Finsoft/Spielo G2 Games Issue

Status
Not open for further replies.
The wide-ranging UK coverage on FOBTs is the work of the “Campaign for Fairer Gambling”- an organisation I know very little about...but it has certainly generated a slew of anti-FOBT publicity over the last month or so that has managed to trigger the ire of MPs all over the country due to the breakdown by constituency of their stats (which as Richas comments were originally derived from UK Gambling Commission numbers.

But we digress - back on to this fascinating and sorry-ass tale of failed player protection....
 
To ensure that my investigation isn't seen as targeting Betfred i've conducted the same test at Bet 365.

100 spins on real play - 4 double numbers -
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


350 spins on free play - no double numbers -
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
- odds of occurence 1 in 62,623,617.

Bet 365 are in violation of their GRA license.
 
You could argue that fiascos like this really blur the line between 'anti-gambling' and 'protecting players' - to the point that they become one and the same thing.

Could you? I think the exact opposite. An adult chose a 100% RTP game because it was EV neutral and was ripped off. For me it was a dull game only made reasonable by the 100% rtp.

My background is poker and a love of live (sociable) blackjack. I am probably -ev at one and certainly at the other but I enjoy it and as an adult it is my choice to spend my time and money that way. I demand fair games not guaranteed wins or even an expectation that I will win long term but the anti gambling piece would try to stop me playing and the pro player piece would support my demand for fair games. There is no blurred line.

As has already been noted, this has been running for nearly a month now, and Betfred are still serving up licence breaching games on their site.

You don't need 'mathematical understanding' to appreciate the con that has been perpetrated here

You really do. Most readers without a proper (mathematical) explanation will think - why is that mad person losing £12k by betting online moaning, not how dare that site steal £12k by lying about the odds


and besides which, the basics of the Guardian piece on FOBTs were sound, those things are a cancer on society, and they did the right thing in bringing it to public attention.

I'm not a FOBT fan or player but the piece was fundamentally unsound, there was a lie presented for each constituency and there was no balance - nobody arguing that adults should be free to bet if they want and that regulation is about making those bets fair.

A fundamentally sound FOBT piece would have included time playing, net cost, fairness of the game, measures to protect the vulnerable 1% but NAhHhhhhh, they went for a lie about betting volumes in constituencies and pretended to most that total amount bet was total lost.
 
Has any of the UK guys in here thought about tipping of any of the newspapers?
 
What else would you call it when a casino is specifically pointed to a game that is in breach of their license and a month later the game is still on their site functioning in exactly the same fashion?

Last I heard they paid the player and either pulled the game, or was it that they had the wrong help file or something to that effect and it was corrected?

I guess I need to go back and do some reading because I thought they fixed the issue per one of their statements.
 
I would like to see some sign of life from Gibraltar, even if it is a simple public confirmation that an investigation is in progress into allegations of a breach of its regulations by Betfred and possible other Gibraltar-licensed operators.

Long silences from officialdom always make me suspicious that they're hoping a controversial issue will eventually die from boredom and disinterest on the part of the public.

Some mainstreet media exposure does tend to prod bureaucrats and politicians into more overt and immediate action, I have often found.
 
I would like to see some sign of life from Gibraltar, even if it is a simple public confirmation that an investigation is in progress into allegations of a breach of its regulations by Betfred and possible other Gibraltar-licensed operators.

Long silences from officialdom always make me suspicious that they're hoping a controversial issue will eventually die from boredom and disinterest on the part of the public.

Some mainstreet media exposure does tend to prod bureaucrats and politicians into more overt and immediate action, I have often found.

Maybe try a bomb hoax?

Seriously, it seems these official "quango troughs" need something lit underneath them.

I'm frankly disgusted that none of them have become involved even here, as I am also with certain operators who have become like church mice.

I'm almost thinking that if any operator who used these games wants to stay on the accred list they should issue a full statement explaining their reactions and actions and their plans moving forward, to the satisfaction of Bryan and the membership at large.

It's almost like they have been given legal advice to shut up completely. Maybe they have.

Is there anything you can do being a journo and all jetset?
 
Last I heard they paid the player and either pulled the game, or was it that they had the wrong help file or something to that effect and it was corrected?

I guess I need to go back and do some reading because I thought they fixed the issue per one of their statements.

Betfred/Bet 365 have exactly the same problem and that's because they're ignoring the fact that there are two seperate forms of cheating going on here, both of them implemented by FinSoft.

Yes, in the problem with the play for real game the game has been removed and at least one player has been paid.

That leaves the issue with the free games - which affects several other games that have NOT been removed. To quote Betfred/Bet 365's GRA license

GRA License said:
7.2. ‘Play for Free’ Games

(1) Play for free games for no prize are not gambling but should accurately reflect any „real-money‟ version of the game,
(2) In particular, such games should not be designed to mislead the player about the chances for success by, for example, using mappings that produce different outcomes than the cash game. Licence holders should be able to demonstrate this equivalence to the Gambling Commissioner upon request.

In the last two posts i made about the Aladdin's Treasure game i showed that these games return more to the player in free play mode than they do in real play mode.

These games are in clear violation of the GRA license, function differently where they are offered by FinSoft compared to other casinos offering them direct from the supplier and was clearly raised and addressed on the 5th of January by katie91 and thelawnet (https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/finsoft-spielo-g2-games-issue.54475/ - post #131/132 though there is some further discussion of this issue a few pages on), and has been discussed at length over the course of this thread. Neither of the above mentioned casinos has even acknowledged that this issue with their games exists and both continue to provide the games nearly 3 weeks down the line.
 
Could you? I think the exact opposite. An adult chose a 100% RTP game because it was EV neutral and was ripped off. For me it was a dull game only made reasonable by the 100% rtp.

My background is poker and a love of live (sociable) blackjack. I am probably -ev at one and certainly at the other but I enjoy it and as an adult it is my choice to spend my time and money that way. I demand fair games not guaranteed wins or even an expectation that I will win long term but the anti gambling piece would try to stop me playing and the pro player piece would support my demand for fair games. There is no blurred line.



You really do. Most readers without a proper (mathematical) explanation will think - why is that mad person losing £12k by betting online moaning, not how dare that site steal £12k by lying about the odds




I'm not a FOBT fan or player but the piece was fundamentally unsound, there was a lie presented for each constituency and there was no balance - nobody arguing that adults should be free to bet if they want and that regulation is about making those bets fair.

A fundamentally sound FOBT piece would have included time playing, net cost, fairness of the game, measures to protect the vulnerable 1% but NAhHhhhhh, they went for a lie about betting volumes in constituencies and pretended to most that total amount bet was total lost.

Yes, the press is usually disingenuous when it comes to stats, and although I detest the neo-Marxist Guradina it has simply followed on from a TV documentary pointing out the same thing - sucking money out of communities, cash from the vulnerable and destroying lives. Known as the 'crack cocaine' of gambling, these FOBTs (I've never played one BTW) are not random in true sense of an online slot, and you can see videos of players FORCING a number to come out 3 times consecutively by backing the other 35 almost impossible on a random wheel or system. They are that bad bookmakers have tried to apply for licences for shops solely offering FOBTs and not even any betting, due to the fast turnover and huge profits they generate. Bookmakers in my opinion, and actually were, places where you could wager on the outcome of physical events not controlled or influenced by the bookmaker. Not FOBT's. Not stupid speedball draws. Not slot machines. Today they have crossed the boundaries to become semi-licensed casinos, and the huge profits made are also heavily spent on lobbying MP's, hence the reluctance for action. In Ireland these were banned from bookies years ago. The bookmakers also heavily spend on TV sponsorship and advertising, hence you'll never see storylines of people addicted to online gambling nor FOBT's on commercial TV. An example being Corrie when the character Robbie was addicted, but all you ever saw was a trip to an anonymous building purporting to be a physical casino, or a punt on a horse in the bookies. He was portrayed as having built up debt but always having won a wad of cash at the vital moment to save the day.... Don't hold your breath for a story on commercial TV graphically showing hungry/neglected kids when parent(s) have spunked every penny in FOBT's or online slots or ignored them for hours when playing. Don't expect a storyline showing tired/irritable people at work because of gaming issues.
You are all getting the propaganda you pay for. Simples.
Yes, we all like to play or we wouldn't be here, and we like the freedom to choose. But you can't have freedom without responsibility.
 
So did Betfred remove the game in question from the OP totally from their website, free play and real play or is it still there?

Simple yes or no question.
 
So did Betfred remove the game in question from the OP totally from their website, free play and real play or is it still there?

Simple yes or no question.

Yes, but they still offer other games that are in violation of their license!

You're asking the wrong question and that's why you're getting the wrong answer.

You should be asking 'have Betfred removed all games that have been identified as in breach of their license?', and the answer to that is no.
 
I would like to see some sign of life from Gibraltar, even if it is a simple public confirmation that an investigation is in progress into allegations of a breach of its regulations by Betfred and possible other Gibraltar-licensed operators.

Long silences from officialdom always make me suspicious that they're hoping a controversial issue will eventually die from boredom and disinterest on the part of the public.

Some mainstreet media exposure does tend to prod bureaucrats and politicians into more overt and immediate action, I have often found.

The GRA has already contacted me - there is an investigation going on, but they are not ready to come forward with this. I should have more on this later.
 
You're asking the wrong question and that's why you're getting the wrong answer.
.

No Actually I'm not asking the wrong questions.

Believe me I've studied licensing jurisdictions and what's required and many OC's don't meet their requirements. Old news..

I've studied more than you think and not in just this area.

My position has always been that it appeared to me that Betfair took the right actions and corrected the player issue and removed the game in a timely faction.

I'm surprised since Bet365 is accredited here you're not endorsing the removal of them too. ;)
 
Last edited:
Yes, the press is usually disingenuous when it comes to stats, and although I detest the neo-Marxist Guradina it has simply followed on from a TV documentary pointing out the same thing - sucking money out of communities, cash from the vulnerable and destroying lives. Known as the 'crack cocaine' of gambling, these FOBTs (I've never played one BTW) are not random in true sense of an online slot, and you can see videos of players FORCING a number to come out 3 times consecutively by backing the other 35 almost impossible on a random wheel or system. They are that bad bookmakers have tried to apply for licences for shops solely offering FOBTs and not even any betting, due to the fast turnover and huge profits they generate. Bookmakers in my opinion, and actually were, places where you could wager on the outcome of physical events not controlled or influenced by the bookmaker. Not FOBT's. Not stupid speedball draws. Not slot machines. Today they have crossed the boundaries to become semi-licensed casinos, and the huge profits made are also heavily spent on lobbying MP's, hence the reluctance for action. In Ireland these were banned from bookies years ago. The bookmakers also heavily spend on TV sponsorship and advertising, hence you'll never see storylines of people addicted to online gambling nor FOBT's on commercial TV. An example being Corrie when the character Robbie was addicted, but all you ever saw was a trip to an anonymous building purporting to be a physical casino, or a punt on a horse in the bookies. He was portrayed as having built up debt but always having won a wad of cash at the vital moment to save the day.... Don't hold your breath for a story on commercial TV graphically showing hungry/neglected kids when parent(s) have spunked every penny in FOBT's or online slots or ignored them for hours when playing. Don't expect a storyline showing tired/irritable people at work because of gaming issues.
You are all getting the propaganda you pay for. Simples.
Yes, we all like to play or we wouldn't be here, and we like the freedom to choose. But you can't have freedom without responsibility.

THIS is the kind of thing that needs to be forced into the open, not just a youtube video that people might stumble upon. It might break the faith of those that regularly play FOBTs, who probably think that despite everything else, it's a fair game, and they can win.
Using a bit of clever "spin", players could be lead to interpret this quirk as proof that all FOBTs cheat, and they can NEVER win, unlike traditional sports betting where the outcome is out of the hands of the bookies, and they often get stung when popular selections all win at a major race meeting. This wont target betting in general, just the FOBTs.

The reason you see so many bookies in a small area is because they are "gaming the system". There is a player protection rule that limits each bookie to 4 FOBTs. They get around this by opening loads of smaller shops, each with it's own 4 FOBT allowance, rather than one big shop. Because FOBTs are rigged, they can guarantee a set long term profit, and cannot be caught out one week by a few lucky players. They shouldn't even need to cheat as roulette is a high house edge game. I suspect the cheating is to bring the RTP of the FOBTs down to 90% from the natural 95% seen on a fair roulette table.

There are players that claim to be able to beat FOBTs, and this is the danger of making these "compensated" games available. It is even worse with FOBTs, where banning a player could be seen as an admission of a lack of confidence of the fairness of their FOBTs.

Unfortunately, the long running battle between the "pro" players and the operators has been fought out of sight of the mainstream media. Many "pro" players do NOT want it to become general knowledge that there is money to be made, and so are wary of supplying main stream media with proof that some systems work. Operators too want it kept quiet, and when they ban someone, it is often for vague reasons, and they can hide behind the "right to refuse admission" rather than accuse the player of cheating.
It needs an undercover investigation by Panorama or Dispatches to expose this aspect, but first they need to recruit a "pro" player.

Some while ago, it seems Channel 4 were sniffing around the player forums looking for a pro player willing to take part in a documentary about beating the games, but there were no takers. The general chatter was that it would involve their systems being aired on national TV, and being rendered worthless overnight as everybody went out to give it a try. This was already happening with some systems where knowledge became too widespread.
I don't know of any attempts by UK mainstream media to produce a documentary about online gambling from the viewpoint of the "pro" player out to beat the system. This DID happen elsewhere, and is why the Danes are bonus banned from large numbers of casinos.
 
No Actually I'm not asking the wrong questions.

Believe me I've studied licensing jurisdictions and what's required and many OC's don't meet their requirements. Old news..

I've studied more than you think and not in just this area.

My position has always been that it appeared to me that Betfair took the right actions and corrected the player issue and removed the game in a timely faction.

I'm surprised since Bet365 is accredited here you're not endorsing the removal of them too. ;)

Actually i am. I've made no bones about disagreeing with CM on this issue. I've already blacklisted both companies and others on my own site. Offering cheating games is unacceptable. If they chose to stop working with a company that has been rigging games i'll reconsider that decision. Until that point they provide games from an untrustworthy party and transitively cannot be trusted themselves.

Earlier you were saying that i should be pushing for better regulation - allowing casinos to continue operating in breach of their license wouldn't achieve that.

There's a good reason that term was written into the GRA license and that's because rigging your free play games to pay out at a higher rate than your real play games is dishonest. And when you are alerted to a breach of license and choose to do nothing about it that's even more serious.
 
Last edited:
While i could get no response what-so-ever from Paddy Power regarding this issue i've done a quick test of their free play Aladdin's Treasure game (you can find the vid at
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
. Unlike Betfred and Bet 365, their free play game turned up a double number in less that 10 spins, quicker than would be expected in a fair game, but well within the expected range.
 
THIS is the kind of thing that needs to be forced into the open, not just a youtube video that people might stumble upon. It might break the faith of those that regularly play FOBTs, who probably think that despite everything else, it's a fair game, and they can win.
Using a bit of clever "spin", players could be lead to interpret this quirk as proof that all FOBTs cheat, and they can NEVER win, unlike traditional sports betting where the outcome is out of the hands of the bookies, and they often get stung when popular selections all win at a major race meeting. This wont target betting in general, just the FOBTs.

The reason you see so many bookies in a small area is because they are "gaming the system". There is a player protection rule that limits each bookie to 4 FOBTs. They get around this by opening loads of smaller shops, each with it's own 4 FOBT allowance, rather than one big shop. Because FOBTs are rigged, they can guarantee a set long term profit, and cannot be caught out one week by a few lucky players. They shouldn't even need to cheat as roulette is a high house edge game. I suspect the cheating is to bring the RTP of the FOBTs down to 90% from the natural 95% seen on a fair roulette table.

There are players that claim to be able to beat FOBTs, and this is the danger of making these "compensated" games available. It is even worse with FOBTs, where banning a player could be seen as an admission of a lack of confidence of the fairness of their FOBTs.

Unfortunately, the long running battle between the "pro" players and the operators has been fought out of sight of the mainstream media. Many "pro" players do NOT want it to become general knowledge that there is money to be made, and so are wary of supplying main stream media with proof that some systems work. Operators too want it kept quiet, and when they ban someone, it is often for vague reasons, and they can hide behind the "right to refuse admission" rather than accuse the player of cheating.
It needs an undercover investigation by Panorama or Dispatches to expose this aspect, but first they need to recruit a "pro" player.

Some while ago, it seems Channel 4 were sniffing around the player forums looking for a pro player willing to take part in a documentary about beating the games, but there were no takers. The general chatter was that it would involve their systems being aired on national TV, and being rendered worthless overnight as everybody went out to give it a try. This was already happening with some systems where knowledge became too widespread.
I don't know of any attempts by UK mainstream media to produce a documentary about online gambling from the viewpoint of the "pro" player out to beat the system. This DID happen elsewhere, and is why the Danes are bonus banned from large numbers of casinos.

IIRC, the danish thing was about the general public being shown how to use bonuses to make money. It had nothing to do with rigged or compensated games, so I don't see how it is relevant. In fact, pretty nothing you said is relevant.

Just for the non- UK readers, could you explain FOBT please? Afaik its a betting terminal in a bookies shop but I'm happy to stand corrected.

There is nothing inherently wrong with compensated games, as long as they are billed as such. Online compensated games aren't the same as actual fruities, as you well know, as you can't know how long it has been since a jackpot etc.
 
Maybe try a bomb hoax?

Seriously, it seems these official "quango troughs" need something lit underneath them.

I'm frankly disgusted that none of them have become involved even here, as I am also with certain operators who have become like church mice.

I'm almost thinking that if any operator who used these games wants to stay on the accred list they should issue a full statement explaining their reactions and actions and their plans moving forward, to the satisfaction of Bryan and the membership at large.

It's almost like they have been given legal advice to shut up completely. Maybe they have.

Is there anything you can do being a journo and all jetset?


We've already carried one story on this back in the early stages of the scandal, but in the absence of notable new developments simply reprising a story with relatively minor embellishments is counter-productive and just bores the audience.

A regulator worth its salt would be all over this by now, because it appears to me that a prima facie case has been established by reputable experts like Eliot Jacobsen. That at least merits some serious and impartial attention, yet we have yet to see even an acknowledgement made publicly by the GRA that it is investigating breaches of its regulations allegedly committed by some of its licensees.

Instead we have these almost covert 'networking' style revelations and the promise of communication at some undefined point.

It really doesn't inspire confidence in the regulator when it conducts its business in this way - justice should be seen to be done, or at least seen to be in the process of being done in an open, professional and impartial manner.

The regulator has a tremendous responsibility and an obligation to the players it purports to protect, and a major part of that is holding its licensees responsible for what appear to be clear breaches of its regulations

Why not be transparent and communicative, giving confidence to players that they really are a priority with a regulator who not only licenses operators, but regulates them diligently as well?

Its both frustrating and deeply disappointing when regulators do not appear to come through on player issues - take Purple Lounge as a recent example of lots of hand waving and hot air from the LGA, but most unsatisfactory enforcement and a very apparent disregard for the player community.
 
IIRC, the danish thing was about the general public being shown how to use bonuses to make money. It had nothing to do with rigged or compensated games, so I don't see how it is relevant. In fact, pretty nothing you said is relevant.

Just for the non- UK readers, could you explain FOBT please? Afaik its a betting terminal in a bookies shop but I'm happy to stand corrected.

There is nothing inherently wrong with compensated games, as long as they are billed as such. Online compensated games aren't the same as actual fruities, as you well know, as you can't know how long it has been since a jackpot etc.

It was still a niche topic. I can't see the majority of the Danish public having bothered to interrupt their usual viewing just to watch this. The UK public have also been shown how to beat the businesses at their own game on TV, and REPEATEDLY. We don't see big business running scared, we see them realise that this is a niche problem that only a small minority of customers will be interested in. They make minor changes, but don't ditch entire schemes on the back of a TV show that shows how to beat it.

In fact, the issue about making money from bonuses has been given it's own section on the Martin Lewis website, which supports the Martin Lewis "money show" on ITV. Also featured are the various loopholes that can result in things like a plasma TV for 4pence from Tesco. Tesco has had it's long running Clubcard scheme attacked repeatedly by followers of the Martin Lewis forum, yet they have not ditched the scheme.

Instead of adapting, casinos just issued a wholesale ban on Danish players which they kept for YEARS after this TV program was aired. Many Danish players have no idea that this was the root cause of the problem because it was so long ago.

The FOBT is a video kiosk that can host a number of games, usually casino favourites like Roulette. They are marketed as being the same as playing the game in a real casino, but they are not quite. The problem is that they "cheat" in order to ensure the bookies can make a consistent long term profit from them. The games featured are "fixed odds" like Roulette, but unlike real roulette, they can adapt to the bets being made. This is how they can be tricked into revealing that they cheat by betting to force them to show a completely non random sequence of results despite them being apparently random when played "normally".

Some players believe that the cheating mechanism in FOBTs can be manipulated in the players' favour, just like on many fruit machines.

There could have been an outcome worse for the operators, someone finding a means to trick the Finsoft games into paying out too much over the long term by using specific betting patterns.

I am also thinking that if the cheat instruction is transmitted from the players' PC via an XML request, surely someone can hack the client side and tamper with these XML instructions to change the cheat into one favouring the player, such as by excluding not duplicates, but one of the results that would cause the player to lose the bet.
 
IIRC, the danish thing was about the general public being shown how to use bonuses to make money. It had nothing to do with rigged or compensated games, so I don't see how it is relevant. In fact, pretty nothing you said is relevant.

Just for the non- UK readers, could you explain FOBT please? Afaik its a betting terminal in a bookies shop but I'm happy to stand corrected.

There is nothing inherently wrong with compensated games, as long as they are billed as such. Online compensated games aren't the same as actual fruities, as you well know, as you can't know how long it has been since a jackpot etc.

It is relevant in the sense of media exposure, and the FOBT's are advertised as 'random' which which they clearly aren't. The FOBT scandal makes this thread's original complaint look insignificant, whereas it isn't in our opinions, as we can see by the responses and huge interest. On this forum we are knowledgeable when it comes to online gaming, and we mustn't forget that to people outside i.e. the media we speak almost a foreign language, so inevitably they have to put total trust in what the subjects say or do, which puts them in a vulnerable position. If only there was a reporter who had the POGG's knowledge for example.....
 
This thread is getting plenty of exposure, which is a good thing if it can be kept on topic - well over 50,000 views as at this afternoon.
 
It is relevant in the sense of media exposure, and the FOBT's are advertised as 'random' which which they clearly aren't. The FOBT scandal makes this thread's original complaint look insignificant, whereas it isn't in our opinions, as we can see by the responses and huge interest. On this forum we are knowledgeable when it comes to online gaming, and we mustn't forget that to people outside i.e. the media we speak almost a foreign language, so inevitably they have to put total trust in what the subjects say or do, which puts them in a vulnerable position. If only there was a reporter who had the POGG's knowledge for example.....

Thanks dunover - that's kind of the goal i'm trying to achieve when i publish articles on the site. I suspect however, that if i was to try and work in mainstream journalism i would spend many a hungry and penniless nights between commissions lol.
 
Thanks dunover - that's kind of the goal i'm trying to achieve when i publish articles on the site. I suspect however, that if i was to try and work in mainstream journalism i would spend many a hungry and penniless nights between commissions lol.

And you'd be telling the truth, which the mainstream media has issues with (usually).
Again, it's follow the money - how much revenue do newspapers and TV channels receive from gaming companies? A word in the right ear, and the article would never be aired or published. This is what we are up against.

The UKGC is about as useful as a <snip>, which brings me to their predecessor BACTA, another pointless toothless bunch of civil servants who failed to enforce any rules bar collection of licences for the government.
Old scandals there. Club machines known never to have paid a jackpot out in years due to MPU3 dodgy programming, whereby when you set the dip switches to certain %ages, certain features would be permanently blocked on certain percentages. I had a 150 jp clubmachine once, whereby if you set it to max 88% you could NEVER access the top 4 features on the ladder by gambling the number up. It was impossible. Similar on the £5 ones. I saw a chap once spend 200 trying to win a £5 jackpot on one set at 72% - avoiding all wins he got the gamble to £4 and was doing it every other spin, and yet it killed him each time regardless of the number. I tried telling him that the %age it was set on blocked the win (despite it being advertised on the glass) and he could play it for the rest of his life and not get the £5.
So, try explaining that to BACTA and they didn't have one person knowledgeable enough about machines to investigate these faults which made the machines essentially illegal. Like the UKGC they simply trusted the providers and programmers to do the right thing. We all know still to this day we have AWP's with EPPS (enhanced payout periods) which means effectively by taking a credit on the top features (eg DOND) or taking a credit for a repeat chance, the APS's basically offer a higher jackpot than allowed by law.
Whether the old BACTA or the UKGC you are simply faced with tax-collectors who have little or no knowledge about the minutiae of games, software or randomness. This thread proves it - again.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And you'd be telling the truth, which the mainstream media has issues with (usually).
Again, it's follow the money - how much revenue do newspapers and TV channels receive from gaming companies? A word in the right ear, and the article would never be aired or published. This is what we are up against.

True. Plus of course the Mail has its own bingo and slots site.

It makes me think, prompted by it coming in the post this morning, that the best place for this story is Private Eye. They will bother to explain the maths and will be happy to get into the regulatory detail. for them the gritty detail is the story and the huge software firm, BetFred and others plus GRA and UKGC are all worthy targets for criticism.

Then all the other papers will read it and do their usual terrible job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top