Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: FOBT stakes to be cut to 2 after all.

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    5,299
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 30 Times in 22 Posts

    FOBT stakes to be cut to 2 after all.

    So reports on Twitter suggest tonight. FOBTs are of course banned in Ireland I do not see much sign of the big bookies going bust over there .

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Posts
    Many

    To remove these adverts please either login or join if you are not a member.


     

  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,188
    Thanks
    162
    Thanked 262 Times in 206 Posts
    Officially cut to 2 which, notwithstanding the loss of revenue to racing and negativity surrounding job losses, has to be an extremely good thing.

    The sport and bookmakers survived withouth them for years and will continue to do so.

    The timing could be crucial though with the recent lift of the gambling ban in the US so will companies like Hills & Paddy shift their focus into the US market?
    Alcohol, because no good story ever started with "I was eating this salad..."

  4. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,489
    Thanks
    507
    Thanked 627 Times in 445 Posts
    I'd prefer a complete ban on them.

    The stuff and nonsense about job losses is grossly exaggerated. If anyone does lose their job then that's obviously bad news for them but I wouldn't be surprised if nobody lost their job other than through a shop closure, which I am not convinced will happen.

    I think I posted a couple of years ago, though, that I spoke to an area manager I happened to be sitting next to at a wedding and he said it was the puggies that were keeping the shops going. I'm not convinced. I'm more likely to believe that they keep profits up. If it takes puggies to keep shops going they should re-open the shops as machine arcades. See how long they last.
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  5. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    2,838
    Thanks
    427
    Thanked 326 Times in 295 Posts
    Blog Entries
    27
    Three positives come out of this for bookmakers as far as I can see. 1: bookies can start to rebuild credibility with their traditional sports betting based customers 2: problem gamblers won't be lured into more problem gambling. 3. In relation to the stake, at least one positive is the firm's will almost certainly have significantly less to pay out in the short, medium and long term, with stakes of 2 pound certainly meaning they won't have to pay out a fraction of the amount that they currently do annually.
    Last edited by Marble; 17th May 2018 at 11:02 AM.

  6. #5
    Senior Member Tanlic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Bangkok Thailand
    Posts
    6,896
    Thanks
    123
    Thanked 206 Times in 189 Posts
    I'm with Dessie they should never ever been allowed in the first place.

    It was blatantly obvious there was a link to increased crime back in the 70's when they closed all the gaming machine shops in Scotland.

    How on earth they got permission to install these in betting shops is beyond me.

    All wrong anyway.you could put 100 quid in a machine to bet but they won't take 20 quid on a horse? BS artist the lot of them hence I go Betfair every time these days
    Formely Fist of Fury

  7. #6
    Administrator dvds2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Sunderland
    Posts
    2,230
    Thanks
    117
    Thanked 252 Times in 105 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Desert Orchid View Post
    The stuff and nonsense about job losses is grossly exaggerated. If anyone does lose their job then that's obviously bad news for them but I wouldn't be surprised if nobody lost their job other than through a shop closure, which I am not convinced will happen.

    I think I posted a couple of years ago, though, that I spoke to an area manager I happened to be sitting next to at a wedding and he said it was the puggies that were keeping the shops going. I'm not convinced. I'm more likely to believe that they keep profits up. If it takes puggies to keep shops going they should re-open the shops as machine arcades. See how long they last.
    I know a manager here, and he says over 70% of their profit is from the FOTBs, but they also get sports revenue from FOTB players so he expects that to drop too.
    I am sure there will be job losses, as shops will close, but they shouldn't have been allowed in the first place.

    Makes me laugh though, 2 max stake on a FOTB, but you can go to online casinos and bet 5k+ on a single spin on a slot machine and lose it in seconds.

  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    381
    Thanks
    266
    Thanked 122 Times in 111 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Marble View Post
    Three positives come out of this for bookmakers as far as I can see. 1: bookies can start to rebuild credibility with their traditional sports betting based customers 2: problem gamblers won't be lured into more problem gambling. 3. In relation to the stake, at least one positive is the firm's will almost certainly have significantly less to pay out in the short, medium and long term, with stakes of 2 pound certainly meaning they won't have to pay out a fraction of the amount that they currently do annually.
    I thought the problem was that most people kept playing until they lost all their money. Can understand that it will help where it comes to money laundering but as to paying out less in the long term.................... Don't understand that

  9. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    381
    Thanks
    266
    Thanked 122 Times in 111 Posts
    Listening to Radio 5 now, they're asking for people who win regularly on the FOBT's to get in touch - should be interesting to learn the secrets of their success

  10. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    2,838
    Thanks
    427
    Thanked 326 Times in 295 Posts
    Blog Entries
    27
    Well in theory what I mean is...If the staking goes from 100 to 2 pound, that's proportionally 50 times less. So the amount they pay out should be roughly 50 times less. The amount they take in should (in theory) be 50 times less as well, but truthily there's other factors to take into consideration in relation to this point, such as the fact, that 2 pound is an extremely low amount and many people will play the 2 pound multiple times and spend longer on the machines, but still...anyways
    ... In theory their takings from the machines will be a signifcant percentage less. So they'll undoubtably have a lot less to pay out..(which is few and far between in any event).
    Last edited by Marble; 17th May 2018 at 12:09 PM.

  11. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    381
    Thanks
    266
    Thanked 122 Times in 111 Posts
    I follow that Marble, just don't see why the takings being significantly less percentage wise comes out as a positive for the bookies

  12. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    2,838
    Thanks
    427
    Thanked 326 Times in 295 Posts
    Blog Entries
    27
    You are right, it doesn't.

  13. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,254
    Thanks
    40
    Thanked 154 Times in 131 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Tanlic View Post
    How on earth they got permission to install these in betting shops is beyond me.

    All wrong anyway.you could put 100 quid in a machine to bet but they won't take 20 quid on a horse? BS artist the lot of them hence I go Betfair every time these days
    IIRC, they were first allowed as a sop to bookmakers for not betting on the lottery numbers, and quickly became milking machines for the gullible.
    Wtf if we lose a few betting shops (mostly those duplicated & triplicated on many high streets to reap the golden harvest, I'd warrant)? At least the bookies will need to generate revenue elsewhere, and may eventually get back to competing on prices and - laying bets on them.
    Hallelujah, I say.

  14. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Shire
    Posts
    3,097
    Thanks
    135
    Thanked 270 Times in 191 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by reet hard View Post
    IIRC, they were first allowed as a sop to bookmakers for not betting on the lottery numbers, and quickly became milking machines for the gullible.
    Wtf if we lose a few betting shops (mostly those duplicated & triplicated on many high streets to reap the golden harvest, I'd warrant)? At least the bookies will need to generate revenue elsewhere, and may eventually get back to competing on prices and - laying bets on them.
    Hallelujah, I say.
    I couldn't have put it better myself Reet.

  15. #14
    Senior Member Perpetual's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Thames Valley
    Posts
    2,122
    Thanks
    262
    Thanked 376 Times in 224 Posts
    This Twitter thread really brings home the impact they can have...

    https://twitter.com/YettonExile/stat...90936206319616

  16. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,188
    Thanks
    162
    Thanked 262 Times in 206 Posts
    Hancock summed it up perfectly:-

    "It cannot be right for our magnificent sport to rely on these machines for its income."
    Alcohol, because no good story ever started with "I was eating this salad..."

  17. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    173
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by reet hard View Post
    IIRC, they were first allowed as a sop to bookmakers for not betting on the lottery numbers, and quickly became milking machines for the gullible.
    Wtf if we lose a few betting shops (mostly those duplicated & triplicated on many high streets to reap the golden harvest, I'd warrant)? At least the bookies will need to generate revenue elsewhere, and may eventually get back to competing on prices and - laying bets on them.
    Hallelujah, I say.

    I wouldn't hold your breath for that to happen, to the best of my knowledge Bet365 & Skybet don't have FOBT's but neither of them lay a bet.

    The hypocrisy from the BHA and Rust in particular on the issue has been sickening.

  18. #17
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5,373
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Desert Orchid View Post
    I'd prefer a complete ban on them.

    The stuff and nonsense about job losses is grossly exaggerated. If anyone does lose their job then that's obviously bad news for them but I wouldn't be surprised if nobody lost their job other than through a shop closure, which I am not convinced will happen.

    I think I posted a couple of years ago, though, that I spoke to an area manager I happened to be sitting next to at a wedding and he said it was the puggies that were keeping the shops going. I'm not convinced. I'm more likely to believe that they keep profits up. If it takes puggies to keep shops going they should re-open the shops as machine arcades. See how long they last.
    Not sure. I remember a documentary a while ago about shops being put in rougher areas purely based on the inclination of people in the area to use FOBTs. Not sure how viable these shops will be with reduced FOBT stakes..

    Needless to say, agree with the consensus on this thread. Should never have been allowed in in the first place.

    Given the body of evidence about the damage FOBTs have done, for the BHA to have come out in favour of the bookmakers on this issue is genuinely shameful.
    Last edited by trackside528; 19th May 2018 at 4:54 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •