Report recommends £2 stake online, and lots of other measures....

[slotter999]

Because prohibition has historically worked brilliantly

But we are not talking about prohibition or outlawing gambling. Simply the possible reduction of a max bet on online slots to £2. They are simply not comparable and your point makes no sense in the context of this thread.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Because prohibition has historically worked brilliantly

Well that's handy, because no one's talking about prohibition, just regulation.

You know, like we do for alcohol, tobacco, drugs, and damn near everything else.

Why should gambling get a free pass? I mean, let's be brutally honest with ourselves here, gambling doesn't exactly make the world a better place now, does it?

 

[trancemonkey]

But we are not talking about prohibition or outlawing gambling. Simply the possible reduction of a max bet on online slots to £2. They are simply not comparable and your point makes no sense in the context of this thread.

Do you think if the government tomorrow outlawed all drinks over 3% alcohol that people wouldn't find a way to get booze with higher content?

Saying it isnt prohibition may be technically right, but that's obviously not how it would work in reality.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

But we are not talking about prohibition or outlawing gambling. Simply the possible reduction of a max bet on online slots to £2. They are simply not comparable and your point makes no sense in the context of this thread.

WE DIDN'T REGULATE THE DINOSAURS AND THINGS TOOK CARE OF THEMSELVES IN THE END.

(Just trying to predict trance's next line of argument on this one....)

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Do you think if the government tomorrow outlawed all drinks over 3% alcohol that people wouldn't find a way to get booze with higher content?

Saying it isnt prohibition may be technically right, but that's obviously not how it would work in reality.

But the government isn't proposing doing that and never has done, and you're making an absurd false equivalence there.

You're flailing about desperately on this one trancemonkey.

 

[Slottery]

More and more countries getting regulated, there's ongoing learning/trying how much and what you can regulate or ban until significant flaw of players to unlicensed offshore sites, in taxes is learnt (or at least very common opinion and use in practice) to be under 20% of GGR like it pretty much every where in Europes regulated markets is.

With these regulations you can as a country buy yourself good reputation by taking care about problem gamblers but still happily provide licenses and happily take part of it in taxes and have your problem gamblers. Don't see that with MGA license only you can offer online gaming in Europe after 10 years in too many countries, just don't make sense for countries take their piece from money also and not only problems.

 

[steveh35]

Well that's handy, because no one's talking about prohibition, just regulation.

You know, like we do for alcohol, tobacco, drugs, and damn near everything else.

Why should gambling get a free pass? I mean, let's be brutally honest with ourselves here, gambling doesn't exactly make the world a better place now, does it?

Good grief Chopley is soooo square and goodie goodie, I can't imagine what you must be like to be around we must regulate everything because people can't be trusted. Lighten up Chopley try and enjoy life not fight it all the time.

 

[Nicola]

Why should gambling get a free pass? I mean, let's be brutally honest with ourselves here, gambling doesn't exactly make the world a better place now, does it?

Says the player who turned into the Bandit after one session on Millionaire Mystery Box

 

[Kroffe]

And you heathens of the old smoking world should be carted off back to The Dark Age

For those confused.

Old smoke-world.



New smoke-world.



Vape-world.




licorice Pipe-world. (best&tastiest world)

 

[dionysus]

Well that's handy, because no one's talking about prohibition, just regulation.

You know, like we do for alcohol, tobacco, drugs, and damn near everything else.

Why should gambling get a free pass? I mean, let's be brutally honest with ourselves here, gambling doesn't exactly make the world a better place now, does it?

but he advocates regulation; it's just back a bit >

re -
stakes should of course be restricted and affordablity checks should play a part in this, but a flat £2 max will cause horrendous problems

trance didnt say give them a free pass he's saying a flat 2 bucks isn't resonable nor feasible; I dont think it is neither nor would I think you.
Not a day ago a player pointed out you yourself bet over 5 bucks

 

[trancemonkey]

But the government isn't proposing doing that and never has done, and you're making an absurd false equivalence there.

You're flailing about desperately on this one trancemonkey.

I think you'll find my example to be perfectly inline with that the APPG is proposing. I know you love a good argument and can't see the logic, but I think you'll find you are just using a word salad to try and deflect from the fact that you know I'm right.

If they reduce the stakes too much, it WILL likely force people on to the black market. How do I know this? Well, Greece is one of my markets and is full of illegal gambling venues for exactly the reason you say wont cause it.

So, is my argument still a strawman even though I know exactly what I'm talking about?

 

[steveh35]

I think you'll find my example to be perfectly inline with that the APPG is proposing. I know you love a good argument and can't see the logic, but I think you'll find you are just using a word salad to try and deflect from the fact that you know I'm right.

If they reduce the stakes too much, it WILL likely force people on to the black market. How do I know this? Well, Greece is one of my markets and is full of illegal gambling venues for exactly the reason you say wont cause it.

So, is my argument still a strawman even though I know exactly what I'm talking about?

Australia is the best example too much regulation.

 

[dealer wins]

Well that's handy, because no one's talking about prohibition, just regulation.

You know, like we do for alcohol, tobacco, drugs, and damn near everything else.

Why should gambling get a free pass? I mean, let's be brutally honest with ourselves here, gambling doesn't exactly make the world a better place now, does it?

Well it makes my life better. I really enjoy a night at the casino, win or lose. And I used to enjoy playing online too before all this new SOW bullshit.

Still I get to play when I go on holidays/cruises, and without any SOW, stupid max bets, cashout issues etc

 

[mack341]

There was nothing on tv so I started to read this 'interim' report and have got halfway through, up to the case studies section.

Aside from the £2 limit there are some other interesting points/observations to takeaway:-

We support the proposals for a Gambling Ombudsman to deal with customer complaints and to provide an effective arbitration mechanism for claims against online gambling companies ....[so is this to replace the adr's, have they been failing to get the job done adequately?]

Given the breadth of data at their disposal, banks could also better assist operators in carrying out affordability checks through open banking. [sounds like a good idea]

A third-party software platform that creates a profile for a user which is used to sign on to every gambling site. The SSO platform would verify the user’s identity and enable the user to set mandatory deposit limits that would apply across all operators. These limits could be informed by affordability checks using services such as Experian. [ditto]

There should be increased protection against accessing unregulated gambling sites by enacting internet service provider and financial transaction blocking to unlicensed operators.

The amount of money taken from gamblers online increased from £1.2bn in 2007 to £5.6bn in 2018, with almost all of that increase coming from gambling through smart phone apps [ something to think about..if this functionality wasn't available how much harm could be removed in one go?]

Betting before and during sports matches is now common among younger gamblers with revenue from sports betting now outstripping that from online poker or slot games.

Money laundering regulations require checks if an individual gambles more than £1500 a day in online and offline casinos.
In the land-based sector, this is enabled by staff monitoring, table limits, and random checks by the Gambling Commission. In the remote sector, checks tend to be retrospective rather than preventative, and on the occasions they do take place, it can be when a gambler is attempting to withdraw money after a win.

Furthermore, the ease of deposit and the electronic nature of money spent, as well as the slowness of withdrawals, the ability to reverse withdrawal and targeting of gamblers with offers when they win to encourage further play, all have the potential of creating a harmful gambling environment.

-----------------
I can't see anything about streamers promoting slots in an unrealistic fashion, as a kind of lifestyle/occupation bashing away everyday and broadcasting it to the nation via twitch or youtube, rather than just an entertainment treat ala dunover and chopley etc..

I think this should be on their radar, slot videos should be funded realistically by the player, otherwise they're effectively a casino employee /contractor promoting irresponsible gambling, by the stake sizes and time spent, which obviously would not be permissible.

There are a lot of suggestions of proactive measures, high levels of kyc and harm prevention, which in a fast moving online/remote environment, I'm not sure is feasible/achievable without making gambling such a PITA no one will want to bother eventually. As a customer you want a seamless experience as much as possible, so the more all these checks/protective measures can be automated and done in the background the better in my book.

 

[goatwack]

There was nothing on tv so I started to read this 'interim' report and have got halfway through, up to the case studies section.

Aside from the £2 limit there are some other interesting points/observations to takeaway:-

We support the proposals for a Gambling Ombudsman to deal with customer complaints and to provide an effective arbitration mechanism for claims against online gambling companies ....[so is this to replace the adr's, have they been failing to get the job done adequately?]

Given the breadth of data at their disposal, banks could also better assist operators in carrying out affordability checks through open banking. [sounds like a good idea]

A third-party software platform that creates a profile for a user which is used to sign on to every gambling site. The SSO platform would verify the user’s identity and enable the user to set mandatory deposit limits that would apply across all operators. These limits could be informed by affordability checks using services such as Experian. [ditto]

There should be increased protection against accessing unregulated gambling sites by enacting internet service provider and financial transaction blocking to unlicensed operators.

The amount of money taken from gamblers online increased from £1.2bn in 2007 to £5.6bn in 2018, with almost all of that increase coming from gambling through smart phone apps [ something to think about..if this functionality wasn't available how much harm could be removed in one go?]

Betting before and during sports matches is now common among younger gamblers with revenue from sports betting now outstripping that from online poker or slot games.

Money laundering regulations require checks if an individual gambles more than £1500 a day in online and offline casinos.
In the land-based sector, this is enabled by staff monitoring, table limits, and random checks by the Gambling Commission. In the remote sector, checks tend to be retrospective rather than preventative, and on the occasions they do take place, it can be when a gambler is attempting to withdraw money after a win.

Furthermore, the ease of deposit and the electronic nature of money spent, as well as the slowness of withdrawals, the ability to reverse withdrawal and targeting of gamblers with offers when they win to encourage further play, all have the potential of creating a harmful gambling environment.

-----------------
I can't see anything about streamers promoting slots in an unrealistic fashion, as a kind of lifestyle/occupation bashing away everyday and broadcasting it to the nation via twitch or youtube, rather than just an entertainment treat ala dunover and chopley etc..

I think this should be on their radar, slot videos should be funded realistically by the player, otherwise they're effectively a casino employee /contractor promoting irresponsible gambling, by the stake sizes and time spent, which obviously would not be permissible.

There are a lot of suggestions of proactive measures, high levels of kyc and harm prevention, which in a fast moving online/remote environment, I'm not sure is feasible/achievable without making gambling such a PITA no one will want to bother eventually. As a customer you want a seamless experience as much as possible, so the more all these checks/protective measures can be automated and done in the background the better in my book.

Funny how you mentioned there's nothing on TV, I quite fancied a read too

 

[Playford7]

But the government isn't proposing doing that and never has done, and you're making an absurd false equivalence there.

You're flailing about desperately on this one trancemonkey.

Totally agree the usual insane comparisons come about when anything gambling related is mentioned.
Drugs and alcohol are totally different animals all together compared to gambling, to attempt to correlate them is just clutching at straws to attempt to build a defence.
For the record I’ve never classed gambling as a addiction, thought it as more of a personal choice.
Regulation in the way of £2 limits helps people whom make a choice to gamble way beyond the way there finances dictate.
It’s needed this kind of regulation for years.
Many vested interests about so wouldn’t count on a balanced discussion.

 

[Smithyy]

Would a solution (although still one that I think is taking far too much free will away from people) be to simply have an affordability check upon signing up, and establish a maximum stake per player that they can't go over on their account? Wouldn't this be at least SOME way of a 'meet in the middle' agreement? Of course, it would be ridiculous and hard to implement, just like the SOW checks we currently have, but just an idea.

 

[Lemon]

Would a solution (although still one that I think is taking far too much free will away from people) be to simply have an affordability check upon signing up, and establish a maximum stake per player that they can't go over on their account? Wouldn't this be at least SOME way of a 'meet in the middle' agreement? Of course, it would be ridiculous and hard to implement, just like the SOW checks we currently have, but just an idea.

This is a good suggestion. Forcing the player to set their limits on a new site before they can deposit or gamble is a good way of making them aware of how much money they are comfortable spending in order to make gambling more of an enjoyable past-time and reinforcing the message that gambling is just a means of buying entertainment. This along with affordability checks should mean that the player is free to spend their money how they like within those predefined limits. If they want to do 500 spins on autoplay, play 4 slots at once or use a turbo play or feature buy option, they should be able to, again within the limits that they themselves have consciously set and know they need to adhere to. The UKGCC should be enabling people to limit how much money they can spend, not how they go on and spend it.

As an aside, I really hate the sensational way the press trot out these figures - £5.8 BILLION LOST on GAMBLING! - most of that is spent within players' means and/or as part of an enjoyable night out, because, for a lot of people, gambling is a form of entertainment that they enjoy. You don't see headlines of how holidaymakers lost £33 million on ice-cream and suntan lotion over an August Bank Holiday scorching hot weekend. The Government and UKGCC regard anyone who gambles as a failed human being and an addict who needs saving from themselves, when that's simply not the case.

 

[allang84]

Do you think that the UKGC will start to clamp down on gambling affiliation too?

 

[Playford7]

Would a solution (although still one that I think is taking far too much free will away from people) be to simply have an affordability check upon signing up, and establish a maximum stake per player that they can't go over on their account? Wouldn't this be at least SOME way of a 'meet in the middle' agreement? Of course, it would be ridiculous and hard to implement, just like the SOW checks we currently have, but just an idea.

Agree, but when a non player of slots sees a streamer playing £20 stakes with unlimited match bonus’s

Do you think that the UKGC will start to clamp down on gambling affiliation too?

we can live in hope. Certainly watching certain affiliates and the stakes they play at won’t of gone down well with the powers that be.

 

[nikantw]

Every country that regulates gambling has a report about how big illegal gambling is. Each and every time.

They often exaggerate on the numbers but it is one of the best established facts that people want to gamble and want to do it effortlessly and without much restrictions.

Isn't it also known that like 98% of the money in the world belong to 2% of the people?
What I want to say is that there is loads of people with enough money to do 50 euro bets and more.
As a government you need to let them and take your share from what they lose.

As for the little guys, don't you realize that all we have to keep us going in life is hope?
The hope of a 500x win on a 20 euro bet for example. Once in a year a DOA wildline will boost balance enough for a highrolling session of 5.00 or more. Just let us dream will you?

 

[goatwack]

Thing is when you start doing relatively 'silly' bets at e.g £50 per spin, on slots of all things (not even leisurely-paced adventures like Roulette, Baccarat etc) then you're not doing it to win or 'make more money'. What does one get the person that has everything

Which ultimately leads to it being a completely pointless exercise. They may as well play it in 'FUN' Mode if it's the barnstorming 'entertainment' they're seeking

 

[allang84]

I think the Uk has a huge gambling problem. Have any of u ever been in the chats of any of the streamers like nickslots, chipmonkzslots etc.?

Its full of people who openly admit they are gambling addicts.

The streamer The Bandit lost 60 grand in a video.

Regardless of wether these people can afford it or not when will this madness end?

 

[Kroffe]

I think the Uk has a huge gambling problem. Have any of u ever been in the chats of any of the streamers like nickslots, chipmonkzslots etc.?

Its full of people who openly admit they are gambling addicts.

The streamer The Bandit lost 60 grand in a video.

Regardless of wether these people can afford it or not when will this madness end?

Only 60k?
Must have been one of his low-stakes videos then.

He is like the poster boy for irresponsible gambling.
His videos where he chases tops on Reel king are nuts.
Often goes 10-30k deep, and just keeps depositing and making 20k all or nothing gambles.

 

[irish-ranger]

Only 60k?
Must have been one of his low-stakes videos then.

He is like the poster boy for irresponsible gambling.
His videos where he chases tops on Reel king are nuts.
Often goes 10-30k deep, and just keeps depositing and making 20k all or nothing gambles.

The fun him will come to a end deposits and losses like that are just not sustainable no matter how much money he has...