequate risk assessments of the business being used for money laundering and terrorist financing, or put controls in place to stop such activity.

Nick Goff, a professional sports bettor and former industry professional, said: “It is long overdue that firms were punished for this practice. It has been happening routinely at a lot of firms for a few years now.”

The Guardian has approached TonyBet and Guoga for comment.

Joined: 05 Sep 10 | Topic/replies: 19,389 | Blogger: dave1357's blog
So movewiththetimes, you are saying that the davos globalists are shutting you down, but after checks you can deposit as much as you want everywhere?

No Dave think it's you what can't read, they are shutting down people who don't comply HTH. I can't deposit anywhere what I like and why is that? I'm limited on here after giving everything about me, got limited on Tote after hitting 1500 and after giving the same info they have let me carry on. Says there's no limit set right now but I would bet when it hits 3000 there will be another hurdle to jump.



I'm guessing you've got no limit and not been asked for personal details or have I got that wrong?

I have know about five people who have committed suicide and not one was gambling related.

That's your prerogative but they have still made you do something what you wouldn't of done 10 years ago. Personally I've never left big money in any betting account even betfair which I think is the safest.

Clyde- the numbers don't matter, only 3% of population in UK are vegans(2021) only 0.007% of population in uk are transgender, never stopped them pushing on with those topics.

Sparrow " If they tax betting like labour would probably do (or even worse) then the exchange would be hammered.
Where did you get this information from?"

I can't see a reply. Wes Streeting mentioned it as a possibility when asked about NZ's move. However the following day, Labour Spokespeople were diluting that comment, probably seeing it as a vote loser and definitely a revenue loser.

The big problem we have working against us is that , with the opening up of America the books can in effect afford to be able to toss all of us into the bin and just concentrate over there, there's a diminishing need on their part to rally against these intrusions themselves.

Judging by the crackpot developments in society as a whole during this tory government you can only think had anyone else been in power then things would be utterly madcap.
I have found myself surprised on numerous occasions as to the decisions made by this government, but at least I take the view of the delay being the result of them understanding the value to enterprise in general of non interference (hence the constant delay).

Somebody questioned above what proof there was that Labour would take a harsher approach to gambling, well beyond the fact Labour don’t ever have any real plan other than playing to the gallery we know they said some years ago they regretted opening up gambling with deregulation in the first place.
I genuinely worry what the likes of Wes Streeting would conjure up in this woke environment.

I wonder which party it was that liberalised gambling in 2005?