Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Coalition Against Gambling Ads
Comments
-
I'm suggesting your boss interrupts Mr Winstone with a warning 'Be aware, accounts may be restricted and offers withdrawn without notice, should your business look like it may be unprofitable to us'.bobmunro said:
I don't think I need to tell you why you are restricted - I'm sure you are all too aware.mid_life_crisis said:
Perhaps that could be the slogan for the new Bet365 advertising campaign.bobmunro said:oohaahmortimer said:
If dad had been the inverse of what happened and had been successful, he’d have had his stake size reduced and he wouldn’t have been able to win as much .Stu_of_Kunming said:Which they can continue to do without having adverts rammed down their throat every 5 minutes, which almost makes it seem like you shouldn’t be watching a game of footy without having a bet riding on it.I watched my dad gamble away everything my family had, his business, house, cars the lot, when he finally hit rock bottom and stopped, the things the bookies did to lure him back were absolutely sickening, including free FA Cup final tickets. So I find it hard to believe these companies are not over the moon to see a punter blow anything they can get their hands on.
Mainly losers welcome .
Simple answer to all those who moan that the bookmaker always wins (no shit Sherlock) - don't bet then!
Would you glorious, charitable leader care to comment on restricting accounts to pennies, withdrawing offers, BOG etc ?
You know, all the stuff they don't mention on those TV ads.
State it explicitly in your fancy advertising. Let people know the truth.
2 -
Spending your formative years in and around a Scottish mining village opens your eyes to the impact gambling and alcohol (often interrelated) has on communities. It certainly made me realise what a mugs game it is and I am even more horrified at how exploitative it has become in recent years with all of the 'on line' stuff.Henry Irving said:
Could say the same for anyone who's working in a pub or bar that sells alcohol. Should we close pubs and bars and ban alcohol to protect those with addiction problems?Chaz Hill said:
I’ve seen first hand the effect gambling addiction can have on not only individuals but whole communities. Not a particularly appealing way to make a living but each to their own.Henry Irving said:
What's wrong with it?Chaz Hill said:
That’s alright then.bobmunro said:Chaz Hill said:https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2019/12/18/bet365-founder-wins-big-with-423-million-payout-as-online-gambling-booms/Well somebody won big from gambling
Nearly half of that went in income tax (the bulk of her pay was salary rather than fiddling it with dividends) - plus around £100m to charity.
Interesting to hear, genuinely, how gambling impacts on whole communities?
As I said "each to their own" but it is, in my view, a Government's duty to protect the weaker willed from exploitation. Instead we have people like Philip Davies MP openly lobbying and being paid by the gambling industry to work on their behalf in the so called 'corridors of power'.
2 -
and horse race trainers being sponsored by gambling companies!Chaz Hill said:
Spending your formative years in and around a Scottish mining village opens your eyes to the impact gambling and alcohol (often interrelated) has on communities. It certainly made me realise what a mugs game it is and I am even more horrified at how exploitative it has become in recent years with all of the 'on line' stuff.Henry Irving said:
Could say the same for anyone who's working in a pub or bar that sells alcohol. Should we close pubs and bars and ban alcohol to protect those with addiction problems?Chaz Hill said:
I’ve seen first hand the effect gambling addiction can have on not only individuals but whole communities. Not a particularly appealing way to make a living but each to their own.Henry Irving said:
What's wrong with it?Chaz Hill said:
That’s alright then.bobmunro said:Chaz Hill said:https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2019/12/18/bet365-founder-wins-big-with-423-million-payout-as-online-gambling-booms/Well somebody won big from gambling
Nearly half of that went in income tax (the bulk of her pay was salary rather than fiddling it with dividends) - plus around £100m to charity.
Interesting to hear, genuinely, how gambling impacts on whole communities?
As I said "each to their own" but it is, in my view, a Government's duty to protect the weaker willed from exploitation. Instead we have people like Philip Davies MP openly lobbying and being paid by the gambling industry to work on their behalf in the so called 'corridors of power'.0 -
He’s jinxed it , next year a black swan , ten times worse than this year comes to dump the FTSE to 3,000 and wipe us all outPragueAddick said:@bobmunro
Nope, sorry, I really don't see the equivalence with shares and funds at all. Cryptos are an entirely different matter, but then I've been giving the crypto crew quite a hard time about them anyway.
It's a fact, isn't it, that over lets say 5 years, most regular gamblers are in loss. Yet on the S&I thread we are busy telling new punters that if they invest now in easy to understand passive funds, history tells us that they will massively beat inflation (and thus cash in the bank account) over 5 years plus. And currently that thread is full of faintly smug remarks of us older hands showing up to 20% gains in portfolio in 2020, against a background of global turmoil and a FTSE100 down 12% on the year. Isn't the lesson there, that more people should be investing in funds at least, especially young people, and ideally putting money there that currently they are spunking on betting? That is after all what the UK govt's pension provision relies on. Look after ourselves for later life because the State can't afford to. It suggests that as someone remarked on that thread, it's about time schools started teaching the basics of investing.
The more you educate yourself about markets and the companies in them, the more likely you are to make decent long term profits, which won't disappear overnight. Nobody can say that about betting on football, or anything else.1 -
I have no problem with having a watershed - although its effectiveness would be questionable due to the ease nowadays in under 18s having access to an unlimited supply of media 24/7.Stu_of_Kunming said:
So you'd agree with banning gambling adverts during the daytime?bobmunro said:Stu_of_Kunming said:
Or, protect children and allow adults to continue to gamble, why does it have to be all or nothing?clb74 said:
Close the gambling down tomorrow then.Stu_of_Kunming said:
But it might stop the future 'problem gamblers' from ever starting and surely that is worth doing?clb74 said:Been with the wife 15 years , married 13yrs.
If someone told me 17yrs ago that I would have my gambling virtually under control over the next 10 years I would of broke down in tears of happiness.
I'm here 17 years later with the gambling virtually under control.
Not as happy as I thought I would be though.
Still addictive and compulsive in nearly everything thing I do.
You could ban betting ads , even ban betting tomorrow.
Most of the 0.5/1% Bob's talking about me included will still have their problems.
But let's not pick on one industry though where there might be addiction.
Drinking and smoking need to go also add sugar to the list.
And if were thinking of the health and wealth of the country do away with credit cards.
On that you have my entire agreement.
Also, the whole concept of horse racing coverage would be turned upside down - although gagging Matt Chapman would be a good thing!0 -
Maybe Charlton Life should stop the "Beat the Bookies", Sport of Kings and Grand National threads? Are they not also promoting gambling and drawing in potential problem gamblers? Or are they just a bit of harmless fun?
Gambling addiction and problem gambling is clearly a problem and addicts, of any kind, deserve support and sympathy but we're getting into an ethical debate over how much the pleasures of the many should be restricted to protect the few.2 -
Is anyone proposing banning gambling, or just the extreme amount of advertising we currently see?11
-
Nobody on this thread, despite what people are saying about " the pleasures of many being restricted to protect the few". Utter tosh.Stu_of_Kunming said:Is anyone proposing banning gambling, or just the extreme amount of advertising we currently see?2 -
That's fair enough, you are a Charlton fan, I am a sports fan, I guess that is the difference?RaplhMilne said:
You can’t get your head around. However, for me that’s 100% the reason I bet on a game. If I’m watching Charlton the desire as a fan for us to win gives me the higher adrenaline rush of the game. Watching Liverpool v ManUtd that rush does not exist (I could not give a shit who wins or what the result is) Therefore if I am going to watch the game, the bet gives me the adrenalin addition, that the lack of supporting the teams has taken away.Algarveaddick said:
That is something I really can't get my head around as a sports fan. "It matters more when you have money on it". To me - does it f**k. I enjoy football, cricket, rugby etc because I enjoy them, having a fiscal interest means jack all to me. If you can't enjoy it for the sake of it - as most of us did for years and years and years - then for me, you are missing the essence of sport. The Pools or an acca on English football of a Saturday was about as far as it got, it was a sideline. Then you were waiting for the results to come in, not watching a live match getting "more" out of it just because you have a fiver riding on it...Stu_of_Kunming said:Which they can continue to do without having adverts rammed down their throat every 5 minutes, which almost makes it seem like you shouldn’t be watching a game of footy without having a bet riding on it.I watched my dad gamble away everything my family had, his business, house, cars the lot, when he finally hit rock bottom and stopped, the things the bookies did to lure him back were absolutely sickening, including free FA Cup final tickets. So I find it hard to believe these companies are not over the moon to see a punter blow anything they can get their hands on.
I am aware that I am now guilty of going away from the main thread. Apologies.I also back Charlton as well. However, this is because as a fan who watches every game, I believe this can give me a level of insider information, that bookies don’t consider. Sometimes I’m right, and sometimes wrong.
Betting on Charlton though? You must be bonkers...
1 -
Think the advertising should be banned. Gambling and betting shops won’t be banned but we don’t really need advertising for this front and centre. I do think that more of the profits that betting companies make should be poured back into help and support for the problem gamblers. It’s basically an unresolvable problem really.0
- Sponsored links:
-
They changed the law to allow more gambling advertising under Tony Blair. Why not just change it back to the way it was? This is a moral issue which the government can get involved in. It must.1
-
That was the question I was raising when I said that "we're getting into an ethical debate over how much the pleasures of the many should be restricted to protect the few."bromleyjohn said:They changed the law to allow more gambling advertising under Tony Blair. Why not just change it back to the way it was? This is a moral issue which the government can get involved in. It must.
Is it right for the government to restrict advertising for a legal and for 95.5% of people (the many) non-harmful past time to protect the 0.5% (the few) who will suffer?
Should the government legislate on "moral" issues?
Illegal drugs are not openly advertised but still widely used. But cigarette advertising and promotions are banned and smoking has decreased greatly since that happened.
Personally I'm not sure.
0 -
I think it's worth pointing out the huge steps the gambling industry takes to avoid its products being used by under-age customers, compared to, say, cigarette brands. That's one thing to the gambling industry's huge credit.1
-
Some good points but we may not see the damage of the advertising for several years.Henry Irving said:
That was the question I was raising when I said that "we're getting into an ethical debate over how much the pleasures of the many should be restricted to protect the few."bromleyjohn said:They changed the law to allow more gambling advertising under Tony Blair. Why not just change it back to the way it was? This is a moral issue which the government can get involved in. It must.
Is it right for the government to restrict advertising for a legal and for 95.5% of people (the many) non-harmful past time to protect the 0.5% (the few) who will suffer?
Should the government legislate on "moral" issues?
Illegal drugs are not openly advertised but still widely used. But cigarette advertising and promotions are banned and smoking has decreased greatly since that happened.
Personally I'm not sure.0 -
What are you talking about? Of course governments should legislate on moral issues.Henry Irving said:bromleyjohn said:They changed the law to allow more gambling advertising under Tony Blair. Why not just change it back to the way it was? This is a moral issue which the government can get involved in. It must.
Should the government legislate on "moral" issues?
Otherwise people would still be keeping slaves, sending kids up chimneys, marrying as many times as they want, driving whilst battered and watching the Christmas special of the Black and White Minstrel Show.0 -
You know this thing where fag packets have nasty images?
Well using a similar principle here you have the West Ham shirt as an example:
Now there is enough space lower down the shirt to add:
Might be a problem when playing Norwich or Watford mind you.
0 -
Moral issues equals political issues0
-
I have to be honest and admit this is not scientific, rather a feeling, but I think if there were no official licensed bookmakers there would likely be illegal ones. This would stop the social gamblers who are the vast majority, but would it stop the hardcore ones? And could it make things even worse for them?0
-
But no-one is seriously suggesting that we stop licensed bookies, for those reasons among others. It's a question of betting firm ADVERTSMuttleyCAFC said:I have to be honest and admit this is not scientific, rather a feeling, but I think if there were no official licensed bookmakers there would likely be illegal ones. This would stop the social gamblers who are the vast majority, but would it stop the hardcore ones? And could it make things even worse for them?2 -
Yes, but do the ads draw people in to bet more or influence which company punters use? I have to be honest and say I don't know, but betting companies do plough money into the sport so it is a valid question. We were sponsored by a betting company until recently/0
- Sponsored links:
-
Both. Constant adverts will obviously normalise the action, especially for children.See MuttleyCAFC said:Yes, but do the ads draw people in to bet more or influence which company punters use? I have to be honest and say I don't know, but betting companies do plough money into the sport so it is a valid question. We were sponsored by a betting company until recently/0 -
Football's Gambling Addiction on Channel 4 tonight.
Interesting show especially what Tranmere are trying to do and what happened to Stephen Caulker.3 -
.0
-
0
-
I think banning adverts for gambling will prevent some people. If it didn't, advertising wouldn't work but it does. Terribly well.RaplhMilne said:Alcohol, food, drugs, gambling, etc there are many things in life to which addiction can occur. However, as some one who has gambled for 47 years, I don’t see that banning its advertising will in anyway prevent that. If you have an addictive nature, you will go there with or without adverts.
Terribly being the operative word.
That said, there is one type of advertising that DOESNT work ~ Ray Winstone telling the public to "bet responsibly" .
Whatever next? " Drink and drive, but do consider other road users while you do please"!!
Ban the advertising immediately ~
and ideally close all betting shops. And replace them with initiatives that really will better your chances of improving your life.2 -
Premier League clubs have collectively agreed to withdraw gambling sponsorship from the front of their matchday shirts by the end of the 2025-26 season.
However, after the deadline, clubs will still be able to continue featuring gambling brands in areas such as shirt sleeves and LED advertising.
0 -
From tiny acorn grow mighty oaks0
-
I think it’s a good step but personally believe they should ban all betting advertising, everywhere.
Their ridiculous slogan, ‘when the fun stops, stop’ people who are addicted can’t stop.4 -
Just ban the “when the fun stops….” nonsense.sillav nitram said:I think it’s a good step but personally believe they should ban all betting advertising, everywhere.
Their ridiculous slogan, ‘when the fun stops, stop’ people who are addicted can’t stop.0
