Proof of winnings is no longer enough!

[Trader Pat]

"We will publish a White Paper which sets out our vision for the sector in the coming months."

I don't really see anything new here. They've been saying the same thing for months now.

[PDC]

"We will publish a White Paper which sets out our vision for the sector in the coming months."

I don't really see anything new here. They've been saying the same thing for months now.

I hadn't seen/heard before a minister confirm there would definitely be affordability checks and a single customer view (SCV) solution. I know they had been talked about but never had I seen it confirmed they are coming.

[jamesedwards]

"Like GAMSTOP, a single customer view (SCV) solution will protect a person, not just their account with one operator.

This one is most concerning. If you've ever used any of the "responsible gambling" tools on any site to set limits/self exclusion, could you find all your accounts everywhere else suddenly limited to the same level? This suggests that is possible!

[deestar]

This is the silly thing. Nobody has a straight path up or down, so bad runs will trigger an affordability check and restrictions. Ensuring more net losers.

Indeed. I've been getting a few more pop ups recently to the tune of "we've noticed a change in your betting recently - check out these tools etc"

Anyone else?

As I keep a healthy bank in BF and haven't made a deposit for many years, I haven't been that concerned about it, but it is starting to make me nervous. Aside from Betdaq BF is my source of income!

The irony being yes; yes I have changed some of my betting behaviour because I'm now paying PC2 so I'm trying to up my commission to offset some of it, because that's the only way I can mitigate its impact. How does that square with their safer gambling approach.

[Trader Pat]

"We will publish a White Paper which sets out our vision for the sector in the coming months."

I don't really see anything new here. They've been saying the same thing for months now.

I hadn't seen/heard before a minister confirm there would definitely be affordability checks and a single customer view (SCV) solution. I know they had been talked about but never had I seen it confirmed they are coming.

Maybe but the fact its taking them so long to publish this white paper leaves me with some hope.

[jamesedwards]

This is the silly thing. Nobody has a straight path up or down, so bad runs will trigger an affordability check and restrictions. Ensuring more net losers.

Indeed. I've been getting a few more pop ups recently to the tune of "we've noticed a change in your betting recently - check out these tools etc"

Anyone else?

As I keep a healthy bank in BF and haven't made a deposit for many years, I haven't been that concerned about it, but it is starting to make me nervous. Aside from Betdaq BF is my source of income!

The irony being yes; yes I have changed some of my betting behaviour because I'm now paying PC2 so I'm trying to up my commission to offset some of it, because that's the only way I can mitigate its impact. How does that square with their safer gambling approach.

An interesting point. PC is deliberately designed to force customers to trade riskier and/or higher volume to churn commission. How can this be allowed to continue in the new world?

Peter, perhaps you could ask them this question at a senior level?

[Naffman]

This is the silly thing. Nobody has a straight path up or down, so bad runs will trigger an affordability check and restrictions. Ensuring more net losers.

Indeed. I've been getting a few more pop ups recently to the tune of "we've noticed a change in your betting recently - check out these tools etc"

Anyone else?

As I keep a healthy bank in BF and haven't made a deposit for many years, I haven't been that concerned about it, but it is starting to make me nervous. Aside from Betdaq BF is my source of income!

The irony being yes; yes I have changed some of my betting behaviour because I'm now paying PC2 so I'm trying to up my commission to offset some of it, because that's the only way I can mitigate its impact. How does that square with their safer gambling approach.

An interesting point. PC is deliberately designed to force customers to trade riskier and/or higher volume to churn commission. How can this be allowed to continue in the new world?

Peter, perhaps you could ask them this question at a senior level?

Exactly, it definitely does cause riskier betting.

But then BF will say you’re long term winners who know what you’re doing, so if that’s the case then surely there’s no need to check PC payers.

[PDC]

This one is most concerning. If you've ever used any of the "responsible gambling" tools on any site to set limits/self exclusion, could you find all your accounts everywhere else suddenly limited to the same level? This suggests that is possible!

Yes I would expect that to happen, it would be one of the main points of it. Potentially it could be worse, I guess they could say you should be limited to the amount across all your accounts in total, not per account. So set a limit of £100, that's your lot. Not 5 x £100 if you have 5 accounts.

Maybe but the fact its taking them so long to publish this white paper leaves me with some hope.

I wouldn't read much into the delay, definitely not that delay = less restrictions.

Overall I see nothing that is going to come out of all of this that will improve market volumes on Betfair. One thing that will be interesting is how this all impacts people based outside of the UK, will the same rules that apply to the UK customers apply to those abroad, I would assume it will if the companies want a licence in the UK.

[Trader Pat]

Bottom line: To the lad on another thread who was talking about packing in his job to trade full time : DON'T

Half of us probably won't be able to trade for much longer if all this talk turns to action

[ANGELS15]

I visited a Hills shop recently doing my usual observing of the markets and my trades. I picked up a leaflet called 'Getting to know you better'. The leaflet basically explains that they (Hills) and other bookmakers, retail or online may from time to time ask for information to verify, age, address and evidence that customers have sufficient funds to bet with.

The leaflet 'has been produced by the leading UK betting operators to explain this process to our customers'. I assuming the same leaflet may be found in other bookies.

What's interesting is that when asked for proof of funds the leaflet gives accepted examples as 'from work or a payment made to you'. So the process seems to be reaching the high street.

For some time now staff in gambling establishments have had to watch for signs of problem gambling and where necessary encourage customers to 'take a break'.

I'm thinking that in the shops the logistics of trying to verify all the customer's sources of income would be impractical. I'm wondering if they'll only do it for the bigger betting punters, those who suddenly start betting in much bigger stakes or those who go ballistic when they lose.

In the shops at least they may leave the vast majority of customers alone. I see this being wheeled out to get rid of successful punters 'sorry to ask this but it's just something we have to do'.

[deestar]

Exactly, it definitely does cause riskier betting.

But then BF will say you’re long term winners who know what you’re doing, so if that’s the case then surely there’s no need to check PC payers.

You would hope not but a scenario where you have a variance down run, triggering some sort of auto restriction leading to you being stuck in a process for weeks doesn't seem unrealistic going by what has happened to a number of other people on here.

[andy28]

I wonder if the Queen will be subjected to proof of income before she places a bet on one of her horses?

But what about those that go to the races? Will you have to prove proof of income at the gate, they going to search to see how much money you have on you? Will you be capped at 100 pound to bring onto the track?

Also the biggest issue is what impact will it have on the racing industry? How many people are directly employed in the racing industry? I know in NZ that number is around 30,000 people. How much does the Government make from taxes from people directly involved in the racing industry and from all gambling taxes?

It will also be of interest to me as to how it impacts off shore people like myself? If it doesn't impact us then my account will be for lease at very competitive rates

[jamesedwards]

UK tax income totals around £3bn per year. Hopefully this will help soften the recommendations, especially with a Conservative government.

[ilovepizza82]

If they go out of their minds black markets will be fully packed
If thats what they want, fine, no problem.
These people have no clue.

Also like someone else said.
How come there is no "source of funds" check when you want to buy alcohol or a video game?
Alco has ruined more lives than gambling industry ever will be able to do so.

[PDC]

Also like someone else said.
How come there is no "source of funds" check when you want to buy alcohol or a video game?
Alco has ruined more lives than gambling industry ever will be able to do so.

The argument I can think of goes something like, you are checked that you are over 18 when buying booze just as you are when placing a bet in order to make sure you are an adult and therefore you should be able to make your own decisions.

But with alcohol it is hard to financially ruin your life and others in very little time. Alcohol can and does devastate lives but it would tend to take a lot longer than gambling so there is a kind of automatic built in protection of time.

Not that I agree with these restrictions particularly but I can see a slight difference if I really try to.