There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
29 Aug 23
19:02
Joined:
Date Joined:
07 Sep 15
The above looks after the interest of bookies. This organisation is accusing The Gambling Commission (GC) of an "act of vandalism" on horseracing if GC does not carry out a proper consultation on Affordability Checks (AC) and the government fails to ensure such checks are truly frictionless.
What a shower of an organisation the BGC is? The bookies representative like the RP (another bookies' sponsor paper) is heaping the entire blame of AC on the GC.
BGC, why do you not try advocating AC being conducted by an independent qualified body (not unqualified bookies' personnel) governed by the FCA? Why do you not also advocate differentiating between sports betting eg horseracing, tennis, etc and gaming eg fobt ie slots, roulette, etc? Each issued with a separate licence to denote risks and dependency accordingly eg propensity to addiction and problem gambling?
What a shower of an organisation the BGC is? The bookies representative like the RP (another bookies' sponsor paper) is heaping the entire blame of AC on the GC.
BGC, why do you not try advocating AC being conducted by an independent qualified body (not unqualified bookies' personnel) governed by the FCA? Why do you not also advocate differentiating between sports betting eg horseracing, tennis, etc and gaming eg fobt ie slots, roulette, etc? Each issued with a separate licence to denote risks and dependency accordingly eg propensity to addiction and problem gambling?
sort by:
Show
per page