Gambling Review White Paper update

[aperson]

Ideally, because of seasonality, you would say a rolling year.

A good example is football where roughly 3 months every other year there's nothing (much) on so someone who bets exclusively on football could be unfairly caught up for not betting in the off season. In a sense you could even argue it might encourage them to bet in other areas to try and keep their net position positive.

[ShaunWhite]

Ideally, because of seasonality, you would say a rolling year.

A good example is football where roughly 3 months every other year there's nothing (much) on so someone who bets exclusively on football could be unfairly caught up for not betting in the off season. In a sense you could even argue it might encourage them to bet in other areas to try and keep their net position positive.

You'd be encouraged to leave your working capital in there but there's no incentive to bet. Net position isn't the same as net deposits.

[Archangel]

The GCF write to the Gambling Commission about the misreporting of official statistics and misinterpretation of data to the DCMS Select Committee

https://gamblersconsumerforum.com/the-g ... committee/

[Derek27]

I'm gonna be "harming" myself for the next 2-3 hours but I'll spend the rest of the night downing beer.

[Michael5482]

The GCF write to the Gambling Commission about the misreporting of official statistics and misinterpretation of data to the DCMS Select Committee

https://gamblersconsumerforum.com/the-g ... committee/

Good to see people taking up the fight. The more the better.

[Derek27]

Don't know the name of the person who wrote the letter, it may have been a joint response but I can't credit them enough. It must take a lot of work to not only sieve through all that bullshit but also review all the research that it alludes to.

It's quite astonishing at anyone can measure the "harm" people are doing to themselves by depositing money in betting accounts without accounting for the money that's still there, profits accumulated in the account and money withdrawn back to their bank account, or even withdrawn through gift cards!

I recall a guy on here that deposited £25K into his Betfair account prior to Royal Ascot, had is account locked until the end of the meeting for money laundering checks and ended up withdrawing the money without placing a bet. That's £25K "spent"!

[WisdomOfCrowds]

The GCF write to the Gambling Commission about the misreporting of official statistics and misinterpretation of data to the DCMS Select Committee

https://gamblersconsumerforum.com/the-g ... committee/

Good to see people taking up the fight. The more the better.

I couldn't agree more. Too many people are on a mission to destroy the gambling industry, claiming their positions are evidence led when they're using spurious data to try to advance their biased cause.

[Archangel]

The GCF write to the Gambling Commission about the misreporting of official statistics and misinterpretation of data to the DCMS Select Committee

https://gamblersconsumerforum.com/the-g ... committee/

Good to see people taking up the fight. The more the better.

Absolutely. There's a lot of people talking about gambling who haven't the first idea about it and are happy to regurgitate erroneous data to whoever will listen

[firlandsfarm]

Absolutely. There's a lot of people talking about gambling who haven't the first idea about it and are happy to regurgitate erroneous data to whoever will listen

But don't you feel that most of the time with MP's? At best they are Jacks (and Jills) of all trades and masters of none and yet they think they can make the law that tells us what's best for us to do!

[Michael5482]

Has anyone seen what the betting company's (Flutter, Bet365 etc) stance is on the white paper. I don't recall seeing much from them? Can't be good for business restricting their revenues with affordability.

[WisdomOfCrowds]

Absolutely. There's a lot of people talking about gambling who haven't the first idea about it and are happy to regurgitate erroneous data to whoever will listen

But don't you feel that most of the time with MP's? At best they are Jacks (and Jills) of all trades and masters of none and yet they think they can make the law that tells us what's best for us to do!

Yes, I agree. The MPs need to have sufficient knowledge to be able to properly question the so called experts who provide evidence to them.

[WisdomOfCrowds]

Has anyone seen what the betting company's (Flutter, Bet365 etc) stance is on the white paper. I don't recall seeing much from them? Can't be good for business restricting their revenues with affordability.

Not seen much at all. They seem to be keeping a low profile as they don't appear to want to poke the bear.

[Michael5482]

Has anyone seen what the betting company's (Flutter, Bet365 etc) stance is on the white paper. I don't recall seeing much from them? Can't be good for business restricting their revenues with affordability.

Not seen much at all. They seem to be keeping a low profile as they don't appear to want to poke the bear.

I'd probably say the bookmakers are the bear and the white paper may be doing the poking.

Ultimately the bookmakers hold all the cards (and appear to be keeping them close to their chest) due to the revenues they generate if they want to take the white paper on and what legislation comes from it they will. Maybe in a similar manor to when betting tax was abolished when they basically told the Government abolish it or were off and we'll take our revenue with us. Take it or leave it.

[Archangel]

Makes me feel slightly uneasy being on the same side of a debate as bookmakers...

[ANGELS15]

Makes me feel slightly uneasy being on the same side of a debate as bookmakers...

It's a case of the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Although not quite the same thing it reminds me of when there was a debate to abolish betting tax, both punters and bookies wanted it abolished.