[michael21]

https://www.racingpost.com/news/ladb...-to-900/388783

Not a good time for betting shops

[Cal.]

HAHAHA hope the bitch who used to be my old boss and ripped me off LOSES her job

[michael21]

Paddy Power have said in the past they would not close any of their 320-strong retail estate as a result of the stake cut and reiterated that position on Thursday.Paddy Power have said in the past they would not close any of their 320-strong retail estate as a result of the stake cut and reiterated that position on Thursday.

[Mitchell]

Bye Ladbrokes xx

[Toy Soldier]

The issue that LadbrokesCorals has is that they specifically opened machine-oriented shops. There has always been a restriction of 4 machines per shop so in heavy traffic areas (for example, around transport hubs in cities) where there was ALREADY a shop, they were opening MORE shops (sometimes 4 or 5 within 2 mins walk of each other) that were specifically for rush-hour FOBT play and took next to nothing over the counter. The bulk of those shops are now worthless and will close, with one or at most two shops in a "cluster" staying open.

If anyone's interested as to why the losses are smaller than originally predicted:

It's because many people who were habitual "smaller stakes" Roulette players were successfully transitioned onto £2 slots in the 6 months prior to the stake restriction with targetted marketing and offers, and the really heavy "£100-a-spin" players were incentivised to bet OTC (over the counter) on Greyhounds and Horses (especially virtuals).

The biggest problem gamblers were monitored and targetted by name with specifically tailored packs. Toxic AF. Actually the final nail that made me determined to leave (and become a vocal critic of) the industry.

[michael21]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The issue that LadbrokesCorals has is that they specifically opened machine-oriented shops. There has always been a restriction of 4 machines per shop so in heavy traffic areas (for example, around transport hubs in cities) where there was ALREADY a shop, they were opening MORE shops (sometimes 4 or 5 within 2 mins walk of each other) that were specifically for rush-hour FOBT play and took next to nothing over the counter. The bulk of those shops are now worthless and will close, with one or at most two shops in a "cluster" staying open.

If anyone's interested as to why the losses are smaller than originally predicted:

It's because many people who were habitual "smaller stakes" Roulette players were successfully transitioned onto £2 slots in the 6 months prior to the stake restriction with targetted marketing and offers, and the really heavy "£100-a-spin" players were incentivised to bet OTC (over the counter) on Greyhounds and Horses (especially virtuals).

The biggest problem gamblers were monitored and targetted by name with specifically tailored packs. Toxic AF. Actually the final nail that made me determined to leave (and become a vocal critic of) the industry.

That a very interesting insight

Now they pay

[Kizzy]

How did bookies make money before fixed odds betting terminals? ... good close dome stores, no high St needs every other shop to be a bookies. I predict the move to restrict the stake will aid the economy as more people will have money to put into it not just funnel it into the pockets of the bookmakers.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

How did bookies make money before fixed odds betting terminals? ...

That was a time when old school race horsing was more popular and there was no online competition. Pretty much the same as the rest of the high street, which has died on its arse.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

That was a time when old school race horsing was more popular and there was no online competition. Pretty much the same as the rest of the high street, which has died on its arse.

All those closing stores also have online betting sites now that they didn't have in the days of old school horse racing.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

All those closing stores also have online betting sites now that they didn't have in the days of old school horse racing.

Yes, but they had the FOBT's keeping them going, which is now being targeted with the lower stakes. You asked how they kept going before those.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

How did bookies make money before fixed odds betting terminals? ... good close dome stores, no high St needs every other shop to be a bookies. I predict the move to restrict the stake will aid the economy as more people will have money to put into it not just funnel it into the pockets of the bookmakers.

There's enough racing and football trade to support a number of shops, and pretty much, there were far fewer shops. I'd say that the number of closures more or less reflects the number of shops that were opened purely for machines - although IMO it's being used as an excuse to cut other shops that were already dead weight. They'll use the FOBT limits to justify redundancies that are primarily for other reasons.

Ladbrokes and Corals as separate companies before they merged, had a policy of keeping open unprofitable shops in order to maintain brand loyalty and brand awareness. GVC (the offshore company that now own the merged LadbrokesCoral PLC) abandonned that policy and were planning to offload unprofitable shops anyway. I think the machines changes are, partly, a convenient excuse.

You're also right that the machines are still profit magnets in busy shops even at £2 stakes. Especially because slots have a much higher profit margin than roulette and blackjack. At the point I left I'd say everything had pretty much stabilised and the stakes changes resulted in approx a 1/3 drop in machines profit... My shop was still making £25k a month on FOBTs, easily, plus there was a fairly significant upswing on virtual horses and greyhounds (£100-a-spin roulette guys will bet £200 on a dog without breaking their stride) and also the Betstations (sports betting machines) are flying.

I'm not saying that any of this is a good thing. I say ban casino games and slots everywhere except actual physical casinos, and just flat out burn the rest of the industry. It's a juggernaut designed purely to make legitimate profit from addiction. There's no two ways about it. Internally they barely bother to even pretend otherwise any more.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

There's enough racing and football trade to support a number of shops, and pretty much, there were far fewer shops. I'd say that the number of closures more or less reflects the number of shops that were opened purely for machines - although IMO it's being used as an excuse to cut other shops that were already dead weight. They'll use the FOBT limits to justify redundancies that are primarily for other reasons.

Ladbrokes and Corals as separate companies before they merged, had a policy of keeping open unprofitable shops in order to maintain brand loyalty and brand awareness. GVC (the offshore company that now own the merged LadbrokesCoral PLC) abandonned that policy and were planning to offload unprofitable shops anyway. I think the machines changes are, partly, a convenient excuse.

You're also right that the machines are still profit magnets in busy shops even at £2 stakes. Especially because slots have a much higher profit margin than roulette and blackjack. At the point I left I'd say everything had pretty much stabilised and the stakes changes resulted in approx a 1/3 drop in machines profit... My shop was still making £25k a month on FOBTs, easily, plus there was a fairly significant upswing on virtual horses and greyhounds (£100-a-spin roulette guys will bet £200 on a dog without breaking their stride) and also the Betstations (sports betting machines) are flying.

I'm not saying that any of this is a good thing. I say ban casino games and slots everywhere except actual physical casinos, and just flat out burn the rest of the industry. It's a juggernaut designed purely to make legitimate profit from addiction. There's no two ways about it. Internally they barely bother to even pretend otherwise any more.

Great post TS, totally agree!

[Kizzy]

They had competition with other stores when there were only stores then other online sites when they came along... the fixed odds terminals are not going the stakes are just being lowered, they could effectively still take as much of pepoles money...it just might take a bit longer to lose every penny you earn

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

They had competition with other stores when there were only stores then other online sites when they came along... the fixed odds terminals are not going the stakes are just being lowered, they could effectively still take as much of pepoles money...it just might take a bit longer to lose every penny you earn

Not sure what you're getting at.

Basically, the industry took a hit when online gambling took off, but a lot of shops still retained a healthy customer base thanks to the FOBT terminals.

Now, the FOBT terminal rules/regulations have took a hit meaning they're losing a lot of their high staking customers so the shops that relied on those machines due to the virtually non-existent over the counter turnover are now facing closures. TS explained it succinctly in another thread.

The FOBT's could still effectively take as much money as they have done but, realistically, they're not going to. £2 max stake severely reduces the amount that can be won and they're going to lose the major players who used to put unspeakable amounts on one spin.

And a lot of shops are having the number of FOBT's in their shop reduced in an effort to cut costs which is going to affect business. In my area (which has a staggering 24 shops ) they've all cut down to 2 and 3 machines per shop instead of 4 in all of them and at least half of them will probably close in the next few years.

[Kizzy]

How hard is it to understand? I said that the high St can stand to lose these stores, they may have to take a financial hit as they cope with the reduced footfall in the stores but they'll still have the online presence they didn't have years ago, and the FOBTs are still in use.
Basically I'm saying if some of the stores have to close its a good thing, I'm a fan of regulation in this area. £100 on one spin? I don't feel that's responsible at all.

[Marsh.]

I understand perfectly. Chill.

You asked how betting shops survived before FOBT's - I answered.

You then suggested the FOBT's wouldn't really be affected as they aren't going and can still accept money - I offered a suggestion why that is not the case.

Then you suggested the lost custom will just transfer online (so the bookies still get the business) but a lot of those high staking customers will not go online for the reasons TS suggested (Not to mention the remaining "old school" customers who don't gamble online and still used the stores). It also opposes your idea that the FOBT loss will help the economy as they spend elsewhere, as if elsewhere is other forms of gambling it's just the same pit.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

I understand perfectly. Chill.

You asked how betting shops survived before FOBT's - I answered.

You then suggested the FOBT's wouldn't really be affected as they aren't going and can still accept money - I offered a suggestion why that is not the case.

Then you suggested the lost custom will just transfer online (so the bookies still get the business) but a lot of those high staking customers will not go online for the reasons TS suggested (Not to mention the remaining "old school" customers who don't gamble online and still used the stores). It also opposes your idea that the FOBT loss will help the economy as they spend elsewhere, as if elsewhere is other forms of gambling it's just the same pit.

Obviously not, I didn't say fobts wouldn't be affected... of course they'll be affected and the stores will be affected too. I didn't say the lost custom will be transferred online either, The fact these online services exist today was my point.
I still maintain that regulation of this kind will improve the economy, you may not and that's fine.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Obviously not, I didn't say fobts wouldn't be affected... of course they'll be affected and the stores will be affected too. I didn't say the lost custom will be transferred online either, The fact these online services exist today was my point.

Yes, they exist and can therefore pick up on the lost custom of the shops. I wasn't putting words in your mouth, I was connecting the two things you said to make the observation.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I still maintain that regulation of this kind will improve the economy, you may not and that's fine.

I never said it wouldn't.
I merely suggested, with the online options, those opting to not play at the £2 stake limit or be unable to due to a closure of their local shop wouldn't spend their money elsewhere if they transfer their custom online. It would still be going to the betting industry. Just another thought.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Yes, they exist and can therefore pick up on the lost custom of the shops. I wasn't putting words in your mouth, I was connecting the two things you said to make the observation.

They may or may not pick up the custom, my point was they will make a profit regardless...it may not be quite so obscene as before the £100 stake FOBTs.

I never said it wouldn't.
I merely suggested, with the online options, those opting to not play at the £2 stake limit or be unable to due to a closure of their local shop wouldn't spend their money elsewhere if they transfer their custom online. It would still be going to the betting industry. Just another thought.

This seems like a contradiction, you suggested FOBT high stake customers wouldn't use an online service?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

This seems like a contradiction, you suggested FOBT high stake customers wouldn't use an online service?

High stake FOBT customers are not all FOBT customers?

[michael21]

So just to sum up

Betting shops bad

Online betting good

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by michael21

So just to sum up

Betting shops bad

Online betting good

All betting bad and addictive .

The ONLY "healthy" gambling I've ever seen is "for interest" e.g. a little £5 football coupon for people who follow the results, or a REASONABLE bet on a sporting event that someone is going to be watching anyway like a football match or tennis game, or small novelty bets like politics / reality TV.

If there was a site that only offered those that would be great .

Betting where the primary motivation is the excitement of the bet itself is always bad. Always.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by michael21

So just to sum up

Betting shops bad

Online betting good

Nope, online betting is extremely bad tbh. The industry is ridiculous and even when proper wins happen they use ridiculous terms to not pay out; Betting 'in person; is of course, massively better in that regard. At least you know you will get your winnings, as its direct to your bloody hand.

Also from personal experience, online betting can get out of hand very quickly, the 'safeguards' in place do not work really, as when 'in the mood' someones not really going to purposely press a button that will exclude them for a day or whatever. I have gambled for as long as I can remember, even when a child I would look forward to the 2p pushy machines when I went to the coast, more than anything else. I have lost control 'in person' a hanful of times, but never ever spend as much as I have when lapsing online. I literally clear my bank account before I will stop, regardless of what was meant with that cash..then lend it from people to buy essentials for ****s sake. Its utterly ridiculous when writing it down..I know it is. But it still happens. And even though I have signed up to gamstop, the national exclusion database, casinos still let me sign up and deposit endlessly, BUT, when a withdrawal is requested after a win, they THEN suddenly realise I am on gamstop and use that to refuse to pay out. Its sick, and exploitative. And I know this, yet have an addiction so go back again and again, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, I know this yet still do it again and again, thinking maybe this time, they will pay out given they have allowed hundred of deposits and the withdrawal is for half of what I have put in. Yet nope, again and again. So gamstop, the thing most applauded as helping problem gamblers, is utter utter ****e in reality for helping people to stop. All it has done, is give casinos yet another reason to refuse to pay out...but also lets them take deposits endlessly...the gamstop registration is only ever noticed once a withdrawal is requested, time and time again. Its not a mistake, or an error, if its industry wide and over and over tbh.

Did not mean that to go into essays tbh.

[michael21]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Nope, online betting is extremely bad tbh. The industry is ridiculous and even when proper wins happen they use ridiculous terms to not pay out; Betting 'in person; is of course, massively better in that regard. At least you know you will get your winnings, as its direct to your bloody hand.

Also from personal experience, online betting can get out of hand very quickly, the 'safeguards' in place do not work really, as when 'in the mood' someones not really going to purposely press a button that will exclude them for a day or whatever. I have gambled for as long as I can remember, even when a child I would look forward to the 2p pushy machines when I went to the coast, more than anything else. I have lost control 'in person' a hanful of times, but never ever spend as much as I have when lapsing online. I literally clear my bank account before I will stop, regardless of what was meant with that cash..then lend it from people to buy essentials for ****s sake. Its utterly ridiculous when writing it down..I know it is. But it still happens. And even though I have signed up to gamstop, the national exclusion database, casinos still let me sign up and deposit endlessly, BUT, when a withdrawal is requested after a win, they THEN suddenly realise I am on gamstop and use that to refuse to pay out. Its sick, and exploitative. And I know this, yet have an addiction so go back again and again, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, I know this yet still do it again and again, thinking maybe this time, they will pay out given they have allowed hundred of deposits and the withdrawal is for half of what I have put in. Yet nope, again and again. So gamstop, the thing most applauded as helping problem gamblers, is utter utter ****e in reality for helping people to stop. All it has done, is give casinos yet another reason to refuse to pay out...but also lets them take deposits endlessly...the gamstop registration is only ever noticed once a withdrawal is requested, time and time again. Its not a mistake, or an error, if its industry wide and over and over tbh.

Did not mean that to go into essays tbh.

The way I see it is if there not paying you winnings then all bet you have places should be void and all money retrun to you or there can pay what you won there cant have it both ways

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by michael21

The way I see it is if there not paying you winnings then all bet you have places should be void and all money retrun to you or there can pay what you won there cant have it both ways

Exactly. Its one or the other. Can't be both.

If they were not paying winnings because..say..I had made multiple accounts to claim a bonus then of couse thats very different. But if they are not paying because they have suddenly realised I am meant to be excluded for problem gambling, then they should either pay out, or refund all deposits that have been made since the date I am meant to be excluded from, as they claim all bets are void from the date of exclusion when denying winnings...so surely, that means all bets are void. Which would mean all losing bets void from that date also.