Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
FOBT Max Stake Reduced
Comments
-
The word 'best' was never used. Anywhere. Not once.0
-
William Hill control a third of the gambling industry in the United States? News to me Chizzy.Chizz said:Zero sympathy for William Hill.
They posted a loss of £722m in 2018, due to a write-down of £883m which they put down to the effect of FOBT regulations on their betting shop business. In other words, they took the view that, despite the new rules, they could afford to write down the full cost and still show an underlying operating profit. So, they are repeating the news they had already forewarned in their report in March, alongside 2018's numbers.
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.0 -
I believe that figure is for Nevada only.bobmunro said:
William Hill control a third of the gambling industry in the United States? News to me Chizzy.Chizz said:Zero sympathy for William Hill.
They posted a loss of £722m in 2018, due to a write-down of £883m which they put down to the effect of FOBT regulations on their betting shop business. In other words, they took the view that, despite the new rules, they could afford to write down the full cost and still show an underlying operating profit. So, they are repeating the news they had already forewarned in their report in March, alongside 2018's numbers.
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
From the WH website:
"Our history in the US, starting in NevadaWilliam Hill became the leading sports betting operator in the US in 2012, when we merged three businesses based in Nevada to form William Hill US. By the end of 2018 we had grown to reach a market share of 32% in terms of revenues and 57% by number of outlets. We now have sports books in about 115 of the total of 190 casinos across Nevada, in addition to offering mobile betting via an app. We continue to focus on expanding our product range including in-play opportunities, developing the mobile app and redeveloping the sports books, which are all branded William Hill."
0 -
Most of their Nevada business is also joint ventures with US casino groups, thereby reducing WH’s actual share.Big_Bad_World said:
I believe that figure is for Nevada only.bobmunro said:
William Hill control a third of the gambling industry in the United States? News to me Chizzy.Chizz said:Zero sympathy for William Hill.
They posted a loss of £722m in 2018, due to a write-down of £883m which they put down to the effect of FOBT regulations on their betting shop business. In other words, they took the view that, despite the new rules, they could afford to write down the full cost and still show an underlying operating profit. So, they are repeating the news they had already forewarned in their report in March, alongside 2018's numbers.
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
From the WH website:
"Our history in the US, starting in NevadaWilliam Hill became the leading sports betting operator in the US in 2012, when we merged three businesses based in Nevada to form William Hill US. By the end of 2018 we had grown to reach a market share of 32% in terms of revenues and 57% by number of outlets. We now have sports books in about 115 of the total of 190 casinos across Nevada, in addition to offering mobile betting via an app. We continue to focus on expanding our product range including in-play opportunities, developing the mobile app and redeveloping the sports books, which are all branded William Hill."
1 -
The Racing Post reported that "[Philip] Bowcock said that William Hill now have a 34 per cent share of the whole US sports betting market". And quoted him as saying "outside of Nevada we are the only company in all the other six states to have regulated," and "we have got the pieces of the jigsaw well placed."bobmunro said:
William Hill control a third of the gambling industry in the United States? News to me Chizzy.Chizz said:Zero sympathy for William Hill.
They posted a loss of £722m in 2018, due to a write-down of £883m which they put down to the effect of FOBT regulations on their betting shop business. In other words, they took the view that, despite the new rules, they could afford to write down the full cost and still show an underlying operating profit. So, they are repeating the news they had already forewarned in their report in March, alongside 2018's numbers.
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
Maybe I am using "the gambling industry" and "sports betting market" interchangeably and I shouldn't..?0 -
wh were a bookie that relied heavily on fobt trade so no suprise they have started closing branches, many bookies if you ever go in used to be full of people addicted to fobt, i only bet on phone or if at event at the traditional bookies as love the thrill of taking hard cash off of them.1
-
If.ValleyGary said:
Most of the people working in bookies near me are women in their late 40's/50's. Im not sure they're fussed about career paths.JaShea99 said:
This. In the nicest possible way, if it encourages people to have a bit more ambition and find a better job/career path then surely it’s only a good thing in the long run.Johnnysummers5 said:Henry Irving said:
Not crying any tears over betting shops closing or bookies making less money (sorry Bob) but if we assume 4 or 5 staff per shop that's 2800 to 3500 people out of work. That's who i'm more concerned about.Addick Addict said:
Good news - and their closure serves to confirm just how much bookies were making from the "crack cocaine" of gamblingpaulie8290 said:1st betting shop having issues because of this.
William Hill to close 700 shops, due to the Government legislation regarding FOBT
I agree and most of the staff are not that well paid. Lets hope they can all find better jobs
My local definitely doesn’t have the same demographic working there.0 -
What?Chizz said:
Yeah, you're right. Sackings really are the best way to encourage people. In the same way euthanasia is a great way to get people to stop being so ill.JaShea99 said:
This. In the nicest possible way, if it encourages people to have a bit more ambition and find a better job/career path then surely it’s only a good thing in the long run.Johnnysummers5 said:Henry Irving said:
Not crying any tears over betting shops closing or bookies making less money (sorry Bob) but if we assume 4 or 5 staff per shop that's 2800 to 3500 people out of work. That's who i'm more concerned about.Addick Addict said:
Good news - and their closure serves to confirm just how much bookies were making from the "crack cocaine" of gamblingpaulie8290 said:1st betting shop having issues because of this.
William Hill to close 700 shops, due to the Government legislation regarding FOBT
I agree and most of the staff are not that well paid. Lets hope they can all find better jobs1 -
Where did I say successful?bobmunro said:
Agreed - what chance have people got having a successful career in bookmaking.JaShea99 said:
This. In the nicest possible way, if it encourages people to have a bit more ambition and find a better job/career path then surely it’s only a good thing in the long run.Johnnysummers5 said:Henry Irving said:
Not crying any tears over betting shops closing or bookies making less money (sorry Bob) but if we assume 4 or 5 staff per shop that's 2800 to 3500 people out of work. That's who i'm more concerned about.Addick Addict said:
Good news - and their closure serves to confirm just how much bookies were making from the "crack cocaine" of gamblingpaulie8290 said:1st betting shop having issues because of this.
William Hill to close 700 shops, due to the Government legislation regarding FOBT
I agree and most of the staff are not that well paid. Lets hope they can all find better jobs0 -
.0
- Sponsored links:
-
Chizz said:
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
You sure, share price a year ago was over £3, now about £1.65 which is exactly what it started the year (2019) on. It's only picked up to it's current level with the general rise in share prices/sentiment since mid may.0 -
Yes, I am sure. WMH share price opened the year on 158.30p and closed today on 164.40p.Rob7Lee said:Chizz said:
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
You sure, share price a year ago was over £3, now about £1.65 which is exactly what it started the year (2019) on. It's only picked up to it's current level with the general rise in share prices/sentiment since mid may.0 -
So with the buy/sell spread - today you can sell for about what you could buy them on 2nd Jan with charges.Chizz said:
Yes, I am sure. WMH share price opened the year on 158.30p and closed today on 164.40p.Rob7Lee said:Chizz said:
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
You sure, share price a year ago was over £3, now about £1.65 which is exactly what it started the year (2019) on. It's only picked up to it's current level with the general rise in share prices/sentiment since mid may.
Down about 90p in 12 months.0 -
My point still holds: my sympathy is reserved for the staff, as opposed to the company. Despite the terrible effect we were told in March by the company, the share price has risen, YTD.Rob7Lee said:
So with the buy/sell spread - today you can sell for about what you could buy them on 2nd Jan with charges.Chizz said:
Yes, I am sure. WMH share price opened the year on 158.30p and closed today on 164.40p.Rob7Lee said:Chizz said:
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
You sure, share price a year ago was over £3, now about £1.65 which is exactly what it started the year (2019) on. It's only picked up to it's current level with the general rise in share prices/sentiment since mid may.
Down about 90p in 12 months.
Ask yourself this - would you prefer to have spent the first half of this year as a William Hill shareholder, or a William Hill employee?
Some people will be spending their 7.7% cash dividend from William Hill; some people will be working out where their next few months' pay checks will come from.0 -
The share price at the start of the year had the fall discounted in respect of FOBT changes.Chizz said:
My point still holds: my sympathy is reserved for the staff, as opposed to the company. Despite the terrible effect we were told in March by the company, the share price has risen, YTD.Rob7Lee said:
So with the buy/sell spread - today you can sell for about what you could buy them on 2nd Jan with charges.Chizz said:
Yes, I am sure. WMH share price opened the year on 158.30p and closed today on 164.40p.Rob7Lee said:Chizz said:
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
You sure, share price a year ago was over £3, now about £1.65 which is exactly what it started the year (2019) on. It's only picked up to it's current level with the general rise in share prices/sentiment since mid may.
Down about 90p in 12 months.
Ask yourself this - would you prefer to have spent the first half of this year as a William Hill shareholder, or a William Hill employee?
Some people will be spending their 7.7% cash dividend from William Hill; some people will be working out where their next few months' pay checks will come from.
William Hill are a basket case - trust me on that.0 -
Their announcement of likely closures was in March this year and within a few days, the share price had dropped by 36p.bobmunro said:
The share price at the start of the year had the fall discounted in respect of FOBT changes.Chizz said:
My point still holds: my sympathy is reserved for the staff, as opposed to the company. Despite the terrible effect we were told in March by the company, the share price has risen, YTD.Rob7Lee said:
So with the buy/sell spread - today you can sell for about what you could buy them on 2nd Jan with charges.Chizz said:
Yes, I am sure. WMH share price opened the year on 158.30p and closed today on 164.40p.Rob7Lee said:Chizz said:
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
You sure, share price a year ago was over £3, now about £1.65 which is exactly what it started the year (2019) on. It's only picked up to it's current level with the general rise in share prices/sentiment since mid may.
Down about 90p in 12 months.
Ask yourself this - would you prefer to have spent the first half of this year as a William Hill shareholder, or a William Hill employee?
Some people will be spending their 7.7% cash dividend from William Hill; some people will be working out where their next few months' pay checks will come from.
William Hill are a basket case - trust me on that.
But the point still remains - a serious, helpful and progressive intervention being implemented has resulted in no downturn for William Hill shareholders, but job losses for thousands of staff. That's why I reserve my sympathy for the staff, rather than the owners of the business.0 -
I 100% agree in not reserving any sympathy for William Hill.Chizz said:
Their announcement of likely closures was in March this year and within a few days, the share price had dropped by 36p.bobmunro said:
The share price at the start of the year had the fall discounted in respect of FOBT changes.Chizz said:
My point still holds: my sympathy is reserved for the staff, as opposed to the company. Despite the terrible effect we were told in March by the company, the share price has risen, YTD.Rob7Lee said:
So with the buy/sell spread - today you can sell for about what you could buy them on 2nd Jan with charges.Chizz said:
Yes, I am sure. WMH share price opened the year on 158.30p and closed today on 164.40p.Rob7Lee said:Chizz said:
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
You sure, share price a year ago was over £3, now about £1.65 which is exactly what it started the year (2019) on. It's only picked up to it's current level with the general rise in share prices/sentiment since mid may.
Down about 90p in 12 months.
Ask yourself this - would you prefer to have spent the first half of this year as a William Hill shareholder, or a William Hill employee?
Some people will be spending their 7.7% cash dividend from William Hill; some people will be working out where their next few months' pay checks will come from.
William Hill are a basket case - trust me on that.
But the point still remains - a serious, helpful and progressive intervention being implemented has resulted in no downturn for William Hill shareholders, but job losses for thousands of staff. That's why I reserve my sympathy for the staff, rather than the owners of the business.
It will also be worth revisiting this thread in say 3 years to review the impact UK bookmakers have had on the US sports betting market. If bet365 were a public Company I would (obvious bias aside) be recommending them for investment unreservedly.1 -
I'm not sure that's true,Chizz said:
Their announcement of likely closures was in March this year and within a few days, the share price had dropped by 36p.bobmunro said:
The share price at the start of the year had the fall discounted in respect of FOBT changes.Chizz said:
My point still holds: my sympathy is reserved for the staff, as opposed to the company. Despite the terrible effect we were told in March by the company, the share price has risen, YTD.Rob7Lee said:
So with the buy/sell spread - today you can sell for about what you could buy them on 2nd Jan with charges.Chizz said:
Yes, I am sure. WMH share price opened the year on 158.30p and closed today on 164.40p.Rob7Lee said:Chizz said:
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
You sure, share price a year ago was over £3, now about £1.65 which is exactly what it started the year (2019) on. It's only picked up to it's current level with the general rise in share prices/sentiment since mid may.
Down about 90p in 12 months.
Ask yourself this - would you prefer to have spent the first half of this year as a William Hill shareholder, or a William Hill employee?
Some people will be spending their 7.7% cash dividend from William Hill; some people will be working out where their next few months' pay checks will come from.
William Hill are a basket case - trust me on that.
But the point still remains - a serious, helpful and progressive intervention being implemented has resulted in no downturn for William Hill shareholders, but job losses for thousands of staff. That's why I reserve my sympathy for the staff, rather than the owners of the business.
When the government announced the date of the FOBT reduction their share price was around £1.85.
When the government first announced the reduction to £2 (around May 18) the share price was around £3.30, after which date it went on a 7 month downward run. The shares are now worth 50% of then. 6 weeks ago the share price was at an all time low since it was first floated in 2002.
So although I agree the sympathy should be with the staff to suggest shareholders have seen no downturn ........
2 -
Rob7Lee said:
I'm not sure that's true,Chizz said:
Their announcement of likely closures was in March this year and within a few days, the share price had dropped by 36p.bobmunro said:
The share price at the start of the year had the fall discounted in respect of FOBT changes.Chizz said:
My point still holds: my sympathy is reserved for the staff, as opposed to the company. Despite the terrible effect we were told in March by the company, the share price has risen, YTD.Rob7Lee said:
So with the buy/sell spread - today you can sell for about what you could buy them on 2nd Jan with charges.Chizz said:
Yes, I am sure. WMH share price opened the year on 158.30p and closed today on 164.40p.Rob7Lee said:Chizz said:
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
You sure, share price a year ago was over £3, now about £1.65 which is exactly what it started the year (2019) on. It's only picked up to it's current level with the general rise in share prices/sentiment since mid may.
Down about 90p in 12 months.
Ask yourself this - would you prefer to have spent the first half of this year as a William Hill shareholder, or a William Hill employee?
Some people will be spending their 7.7% cash dividend from William Hill; some people will be working out where their next few months' pay checks will come from.
William Hill are a basket case - trust me on that.
But the point still remains - a serious, helpful and progressive intervention being implemented has resulted in no downturn for William Hill shareholders, but job losses for thousands of staff. That's why I reserve my sympathy for the staff, rather than the owners of the business.
When the government announced the date of the FOBT reduction their share price was around £1.85.
When the government first announced the reduction to £2 (around May 18) the share price was around £3.30, after which date it went on a 7 month downward run. The shares are now worth 50% of then. 6 weeks ago the share price was at an all time low since it was first floated in 2002.
So although I agree the sympathy should be with the staff to suggest shareholders have seen no downturn ........
I am. Read the words I wrote. In particular, the word "implemented".
The implementation of the new rule - which took place on 1 April - has resulted in no downturn for William Hill shareholders. The share price on the day of implementation was 160.60p and is now 163.70p. So, people owning shares in William Hill on the date it was implemented, have seen the value of their shareholdings increase by 3.1p per share.
In addition, those shareholders have trousered a large dividend payment.
I am not claiming causation; I am merely accurately describing correlation.2 -
I accept the share price since 1.4 hasn’t been adversely effected, but as Bob had already said the reduction/correction in share price due to the FOBT change had already happened, it may have been implemented on 1.4.19 but was known about for months before that. Share prices are effected by known events not the implementation date so with the correction having already happened the implementation date is irrelevant, but you know that.Chizz said:Rob7Lee said:
I'm not sure that's true,Chizz said:
Their announcement of likely closures was in March this year and within a few days, the share price had dropped by 36p.bobmunro said:
The share price at the start of the year had the fall discounted in respect of FOBT changes.Chizz said:
My point still holds: my sympathy is reserved for the staff, as opposed to the company. Despite the terrible effect we were told in March by the company, the share price has risen, YTD.Rob7Lee said:
So with the buy/sell spread - today you can sell for about what you could buy them on 2nd Jan with charges.Chizz said:
Yes, I am sure. WMH share price opened the year on 158.30p and closed today on 164.40p.Rob7Lee said:Chizz said:
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
You sure, share price a year ago was over £3, now about £1.65 which is exactly what it started the year (2019) on. It's only picked up to it's current level with the general rise in share prices/sentiment since mid may.
Down about 90p in 12 months.
Ask yourself this - would you prefer to have spent the first half of this year as a William Hill shareholder, or a William Hill employee?
Some people will be spending their 7.7% cash dividend from William Hill; some people will be working out where their next few months' pay checks will come from.
William Hill are a basket case - trust me on that.
But the point still remains - a serious, helpful and progressive intervention being implemented has resulted in no downturn for William Hill shareholders, but job losses for thousands of staff. That's why I reserve my sympathy for the staff, rather than the owners of the business.
When the government announced the date of the FOBT reduction their share price was around £1.85.
When the government first announced the reduction to £2 (around May 18) the share price was around £3.30, after which date it went on a 7 month downward run. The shares are now worth 50% of then. 6 weeks ago the share price was at an all time low since it was first floated in 2002.
So although I agree the sympathy should be with the staff to suggest shareholders have seen no downturn ........
I am. Read the words I wrote. In particular, the word "implemented".
The implementation of the new rule - which took place on 1 April - has resulted in no downturn for William Hill shareholders. The share price on the day of implementation was 160.60p and is now 163.70p. So, people owning shares in William Hill on the date it was implemented, have seen the value of their shareholdings increase by 3.1p per share.
In addition, those shareholders have trousered a large dividend payment.
I am not claiming causation; I am merely accurately describing correlation.
As for dividend rate that very much depends on when you bought the shares, the rate is simply based on the ex dividend date.
2 - Sponsored links:
-
Good grief.Rob7Lee said:
I accept the share price since 1.4 hasn’t been adversely effected, but as Bob had already said the reduction/correction in share price due to the FOBT change had already happened, it may have been implemented on 1.4.19 but was known about for months before that. Share prices are effected by known events not the implementation date so with the correction having already happened the implementation date is irrelevant, but you know that.Chizz said:Rob7Lee said:
I'm not sure that's true,Chizz said:
Their announcement of likely closures was in March this year and within a few days, the share price had dropped by 36p.bobmunro said:
The share price at the start of the year had the fall discounted in respect of FOBT changes.Chizz said:
My point still holds: my sympathy is reserved for the staff, as opposed to the company. Despite the terrible effect we were told in March by the company, the share price has risen, YTD.Rob7Lee said:
So with the buy/sell spread - today you can sell for about what you could buy them on 2nd Jan with charges.Chizz said:
Yes, I am sure. WMH share price opened the year on 158.30p and closed today on 164.40p.Rob7Lee said:Chizz said:
I reserve my sympathy for the staff losing their jobs, a number of which will be in the least well-off parts of the coutry and not for William Hill, whose share price is up on the year, will continue to make an underlying profit of £5m a week; and now control more than one-third of the gambling industry in the United States.
You sure, share price a year ago was over £3, now about £1.65 which is exactly what it started the year (2019) on. It's only picked up to it's current level with the general rise in share prices/sentiment since mid may.
Down about 90p in 12 months.
Ask yourself this - would you prefer to have spent the first half of this year as a William Hill shareholder, or a William Hill employee?
Some people will be spending their 7.7% cash dividend from William Hill; some people will be working out where their next few months' pay checks will come from.
William Hill are a basket case - trust me on that.
But the point still remains - a serious, helpful and progressive intervention being implemented has resulted in no downturn for William Hill shareholders, but job losses for thousands of staff. That's why I reserve my sympathy for the staff, rather than the owners of the business.
When the government announced the date of the FOBT reduction their share price was around £1.85.
When the government first announced the reduction to £2 (around May 18) the share price was around £3.30, after which date it went on a 7 month downward run. The shares are now worth 50% of then. 6 weeks ago the share price was at an all time low since it was first floated in 2002.
So although I agree the sympathy should be with the staff to suggest shareholders have seen no downturn ........
I am. Read the words I wrote. In particular, the word "implemented".
The implementation of the new rule - which took place on 1 April - has resulted in no downturn for William Hill shareholders. The share price on the day of implementation was 160.60p and is now 163.70p. So, people owning shares in William Hill on the date it was implemented, have seen the value of their shareholdings increase by 3.1p per share.
In addition, those shareholders have trousered a large dividend payment.
I am not claiming causation; I am merely accurately describing correlation.
As for dividend rate that very much depends on when you bought the shares, the rate is simply based on the ex dividend date.
Everything I have posted about the share price and about the dividend payment is a fact. If you owned shares at the start of the year, as I said, you would have seen them increase in price, as I said, until yesterday, as I said. And, as I said, you would also have received a dividend, as I said.
The announcement by William Hill that there would be store closures took place mid-way through that period, followed by the implementation of the new rules. As I said. Despite that, shareholders have made profits (on paper) and staff have lost their jobs. That's why I reserve my sympathy to those that have lost out this year. Which is not shareholders.1 -
Why pick the date for your comparison as the beginning of the year? It has no relevance. If you bought shares a year ago you’ve lost 40-50%, if you bought shares in early May you’ve probably made 20%.
If staff lose their jobs due to the change to FOBT rules then if you want to compare them to shareholders loss/profit due to the change then you would use the same causation. Both the date the change was originally announced and then when the implementation date was set.
Back on topic, it is sad that staff will be losing their jobs due to the FOBT rule change when inevitably the bookmakers start to close shops (having opened thousands over the last 10 years), especially as I don't personally believe the change has actually helped the people it was mainly supposed to. Bookies continued to open more shops previously, often within a couple of hundred yards of each other purely as they were restricted to how many machines one shop could have, call greed or supply and demand.The only people it may have helped is the real high rollers who were losing up to £15,000 a day who now can't spend £100 a time on roulette (on a FOBT). You can probably only lose a few thousand at most in a day now on FOBT. For the average person who was addicted to FOBT and was losing up to a few hundred pounds a day, they still will and still are doing so.
I'm not sure of the solution, maybe a further restriction is needed.
3 -
I hope this discussion of share prices makes it to 1877 pages. I am gripped.9
-
pity about the employees losing their jobs .. on the other hand they were quite happy sitting behind the till watching mugs lose (often) borrowed money hand over fist.
The closures show that the real reason these shops were opened and staffed in the first place was simply to facilitate these no armed bandits. Bookies design the odds to prevent winners .. on the odd occasion when a punter hits the jackpot, they often ban him/her .. so fuck 'em
6 -
I agree. The job losses are a price worth paying, the staff they employ are not skilled and can easily find other employment within the retail sector. It is wholly wrong that as a society we allow large companies to profit from people's misery, these betting shops are banned in most other countries for exactly this reason, maybe we should go the whole hog and do the same?Lincsaddick said:pity about the employees losing their jobs .. on the other hand they were quite happy sitting behind the till watching mugs lose (often) borrowed money hand over fist.
The closures show that the real reason these shops were opened and staffed in the first place was simply to facilitate these no armed bandits. Bookies design the odds to prevent winners .. on the odd occasion when a punter hits the jackpot, they often ban him/her .. so fuck 'em1 -
where do we stop though? should pubs close down incase of people becoming alcoholics - is wetherspoons to blame for binge drinking and fighting on a saturday night because of cheap drink prices - maybe its modern times but sometimes it is just a little too easy to blame others.
just like with any addiction another fix will be found, have worked with gambling addicts in the past one who was obsessed with them machines, he done a shit load of overtime one december and got paid in cash around 6k i think, anyway offered me a lift home to bexley from earls court and he must of had us stopping at every bookies he could find doing £200 a spin on the poxy machines would only do one spin then walk off at the end of the lift he asked me if he could borrow £200 to buy his wife a xmas present.0 -
Employees were presented with an impossible task.Lincsaddick said:pity about the employees losing their jobs .. on the other hand they were quite happy sitting behind the till watching mugs lose (often) borrowed money hand over fist.
The closures show that the real reason these shops were opened and staffed in the first place was simply to facilitate these no armed bandits. Bookies design the odds to prevent winners .. on the odd occasion when a punter hits the jackpot, they often ban him/her .. so fuck 'em
Expected by management to physically intervene and deliver "problem gambling chats/literature" to someone that has just seen their rent money disappear - no thanks.
I was in a betting shop in Bromley 2 years ago when a guy smashed the glass on a machine, went to the counter and said "please call the police".
The manager said "just leave please"
When I asked why he didn't call the cops, he told me "it wasn't company policy with regard to machine damage"
Talking to a staff member in another shop on another occasion, she told me:
"I can handle just about everything in here - except I am expected to regularly clean the spit from the machine glass"
Staff won't be lamenting the FOBT change, and yes, some will lose their jobs - but IMO the industry is so badly under-manned that there will be a high degree of redeployment.
Let's reduce the crazy number of betting shops to be more in line with demand, and try to get our High Streets back to some kind of shopping activity.3 -
You've highlighted a good example of why it is a good idea to reduce to max stake or ban them completely, how can anyone agree that someone can be rinsed of 6 grand in one evening is a good thing? There needs to be regulation so restrict it to online only. I think what people do in their own home is their own business so if they wanna blow all their money on gambling fine, but luring people off the street is morally unacceptable, if they still want to do it, they can join a casino where it is regulated. It also shouldn't be allowed to have a form of gambling that can be fixed by the bookmaker, it should only be for sports which neither party has influence over the outcomepalarsehater said:where do we stop though? should pubs close down incase of people becoming alcoholics - is wetherspoons to blame for binge drinking and fighting on a saturday night because of cheap drink prices - maybe its modern times but sometimes it is just a little too easy to blame others.
just like with any addiction another fix will be found, have worked with gambling addicts in the past one who was obsessed with them machines, he done a shit load of overtime one december and got paid in cash around 6k i think, anyway offered me a lift home to bexley from earls court and he must of had us stopping at every bookies he could find doing £200 a spin on the poxy machines would only do one spin then walk off at the end of the lift he asked me if he could borrow £200 to buy his wife a xmas present.1 -
you could go to a casino and do the exact same thing though, i have no idea if they have max bet but having been to vegas i was sat in a casino people watching and a lady was doing 25k a hand blackjack she lost 10 on the spin so in around 5 mins she had burned 250k, madness really.snowinberlin said:
You've highlighted a good example of why it is a good idea to reduce to max stake or ban them completely, how can anyone agree that someone can be rinsed of 6 grand in one evening is a good thing? There needs to be regulation so restrict it to online only. I think what people do in their own home is their own business so if they wanna blow all their money on gambling fine, but luring people off the street is morally unacceptable, if they still want to do it, they can join a casino where it is regulated. It also shouldn't be allowed to have a form of gambling that can be fixed by the bookmaker, it should only be for sports which neither party has influence over the outcomepalarsehater said:where do we stop though? should pubs close down incase of people becoming alcoholics - is wetherspoons to blame for binge drinking and fighting on a saturday night because of cheap drink prices - maybe its modern times but sometimes it is just a little too easy to blame others.
just like with any addiction another fix will be found, have worked with gambling addicts in the past one who was obsessed with them machines, he done a shit load of overtime one december and got paid in cash around 6k i think, anyway offered me a lift home to bexley from earls court and he must of had us stopping at every bookies he could find doing £200 a spin on the poxy machines would only do one spin then walk off at the end of the lift he asked me if he could borrow £200 to buy his wife a xmas present.
the only other niggle with bookies is skybet enable at the weekend they had a bet over 2 lengths 2/1 max bet £9.25 ffs
can certainly see a lot more bookies going as certainly for the high street ones they lived on these machines - in all honesty it ruined the bookies, used to drink in the william camden in bexleyheath and on saturday sunday day time we would often when charlton playing go in the pub and nip out do bets on the horses etc watch the race and then go back in pub, then these places become awash with vile people kicking the fuck out of machines because they had just emptied there wages into them.
going back to my example about pubs in liverpool the other weekend for a stag do we was in popworld - awful place but they done 12 jagerbombs for £10 that surely promotes excess drinking.0 -
Thats not quite the case, in a casino and even Bingo you have to have a membership and you have to wait 24 hours before you can start, so it has to be premeditated so as to deter the problem gambler, FOBT's leech off the spontaneous gambler with cash in his pocket and those people tend to be the vulnerable addicts, it should never have been allowed, and bookies coped perfectly OK before these machines came inpalarsehater said:
you could go to a casino and do the exact same thing though, i have no idea if they have max bet but having been to vegas i was sat in a casino people watching and a lady was doing 25k a hand blackjack she lost 10 on the spin so in around 5 mins she had burned 250k, madness really.snowinberlin said:
You've highlighted a good example of why it is a good idea to reduce to max stake or ban them completely, how can anyone agree that someone can be rinsed of 6 grand in one evening is a good thing? There needs to be regulation so restrict it to online only. I think what people do in their own home is their own business so if they wanna blow all their money on gambling fine, but luring people off the street is morally unacceptable, if they still want to do it, they can join a casino where it is regulated. It also shouldn't be allowed to have a form of gambling that can be fixed by the bookmaker, it should only be for sports which neither party has influence over the outcomepalarsehater said:where do we stop though? should pubs close down incase of people becoming alcoholics - is wetherspoons to blame for binge drinking and fighting on a saturday night because of cheap drink prices - maybe its modern times but sometimes it is just a little too easy to blame others.
just like with any addiction another fix will be found, have worked with gambling addicts in the past one who was obsessed with them machines, he done a shit load of overtime one december and got paid in cash around 6k i think, anyway offered me a lift home to bexley from earls court and he must of had us stopping at every bookies he could find doing £200 a spin on the poxy machines would only do one spin then walk off at the end of the lift he asked me if he could borrow £200 to buy his wife a xmas present.
the only other niggle with bookies is skybet enable at the weekend they had a bet over 2 lengths 2/1 max bet £9.25 ffs
can certainly see a lot more bookies going as certainly for the high street ones they lived on these machines - in all honesty it ruined the bookies, used to drink in the william camden in bexleyheath and on saturday sunday day time we would often when charlton playing go in the pub and nip out do bets on the horses etc watch the race and then go back in pub, then these places become awash with vile people kicking the fuck out of machines because they had just emptied there wages into them.
going back to my example about pubs in liverpool the other weekend for a stag do we was in popworld - awful place but they done 12 jagerbombs for £10 that surely promotes excess drinking.1
