Quite enjoyed the program to be honest, I used to work in the betting shops so could relate to a lot of it. Felt sorry for the two girls being sent to the rough shop,one by her own dad too! I remember there was always at least one shop in every area that nobody wanted to work in.
I had it lucky where I was really, some of the stories you used to hear from people who worked in the rougher area shops, they got abused, spat at, threatened, stuff thrown at them on a daily basis, mostly for minimum wage too. The fruit machine addicts were always the worst ones too, I'd hate to be in there now dealing with some nutcase who had just lost all his money playing roulette and decided to start taking it out on the machine.
I think the number of shops will die right down again soon, the explosion only came due to the fobts. With the higher taxes, higher shop rates, and more awareness of just how addictive they are they won't be able to sustain the costs soon and it will be back to just one or two shops in each area. I think it will die, just like the rest of the high street.
The scary thing though is that all these games can be played online and on your phone 24 hours a day. That's where every firm seems to be heading, pushing you towards these silly arcade games which are impossible to win at long term and are extremely appealing to people of an addictive nature.
Even betfair have emailed me 5 times this week to remind me that I should be playing on betfair arcade spinning to win my chance to win something or other.
Britain at the Bookies
Yes Archangel, and you are wise to be concerned,i misread your concerns. I read it as you were concerned as an individual what others thought of you, rather than the legislation/public opinion angle.I care because if there is specific legislation down the line to curb problem "gambling", that I , as a trader would suffer under this blanket approach.
We can all see what happened and is happening with banks as legislation tightens after abuses. In their case much of the legislation was required but I expect there were genuine products that have been adversely affected by the tightening of legislation and the growing clamour for action to be taken. (Baby out with Bathwater)
I didnt watch epsiode 1, but, was amused by episode 2.
Everyone likes to cheer on winners - but, the personalities aside, althou racing / gambling can be glamorised, the reality is, its hard to win, on all sides of the spectrum, once expenses are taken out.
Some oddities, during the epsiode.
Coral seemed to think, 80k-100k was a big liability, across the internet/shops, for a horse race. If they have 1800 shops .. the avg liability per shop, is £45. Maybe it shows how bad horse racing has become - I would have expected it to be much higher.
The guy at auction, paid £40k for a horse, he wanted to buy for £20k. Ok, maybe he was hoping it would go for £20k, but, was £40k, reasonable ? I would guess not .. especially, as the stats show, v few horses, actually win a race.
If the bookie wanted to win £400 per race, logically, he needs to hold £4000 per race, betting at 10% margin. To hold £25k, on a sat, is going some .. even on a big race-day - maybe there is more money in the north.
I have never understood, how self-proclaimed pros, can have casual bets on greyhounds in the shops, when BAGS have 25% over-rounds - and they werent even checking, what the exchange was.
Gambling was portrayed as a social distraction - but, it didnt show the serious nature of the despos, who really fall-in. Maybe the show, doesnt have the time alloted etc.
Everyone likes to cheer on winners - but, the personalities aside, althou racing / gambling can be glamorised, the reality is, its hard to win, on all sides of the spectrum, once expenses are taken out.
Some oddities, during the epsiode.
Coral seemed to think, 80k-100k was a big liability, across the internet/shops, for a horse race. If they have 1800 shops .. the avg liability per shop, is £45. Maybe it shows how bad horse racing has become - I would have expected it to be much higher.
The guy at auction, paid £40k for a horse, he wanted to buy for £20k. Ok, maybe he was hoping it would go for £20k, but, was £40k, reasonable ? I would guess not .. especially, as the stats show, v few horses, actually win a race.
If the bookie wanted to win £400 per race, logically, he needs to hold £4000 per race, betting at 10% margin. To hold £25k, on a sat, is going some .. even on a big race-day - maybe there is more money in the north.
I have never understood, how self-proclaimed pros, can have casual bets on greyhounds in the shops, when BAGS have 25% over-rounds - and they werent even checking, what the exchange was.
Gambling was portrayed as a social distraction - but, it didnt show the serious nature of the despos, who really fall-in. Maybe the show, doesnt have the time alloted etc.
BTW, the office of the bespoke bookie, Ben Keith, was the ex-office, of London bookie, Tony Morris.
It has some great momentos, of his past - he was a giant amoungst bookies - and perhaps oddly, was a serious friend of Bernie Ecclestone - who, loved to punt.
It has some great momentos, of his past - he was a giant amoungst bookies - and perhaps oddly, was a serious friend of Bernie Ecclestone - who, loved to punt.
I would imagine, in general, putting value on young racehorses must be quite difficult. Obviously it will come down to the breeding of the throughbred , so a horse could sell of 5k, or £1m. The horse could win the derby, or never even run. It seems more gambling than business, unless they are going down the breeding routemegarain wrote: The guy at auction, paid £40k for a horse, he wanted to buy for £20k. Ok, maybe he was hoping it would go for £20k, but, was £40k, reasonable ? I would guess not .. especially, as the stats show, v few horses, actually win a race.
I have never understood, how self-proclaimed pros, can have casual bets on greyhounds in the shops, when BAGS have 25% over-rounds - and they werent even checking, what the exchange was.
.
I think that guy who was betting golf and talked about winning 50k one weekend, now seemed quite broke, when he lost his stake on Darts... prob had a gambling problem. He seemed to assume betting was going to make him and his family comfortably rich
As i said it would be cool if they did an episode on exchange traders
I was surprised not to see any of the on course bookies laying off there liabilitys on BF as we know they do, take the Bookie keith in last race at Doncaster when he gave the owner 18/1 he could of easily reduced his £500 liabilty by putting just half though BF and probebly getting odds around 26.0
But then that asks the question why did nt the owner pull out his phone and place his £40 directly with BF and get odds around top 20s instead of haggling with a course bookie to move him from 16/1 to 18/1
But then that asks the question why did nt the owner pull out his phone and place his £40 directly with BF and get odds around top 20s instead of haggling with a course bookie to move him from 16/1 to 18/1
Yes I agree. probably down to the general ignorance of the exchange. I havent heard Betfair even mentionedhilly2908 wrote:I was surprised not to see any of the on course bookies laying off there liabilitys on BF as we know they do, take the Bookie keith in last race at Doncaster when he gave the owner 18/1 he could of easily reduced his £500 liabilty by putting just half though BF and probebly getting odds around 26.0
But then that asks the question why did nt the owner pull out his phone and place his £40 directly with BF and get odds around top 20s instead of haggling with a course bookie to move him from 16/1 to 18/1
Most punters are just not price sensitive. They don't care if they get 16/1, 18/1 or 20/1, so long as they get their bet on, it doesn't matter to them, a winner is a winner.
Personally I wouldn't dream of backing a horse at 16/1 when I can get 20/1 elsewhere. Though I am a mug shopper, I buy all my groceries at tesco, and some people would be appalled that I pay £10 for a big box of washing powder, when I can go to Asda where it is on offer for £7. It's the same sort of thing. Bookmakers want loyal customers, who bet like I shop, and there are plenty of them around.
I think the man in the last nights program called Ben was from star sports. I think they do this at a very high level. They target high staking customers, who just don't care about price and just want their bets on. They don't advertise their prices anywhere, though apparently they are always shortest price on every runner. He said his perfect customers are racehorse owners. They clearly have money to burn and don't care about getting a good deal. They probably all make their millions elsewhere, racing is just a hobby for them.
Just goes to show though how much money there is sloshing around these markets.
Personally I wouldn't dream of backing a horse at 16/1 when I can get 20/1 elsewhere. Though I am a mug shopper, I buy all my groceries at tesco, and some people would be appalled that I pay £10 for a big box of washing powder, when I can go to Asda where it is on offer for £7. It's the same sort of thing. Bookmakers want loyal customers, who bet like I shop, and there are plenty of them around.
I think the man in the last nights program called Ben was from star sports. I think they do this at a very high level. They target high staking customers, who just don't care about price and just want their bets on. They don't advertise their prices anywhere, though apparently they are always shortest price on every runner. He said his perfect customers are racehorse owners. They clearly have money to burn and don't care about getting a good deal. They probably all make their millions elsewhere, racing is just a hobby for them.
Just goes to show though how much money there is sloshing around these markets.
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
I haven't watched the show yet, got it series linked.
The price of a racehorse at the sales is actually inversely related to its performance on the racecourse. Many of the buyer you hear on TV as being very shrewd are anything but. I did (some years ago now) quite an in depth study of the price of yearlings and how they performed subsequently and that took in looking at the buyers.
I think we as traders often forget that a bet on a horse for many is a hobby and as such it is about getting the bet on and having the chance to win and have fun with it. So in with that is the convenience to get a bet on, much like the shopping scenario talked about above. I could spend my time shopping around all the different supermarkets and over the year I would probably be able to save a few hundred. But to be truthful I can't be bothered. I do the shopping online from the comfort of my home and always shop at the same supermarket and just want to get it done quickly. For that convenience I know I am paying more than I could but I am happy with that knowledge.
Now if my full time job was to do food shopping I would of course spend time shopping around getting the best price whenever possible.
For food shopping insert, bank accounts, car insurance, house insurance, gas and electric etc etc. as a society we don't really need to and can't really be bothered to shop around and get the best price always.
If we all did we would all pay a lot less but the companies know we wont and so over charge us.
Betting is no different, exchanges are not as simple as placing a bet with a normal bookie and for that reason alone will never attract the vast majority of punters.
The price of a racehorse at the sales is actually inversely related to its performance on the racecourse. Many of the buyer you hear on TV as being very shrewd are anything but. I did (some years ago now) quite an in depth study of the price of yearlings and how they performed subsequently and that took in looking at the buyers.
I think we as traders often forget that a bet on a horse for many is a hobby and as such it is about getting the bet on and having the chance to win and have fun with it. So in with that is the convenience to get a bet on, much like the shopping scenario talked about above. I could spend my time shopping around all the different supermarkets and over the year I would probably be able to save a few hundred. But to be truthful I can't be bothered. I do the shopping online from the comfort of my home and always shop at the same supermarket and just want to get it done quickly. For that convenience I know I am paying more than I could but I am happy with that knowledge.
Now if my full time job was to do food shopping I would of course spend time shopping around getting the best price whenever possible.
For food shopping insert, bank accounts, car insurance, house insurance, gas and electric etc etc. as a society we don't really need to and can't really be bothered to shop around and get the best price always.
If we all did we would all pay a lot less but the companies know we wont and so over charge us.
Betting is no different, exchanges are not as simple as placing a bet with a normal bookie and for that reason alone will never attract the vast majority of punters.
Archangel wrote:Yes I agree. probably down to the general ignorance of the exchange. I havent heard Betfair even mentionedhilly2908 wrote:I was surprised not to see any of the on course bookies laying off there liabilitys on BF as we know they do, take the Bookie keith in last race at Doncaster when he gave the owner 18/1 he could of easily reduced his £500 liabilty by putting just half though BF and probebly getting odds around 26.0
But then that asks the question why did nt the owner pull out his phone and place his £40 directly with BF and get odds around top 20s instead of haggling with a course bookie to move him from 16/1 to 18/1
the site was on a few of the traders monitors at coral hq if you kept your eye out but thats about it
-
The dog of ry
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2014 2:17 am
I've only watched the first one, but I hardly think it was an unbiased view. Coral seemed to have given them exclusive access, and I highly doubt part of their 'agreement' would have included showing how Betfair's odds are superior. I may be wrong, but that was my take on it