There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Stating that he could close All his shops in the event of general betting tax increasing. Almost a quarter of the shops (300) already running at a loss according to him, if this is replicated across the industry it will likely mean the end of a high street presence.
The effect on the levy will be disastrous and there will be no way back, a fair few on here will celebrate the demise but be careful what you wish for imo.
The effect on the levy will be disastrous and there will be no way back, a fair few on here will celebrate the demise but be careful what you wish for imo.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 72
|
By:
Running at a loss with four FOBT's in each
 |
|
By:
They are running at a loss because the scumbags are non-competitive even with other rip-off high st bookies
|
|
By:
The machines may have lost their attraction.
I pass through a Coral every week and there is no one on them when I do, often 2 customers or less. |
|
By:
Perhaps the bald manc might do better if he actually took bets to even a modest £100 stake?
|
|
By:
This has got bluff written all over it
|
|
By:
There is bound to be a lot of posturing in a situation
like this. But if margins are squeezed some shops will close, the bottom line will dictate it. |
|
By:
That would be the first thought tbf irons but I don't think so on this occasion based purely on business viability.
|
|
By:
saddo19 Oct 25 12:56Joined: 04 Dec 05 | Topic/replies: 53,281 | Blogger: saddo's blog
The machines may have lost their attraction. Find you local branch of Merkur Slots (open 24/7 wherever possible) and you will find the machine players that you think have gone missing from your local "betting shop". |
|
By:
Many’s the time I’ve gone in there wanting a bet on a golf tournament, they offer each way 1 - 6, across the road spoilsports 1 - 10.
|
|
By:
They would have to travel miles from the shop I refer to TM,a slow
bus ride or pay for parking. I really don't think that's the case here. |
|
By:
Good riddance if he does tbh…..
|
|
By:
Not for his staff mind
|
|
By:
Fair enough saddo - but if there's a market for one - they'll be coming to your area soon.
The sad reality is that "the attraction" doesn't wear off for addicts. Maybe they have joined the 21st Century and gone on-line. As you say physical shops are doomed - and they were doomed long before any talk of a tax rise. It amazes me that they've lasted as long as they have - but I suppose the machines gave them about a 20 year stay of execution. |
|
By:
Very easy to say ''good riddance'' when you don't rely on them for
your income. |
|
By:
That's true - but not in the way you mean. The truth is the big operators no longer rely on them for their income.
"Good riddance" would be a bit brazen (and bad optics), not least to their employees but events have conspired nicely for them to pretend that shops matter to them and that they weren't already winding them down to focus on other (much more lucrative) opportunities and emerging markets. As per my comment on the other thread: Does anybody believe that in their efforts to grab a slice of the US market, that any of these UK operators will be opening physical shops in those new territories??? (regardless of how light-touch the regulation might be or how the low the tax may be). Will they feck - it would be akin to opening a Blockbusters style VHS film hire shop! |
|
By:
Plenty of work out there penzance …..
|
|
By:
Life doesn’t fall apart when you leave a bookies …..
|
|
By:
I notice you never got a sniff yesterday Cag…..never mind…
|
|
By:
Well done Horatio and Penzance. My sentiments too.
|
|
By:
Still well in front of you Quixall or have you forgotten your "Good things" on your Arc thread and my 14/1 winner? lol
|
|
By:
penzance19 Oct 25 14:01Joined: 26 Feb 04 | Topic/replies: 17,220 | Blogger: penzance's blog
Very easy to say ''good riddance'' when you don't rely on them for your income. Neither Fred nor Paddy now relying on shops for their income. Can't blame them for trying to scapegoat the Govt - that's much better optics for them than the reality that shops have had their day. When they get the slice of the much bigger and more lucrative American market that they crave and are focussed upon - do you think they will be opening any physical shops over there?????? Even if the regulation is light touch and the taxes are low? Will they heck! |
|
By:
They are hardly 'scapegoating' the Govt. Yor are scapegoating them by shifting blame away from this spectaculary inept administration we have that has nothing but harm since it took over
Your constant attacks on the bookmakers is an attempt to avoid the realty-this Govt is a calamity and is very bad for all businesses |
|
By:
Quixall emerges as one who will celebrate, never mind the loss of thousands of jobs of ordinary people or the loss of about 40% of racings betting related income, sums up bitter punters tbh, obviously not winning ones!!
|
|
By:
Busyfool - are you thinking the big operators were looking to maintain or expand their retail estates prior to talk of tax harmonisation?
 For sure, the tax hike will probably be the final nail in the coffin for many shops - but they were already 3 feet under! Do you think Fred, Paddy, etc, will be closing down their on-line presence? The machines gave them a stay of execution and actually drove a massive expansion due to the 4 per shop rule- but the internet killed the shops. |
|
By:
Nothing for me to celebrate Cag tbh…..
Personally couldn’t give a monkey’s regarding any bookmaker ….. |
|
By:
What will happen to "The Betting Shop Manager" of the Year Award?
Always look forward to that one. |
|
By:
be replaced by 'On-line Bookmakers Helpdesk Bot of the Year Award'.
|
|
By:
Fred nice offer on Liverpool game paid double of win by 2 and treble of win by 3 , £100 max
|
|
By:
The Management Joined: 27 Dec 00
Replies: 1187019 Oct 25 15:08 Busyfool - are you thinking the big operators were looking to maintain or expand their retail estates prior to talk of tax harmonisation? BlushLaugh For sure, the tax hike will probably be the final nail in the coffin for many shops - but they were already 3 feet under! Do you think Fred, Paddy, etc, will be closing down their on-line presence? But why do we want to put them in a coffin? I hardly go in but many do and it will be a calamity for tens of thousands, and if its true that they are are outdated and unviable then let market forces decide and not an act of vandalism from the Govt elected to 'pursue growth above all else', to quote Theeves herself Instead, spiteful increases in everything has done the opposite-Do you agree? or are you totally devoted to the Lbour project and will not hear of criticism. seems so |
|
By:
I don't see it as a Party Political matter. Your business (and each of it's divisions) is either financially viable or it's not.
Shops were financially viable before the internet and "gaming" arrived on the scene - Now they're mostly not. They've just about clung on due to FOBT's (which actually gave them a mini-renaissance). Completely ignoring the Gambling Act probably helped a bit too. I've got nothing against bookmakers or gambling; If you could point me in the direction of a bookmaker, I'd probably try to have a bet with them! But all I see now is gaming companies masquerading as bookmakers. Bookmakers transforming their gambling businesses into an on-line gaming businesses is the root cause of all the issues and problems. It's been catastrophic for many "associated parties", including/especially racing. It's also been catastrophic for their shops - but of course, for the business as a whole, that's been considered a price well worth paying. Gaming coupled with the internet have allowed them to transform from a relatively high-cost, low-margin business model (gambling in shops), to one that is low-cost and high-margin (gaming on-line). Which division would you focus on? Which one would you be looking to close down (if presented with the opportunity)? |
|
By:
Not the point. It is up to bookmakers to act as they see fit, in accordance with the law, even if they make a right cobblers of it. Shareholders will blow up
The Govt. might(we do not know) make them unviable which should not be the effect of a state that wants business to succeed but has done nothing but harm so far. That is what I have heard from everybody in business, and most voted Labour Saying the bookmakers should have gone down a different path is one thing but they will die out if the lendscape changes. That is the way things work, or don't. Football pools were huge, as was shopping by catalogue but times change You are making light of something that could potentially end another widely enjoyed pastime by a Govt. that preaches one thing but is incapable of thinking ratiaonly because almost no member of it has ever run anything other than a trade union or council. Endlessly bumping up costs is subject to the law of diminishing returns, as tax income frequently goes down not up. eg, the increases in excise duty were projected to bring in x amouint more, but the revenues decreased by 220 million and harmed a hospitality industry that suffered horribly during covid and has shrunk further |
|
By:
Baroness Davidson, one of the prime movers behind the stop gambling lobby, has worked in neither. Has probably never placed a bet in a licenced betting shop or has any understanding of gaming compared to betting. The power these ignorant people have assumed is extraordinary.
|
|
By:
None of them have. The 101 Labour loonies who wrote to Theeves demanding savage increases based on specious arguments are too noisy to ignore
All they see is venal corporate types mugging the poor blighters too thick to realise what they are doing and wouldn't care if it was ended tomorrow The Netherlands hiked tax on gambling and guess what? Revenues have plummeted |
|
By:
I'm not making light of anything. I'm pointing out that shops are an analogue business operating in a digital world. As such, they've been dying a long, slow death for a long time and much of it is self inflicted.
Much as Fred, Paddy, etc, would like to pass the buck - The autopsy won't give tax harmonisation as the cause of death - much more likely to (rightly) conclude it was multiple causes, mostly self-harm, a kind of assisted suicide. When they conquer the US market (lol) - shops won't be any part of their strategy even if tax is low and regulation is lax. That's a fact. Sorry for repeating that fact so many times (on various threads) - but it sums up that shops just aren't viable. |
|
By:
Mitool is back?
|
|
By:
Why is the Govt. so anti-gambling?
I said the same about changing landscapes but want to know why it is the business of the Govt. to speed their extinction? Do you think it has been good for business in general? |
|
By:
A bit ironic, since it was the same government that opened the flood gates years ago.
|
|
By:
Busyfool19 Oct 25 18:57Joined: 14 Oct 25 | Topic/replies: 12 | Blogger: Busyfool's blog
Why is the Govt. so anti-gambling? You can gamble 24/7 in the uk. We've had the most liberal gambling laws in the world for a very long time. You'd have a stronger argument about a nanny state if you were ranting about the forced wearing of seat-belts or food manufacturers being made to list their ingredients or your lack of access to guns - that really is a nanny-state! |
|
By:
There is still money to be made in shops but they need to adapt or die. It needs a massive change.
Management live for today and how much they can make and have made no preparations for the future and what might happen. They could easily have self regulated the fobts to a £20 max spin but those in charge chose to keep taking the huge profits at £100 a spin because it suited their remit. Shops need to go back to shorter opening and closing hours, halfing staffing costs, go betting terminals only with no OTC business, no paper slips, coupons etc no papers, all info on terminals etc |