Outgoing SkyBet boss "industry not doing enough with problem gamblers"

TheSam469

Newbie member
Joined
Oct 9, 2016
Location
Malta
I don't agree. It's the regulators that aren't doing enough.

2015/2016 I believe, UKGC stepped up on exclusions. 2018 Gamstop(useless imo). In the same hear, the EU, MGA, UKGC were.more worried about gambling as a source of funding for terrorism. Problem gamblers are on the back burner. This is of course.....in my opinion only
 

trancemonkey

Ueber Meister
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Location
United Kingdom
I don't agree. It's the regulators that aren't doing enough.

2015/2016 I believe, UKGC stepped up on exclusions. 2018 Gamstop(useless imo). In the same hear, the EU, MGA, UKGC were.more worried about gambling as a source of funding for terrorism. Problem gamblers are on the back burner. This is of course.....in my opinion only
I think Gamstop is extremely useful... interested to hear why you don't
 

goatwack

Get dunked, big buns!
CAG
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Location
Londonia
Yes I can see the industry falling over itself in a counter-productive move to aid problem gamblers :laugh:

I'd like world peace and unicorns to run through golden fields, doesn't mean it's ever gonna happen
 

EkJR

Senior Member
MM
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Location
Glasgow
UKGC new rules are taking action...but only if a player is also on Gamstop(and that it's working) or excluded already.

It will 100% end with affordability assessments for players because it's been mismanaged for so many years. Casinos have been at the heart of this though, some offering obscene bonuses to "VIP" players to keep gambling etc. Casinos need to get better at identifying signs of problem gambling or at least have the conversation earlier in their relationship.
 

EkJR

Senior Member
MM
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Location
Glasgow
I think Gamstop is extremely useful... interested to hear why you don't
Useful until it's realised that it's so easy to circumvent that there is no point of it. It needs to be 4 out of 5 as opposed to 3. It's long been argued that it's only going to be effective in that case alongside the new rules.
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
Considering his role at Skybet surely he could have started this, maybe they could have used the money they stole from affiliates. See stars are slowly starting the affiliate programme back up too.
 

winbigger

Banned User
Joined
Apr 27, 2019
Location
london
Sky bet is useless. I self exclude my account in 2014 for 6 months. After my exclusion fished I want on live chat to open it where they meant to go through a process. Like ask if I happy with my gambling but the chat disconnected and they just opened my account .

I was making 20pound bets before self exclusion then I betted 1000 on 1 bet. After I told them they never followed the procedure they lock my account and since that day they have kepted my balance.
 

Slottery

Senior Member
PABnoaccred
MM
Joined
Aug 21, 2017
Location
Malta
I was making 20pound bets before self exclusion then I betted 1000 on 1 bet. After I told them they never followed the procedure they lock my account and since that day they have kepted my balance.
Just to be curious, why you ended up to make bet 50 times bigger than you usually do and then right after losing it went to ask a refund?

You were not by any mean trying to freeroll with casino and if you have won you would request them to confiscate your winnings and follow correct procedure?
 

winbigger

Banned User
Joined
Apr 27, 2019
Location
london
Hi at the time there was no cases of refunds. I knew I had a problem so I self excluded. I didn't gamble for 6 months so I had the compulsion to gamble again and deposited and lost when I wasn't ready to return. They just open my account without going through the process . They still have my balance so I have not freeroll them. They have had my balance for nearly 5 years and never let me withdraw it back.
 

Jono777

Meister Member
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
Just an after thought whist reading this thread. I am by no means at all 100% clued up over these matters, however scenario post more than anything else, stranger things and all that......

If affordability ever does come into it, then could we ever be looking at a similar situation which happened recently with these pay day loans and cheque cashing centres?

Numerous PDL companies have after YEARS in some cases been told by the FCA "XYZ could never afford that loan" and they've had to wipe out any outstanding debts, refund interest of settled loans AND compensate. Most have after this situation ended up with the receivers in and ceased trading.

Now I appreciate the bodies that govern casinos and these PDL companies are nowt to do with each other, not related etc, however 'affordability' holds the same definition.

Not something I'd wish on casinos as I've always held the "lost fair and square" stance but thoughts that may lead to something or nothing and my take why mandatory and strict affordability checks may never fully surface.

As I say just thinking random possibilities, happy to be shot down in flames :)
 

Mr_Slot5

Experienced Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
Cheshire
UKGC new rules are taking action...but only if a player is also on Gamstop(and that it's working) or excluded already.

It will 100% end with affordability assessments for players because it's been mismanaged for so many years. Casinos have been at the heart of this though, some offering obscene bonuses to "VIP" players to keep gambling etc. Casinos need to get better at identifying signs of problem gambling or at least have the conversation earlier in their relationship.
This is what I take issue with. Why the hell should any player be subject to affordability checks. Why should any player have to submit financial information because they fancy a flutter on the slots?

Problem gambling is an issue, I admit, but then so is drug use, alcoholism, smoking etc. At the end of the day people need to have autonomy and make decisions for themselves. It's their life. If someone realises they need help for an addiction, they'll reach out themselves... But it has to be their decision and they have to want to stop.

When you go down the route of manually enforcing things on people, it's a slippery slope.
 

Jono777

Meister Member
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
This is what I take issue with. Why the hell should any player be subject to affordability checks. Why should any player have to submit financial information because they fancy a flutter on the slots?

Problem gambling is an issue, I admit, but then so is drug use, alcoholism, smoking etc. At the end of the day people need to have autonomy and make decisions for themselves. It's their life. If someone realises they need help for an addiction, they'll reach out themselves... But it has to be their decision and they have to want to stop.

When you go down the route of manually enforcing things on people, it's a slippery slope.
Well said, that is 90% of over coming ANY addiction, no amount of support or 'aids' will work unless that is truthfully in place before anything else.
 

EkJR

Senior Member
MM
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Location
Glasgow
Just an after thought whist reading this thread. I am by no means at all 100% clued up over these matters, however scenario post more than anything else, stranger things and all that......

If affordability ever does come into it, then could we ever be looking at a similar situation which happened recently with these pay day loans and cheque cashing centres?

Numerous PDL companies have after YEARS in some cases been told by the FCA "XYZ could never afford that loan" and they've had to wipe out any outstanding debts, refund interest of settled loans AND compensate. Most have after this situation ended up with the receivers in and ceased trading.

Now I appreciate the bodies that govern casinos and these PDL companies are nowt to do with each other, not related etc, however 'affordability' holds the same definition.

Not something I'd wish on casinos as I've always held the "lost fair and square" stance but thoughts that may lead to something or nothing and my take why mandatory and strict affordability checks may never fully surface.

As I say just thinking random possibilities, happy to be shot down in flames :)
Rumours that there might be cases of it in the future...

Let's face it, up til the last 2 years or less there have been basically no checks done by casinos on identity, money laundering etc etc. Affordability might be brought in more to abide by AML regulations than anything else.
 

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

Top