'Crack Cocaine of the highstreet'

PNEFOREVER2

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Location
Preston,lancs
Saw this this morning, thought it was quite interesting. £46 billion wagered in Britain last year, be interesting to hear what people think here as to whether stakes should be reduced. I've always managed to stay clear of these Roulette machines but used to place bets on horses years ago and have seen friends blow their months wages in less than an hour on these, being able to lose £100 within 20 seconds does seem a little too much.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 

Redbet-Andy

Dormant account - New account: AndyB-MrGreen
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Location
Malta
I really dislike those things! I have friends who get paid in cash, can't get credit and throw a lot of money into these, and they are everywhere now.
They should be limited to the same RTP as online games generally are, RNG, max bet of £1 per spin and the spins should be set at longer intervals. That'll go some way to making them less addictive and fairer.
Liverpool City Council voted to ban from the city. Hurrah for them.
 

Richas

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Location
UK
Saw this this morning, thought it was quite interesting. £46 billion wagered in Britain last year, be interesting to hear what people think here as to whether stakes should be reduced. I've always managed to stay clear of these Roulette machines but used to place bets on horses years ago and have seen friends blow their months wages in less than an hour on these, being able to lose £100 within 20 seconds does seem a little too much.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
I do not like them much and don't use them myself but it is a choice issue, if the antis get to ban these then they will be after Internet Gambling next.

The anti campaign is misleading in many ways, run by a man who likes to send out libel threats and who stioll has strong financial ties to the casino industry in the UK - he & his partner own over 5.5% of Galaxy Gaming and their patents for Three Card Poker and other games like Blackjack side bets are mortgaged to that same firm with about $18m owing to be paid before Derek Webb relinquishing his control over them. Crucuially the big money spinner is the British only rights of Three Card Poker in casinos. He sold the British Internet rights for $1.5m and the rest of the Internet and International rights were sold in two goes, following a nasty court case and then via a settlement of a continuation of that nasty court case for an extra $5.5m.

The campaign founder hates these machines because they deal three card brag and refused to pay him for his "invention" - in the UK there is no need to games are not patentable in the UK or EU, only in the US. He hates them and they compete with the income stream that goes to Galaxy Gaming then to Prime Table Games and then to this campaign...an income stream which is in fact pretty voluntary, the casinos could deal three card brag instead and escape his copyright rights for 3CP.

On Dec 23rd this year it will be three years since he sold the British Internet rights so a likely point for his goodwill and non compete clauses to expire. In January he is planning a new campaign on Internet gambling which coincidentally is the same time as Sheldon Adelson launches his coalition against Internet Gambling.

I don't like FOBTs but this campaign is far more misleading, in my view, after considerable research and only with that evidence to back me I can make an honest belief legal defence to have the right to say I believe the campaign is in part personal vendetta and in part commercial interest.

The Daily Mail has its own history of backing UK casinos - you will notice that the focus here is not on the dramatic rise in B1 stakes from £2 stak and £5k max win to £5 max stake and £20k max win, it is all about opposing their high street competition. Competition is exactly what it is from the 2010 Gamblign Prevalence Survey we know that 42% of those who use FOBTs also play casino table games where the stakes are unlimited and the months wages can be on one spin.
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
I really dislike those things! I have friends who get paid in cash, can't get credit and throw a lot of money into these, and they are everywhere now.
They should be limited to the same RTP as online games generally are, RNG, max bet of £1 per spin and the spins should be set at longer intervals. That'll go some way to making them less addictive and fairer.
Liverpool City Council voted to ban from the city. Hurrah for them.
Yes, and numerous TV documentaries have clearly demonstrated the negative social effects of these FOBT's which have 'sucked the soul' from High Streets in poorer areas. In Ireland they are banned.
They play apparently like a cross between AWP's and Random Games, similar to B3 £500 arcade slots which aren't as random as proper online games - you can feed them and get the jackpot unlike online slots. There is a video on the web I saw (can't find it at the moment) where a player bets in a certain way on the FOBT roulette and correctly predicts the number 36 will come out, which he does 3 times consecutively. He had set his bet up in a way that ONLY 36 would lose him all his stake.
 

Richas

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Location
UK
Yes, and numerous TV documentaries have clearly demonstrated the negative social effects of these FOBT's which have 'sucked the soul' from High Streets in poorer areas. In Ireland they are banned.
They play apparently like a cross between AWP's and Random Games, similar to B3 £500 arcade slots which aren't as random as proper online games - you can feed them and get the jackpot unlike online slots. There is a video on the web I saw (can't find it at the moment) where a player bets in a certain way on the FOBT roulette and correctly predicts the number 36 will come out, which he does 3 times consecutively. He had set his bet up in a way that ONLY 36 would lose him all his stake.
Yeah his £500k spend on this campaign has certainly got his message across. It is a shame that our media Dispatches, Panorama, Inside Out, Mail, Express, Independent, Guardian, Sunday People and more are all agreed....why do we have no media diversity at all?

The research shows Problem Gambling in Scotland in 1999 before these machines were introduced was 0.7% in 2012 after they sucked the soul it was 0.7%

The number of bookies has been stable over the decade. It is a myth that we have many more, they have just moved to busier locations.

As for that video and the games, the B2 games are random. They are tested as such and would be illegal if they were not random. I have seen the video, it does not show a lack of randomness and showed 36 coming once not three times. I have also seen a video of a maxed bet on one number winning. The machines are random, the video edit is not.

In 2010 4% of adults used FOBTs. It is a shame that this minority is targeted for a ban, if they get their way on this watch out, you could be next. The addiction rate for online slots was in 2010 significantly higher than for FOBTs. Online is next on the list.

First they came for the FOBT players,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a FOBT player.
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
Yeah his £500k spend on this campaign has certainly got his message across. It is a shame that our media Dispatches, Panorama, Inside Out, Mail, Express, Independent, Guardian, Sunday People and more are all agreed....why do we have no media diversity at all?

The research shows Problem Gambling in Scotland in 1999 before these machines were introduced was 0.7% in 2012 after they sucked the soul it was 0.7%

The number of bookies has been stable over the decade. It is a myth that we have many more, they have just moved to busier locations.

As for that video and the games, the B2 games are random. They are tested as such and would be illegal if they were not random. I have seen the video, it does not show a lack of randomness and showed 36 coming once not three times. I have also seen a video of a maxed bet on one number winning. The machines are random, the video edit is not.

In 2010 4% of adults used FOBTs. It is a shame that this minority is targeted for a ban, if they get their way on this watch out, you could be next. The addiction rate for online slots was in 2010 significantly higher than for FOBTs. Online is next on the list.

First they came for the FOBT players,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a FOBT player.
I take your point, and I'm not into state-nannyism either. In this case, FOBT's (considering you say they are a minority occupation as compared to online slots) are prevalent in all the problem gaming fora I've read in that pro-rata they far exceed online as a source of misery. YouTube is full of people smashing them up and legging it, breaking down in front of them. A bookmaker's shop used to be 'speculating on the outcome of future events, the result of which is not controlled by the bookmaker'. Now they are becoming High St. casinos without casino licences.
How do you explain bookies applying for licenses in the past for shops containing ONLY FOBT's?? Or having multiple outlets near each other to get round the limit of 4 machines per premises?? Follow the money and you'll find the answer.
 

Balthazar

The Governor
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Location
Woodbury
How do they work exactly? Are they [strike] rigged[/strike] "skill based" like your fruit machines?
 

Richas

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Location
UK
I take your point, and I'm not into state-nannyism either. In this case, FOBT's (considering you say they are a minority occupation as compared to online slots) are prevalent in all the problem gaming fora I've read in that pro-rata they far exceed online as a source of misery. YouTube is full of people smashing them up and legging it, breaking down in front of them. A bookmaker's shop used to be 'speculating on the outcome of future events, the result of which is not controlled by the bookmaker'. Now they are becoming High St. casinos without casino licences.
How do you explain bookies applying for licenses in the past for shops containing ONLY FOBT's?? Or having multiple outlets near each other to get round the limit of 4 machines per premises?? Follow the money and you'll find the answer.
That's because they are visible and under CCTV, the smashed laptop at home is not videoed.

There are no licence applications for just FOBTs, they are not allowed under the "primary purpose" rule.

Bookies used to be spread out, often in side streets, as the planning rules said they needed to be meeting "unmet demand". That requirement went in 2007 so they have relocated to prime high street locations, often because the recession meant there were good locations available. They cluster for the same reasons as all retailers, you have multiple costas or Prets within yards not because they have limited numbers of espresso machines or sandwich fridges but because retail is all about location

You are right though, this campaign is about protecting the casino monopoly. They don't like competition.

Following the money shows this campaign is anti competitive, it is not about protecting the vulnerable, proper self exclusion and more help is not the focus as it should be, instead we get one product demonised. Online slots are next.

Edit - I said online slots had a higher proportion of problem gamblers not that they had most customers. More money is spent on FOBTs than online slots. They also get profile as they are seen as "new" and there is an active campaign. People like blaming a machine not themselves. The evidence is they would be PG anyway, with or without FOBTs, at least the saem number would be PG.
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
Random, just like all casino style games they have a house edge built in to the pay table.
I've not played one, but if you can make selections that make it almost certain you'll win something and the pseudo roulette wheel repeatedly throws the same one or two losing numbers out (i.e. play reactively) then I can understand why those that play them question their programming. There was also a mistake on one brand of FOBT or a controversy/inaccuracy that I'm sure Richas will be able to quote verbatim?
 

dizze

Dormant account
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Location
uk
why ban them when idiots would rather play 10% HE games like rainbow riches and not 0.5% HE games like blackjack or 0.2% like blackjack switch

they should however stop those who are not mentally or physically capable of understanding whats going on from playing them.
 

Nifty29

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 20, 2001
Location
Turn right, then right. then right again
why ban them when idiots would ratherunderstanding10% HE games like rainbow riches and notperson's HE games like blackjack or 0.2% like blackjack switch

they should however stop those who are not mentally or physically capable of understanding whats going on from playing them.
Ok. Let's say they implemented your idea.

What would constitute "physically or mentally capable of understanding what's going on"? Who would judge each person's status?

It would mean the entire House of Lords and the majority of the Commons would be banned from gambling for starters.
 

dizze

Dormant account
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Location
uk
Ok. Let's say they implemented your idea.

What would constitute "physically or mentally capable of understanding what's going on"? Who would judge each person's status?

It would mean the entire House of Lords and the majority of the Commons would be banned from gambling for starters.
those who are receipt of disability benefits for one.

funny thing is , if they introduced a bj game, with lets say 99.8% rtp, the players loss in the long run would be much lower( even though he could lose it all in the short run)

And it would fit the requirement of social responsibility as well, because as we all know, bj is also very streaky, and you could definitely turn £10 into £500

if people cant be bothered to look at the massive sign that says 92% rtp on the bottom left hand side, then they deserved to be robbed by the machines.

EGO..EGO...EGO thats all it is, they think that they will be that special person who will win
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
why ban them when idiots would rather play 10% HE games like rainbow riches and not 0.5% HE games like blackjack or 0.2% like blackjack switch

they should however stop those who are not mentally or physically capable of understanding whats going on from playing them.
What do you suggest? A quick IQ test in the doorway of the bookies for each new customer? A doctor's certificate of mental competence to be carried at all times by patrons of said bookies and shown upon request? :rolleyes:
 

Nifty29

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 20, 2001
Location
Turn right, then right. then right again
those who are receipt of disability benefits for one.

funny thing is , if they introduced a bj game, with lets say 99.8% rtp, the players loss in the long run would be much lower( even though he could lose it all in the short run)

And it would fit the requirement of social responsibility as well, because as we all know, bj is also very streaky, and you could definitely turn £10 into £500

if people cant be bothered to look at the massive sign that says 92% rtp on the bottom left hand side, then they deserved to be robbed by the machines.

EGO..EGO...EGO thats all it is, they think that they will be that special person who will win
LOL.

Are you serious? Really??

So, somebody who lost their foot in an accident, or was born with only one hand, or paraplegic etc etc should not be allowed to gamble? Sounds like you would have been in your element in 1930's-40's Europe.

Based on your statements thus far, I think it is you who has an issue with "understanding what is going on".
 

JackTenOff

Webmaster
webmeister
Joined
Jun 6, 2004
Location
uk
those who are receipt of disability benefits for one.
You should also be banned from gambling under your own retarded logic for such a stupid post, well done.
Most people on benefits are on them because they need them, put down the Daily Mail for 5 seconds and get a grip.
 

dizze

Dormant account
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Location
uk
LOL.

Are you serious? Really??

So, somebody who lost their foot in an accident, or was born with only one hand, or paraplegic etc etc should not be allowed to gamble? Sounds like you would have been in your element in 1930's-40's Europe.

Based on your statements thus far, I think it is you who has an issue with "understanding what is going on".
no need to get personal, "LOL",

So you get it, we should let everyone gamble, heck, im gonna let my 2 year old kid play his college money on roulette!

You should also be banned from gambling under your own retarded logic for such a stupid post, well done.
Most people on benefits are on them because they need them, put down the Daily Mail for 5 seconds and get a grip.

Ok you retard, theyve already got this in the uk form of protecting the "vulnerable"

Dont turn this into a swearing contest you twat, does your mother teach you to speak like that?
 

Richas

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Location
UK
Well Labour have come out against these.

Indeed Highland council dominated by the SNP voted unanimously to ban/control them, as did the Brighton council full of Greens and the Liverpool council, full of Labour and Libs.

We have a new political consensus to ban and control FOBTs.

Well watch out, they are coming for online next.

My prediction for Jan 2014 the same campaign that has got so many to sign up to this nonsense ban in the same week that it was proved that problem gambling is no worse in 2012 than it was before these machines were introduced will be coming for online gamblers soon. Specifically any time after the 23rd December 2013 they will be broadening their campaign to online.
 

ChopleyIOM

Hearthstone Addict
webby
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Location
IOM
Well Labour have come out against these.

Indeed Highland council dominated by the SNP voted unanimously to ban/control them, as did the Brighton council full of Greens and the Liverpool council, full of Labour and Libs.

We have a new political consensus to ban and control FOBTs.

Well watch out, they are coming for online next.

My prediction for Jan 2014 the same campaign that has got so many to sign up to this nonsense ban in the same week that it was proved that problem gambling is no worse in 2012 than it was before these machines were introduced will be coming for online gamblers soon. Specifically any time after the 23rd December 2013 they will be broadening their campaign to online.
With the greatest of respect Richas (and ordinarily your posts make a great deal of sense and I tend to agree with them), I'm utterly bemused by your position on this issue.

FOBTs are an aberration, they have absolutely no place on the high street whatsoever, and the sooner they're outlawed the better. (Or at least knocked down to a maximum stake of £2.)

Games such as this belong in casinos, that's all the 'no' campaign is saying as far as I can tell, and I see no reason to see that online gaming is the next 'target'.
 

Richas

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Location
UK
With the greatest of respect Richas (and ordinarily your posts make a great deal of sense and I tend to agree with them), I'm utterly bemused by your position on this issue.

FOBTs are an aberration, they have absolutely no place on the high street whatsoever, and the sooner they're outlawed the better. (Or at least knocked down to a maximum stake of £2.)

Games such as this belong in casinos, that's all the 'no' campaign is saying as far as I can tell, and I see no reason to see that online gaming is the next 'target'.
Wait and see. The anti gambling lobby have had a win with the help of the bricks and mortar casino lobby. Sheldon Adelson is launching his Stop Internet Gambling coalition in January and my guess is that there will be a UK arm/affiliate from the same people as are behind Stop The FOBTs.

Online is an FOBT, just with no stake or spin rate limits.

It is my belief that there are contractual reasons for the delay in launching their anti online gambling wing.

As for casinos being the best place for a monopoly - why so when today many are walk in and serve alcohol at the table. they have lower levels of protection than the bookies. Bookies do not stay open after the pubs and clubs and serve you alcohol as you gamble.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top