The evidence out there suggests that pokies remain the most dangerous vice in terms of ruining themselves. The proliferation of sports betting in particular amongst younger people, utilising modern technology does mean problem gambling prevalence in that space is growing substantially as well. I'd be suprised if there is anyone on here that is 'anti-pokie', that isn't also supportive of appropriate harm minimisation arrangements for other forms of gambling too.
20 year Pokies licenses for 5 AFL Clubs
- Thread starter Max zero
- Start date
- Tagged users None
The evidence out there suggests that pokies remain the most dangerous vice in terms of ruining themselves. The proliferation of sports betting in particular amongst younger people, utilising modern technology does mean problem gambling prevalence in that space is growing substantially as well. I'd be suprised if there is anyone on here that is 'anti-pokie', that isn't also supportive of appropriate harm minimisation arrangements for other forms of gambling too.
There's a HUGE amount of people who casually gamble a handful of times a year, people who constantly gamble all their savings and cannot stop are actually the extremely small minority.
I've seen the stats before but can't find it, different sources say somewhere between 5% and 0.5% of gamblers depending on how you define terms.
Fair enough. Just don’t think it has anything to do with pokies really. If pokies machines were all exactly the same bland colour with no music, do you think this would turn people away from them?
Short answer, I'd argue yes. Long answer - hard to tell, as its not something easily proven or disproven by experiment. It is certainly part of the attraction - hearing first hand evidence the steps taken in developing and programming pokies, its all part of the 'bait' for want of a better term, that is designed to enhance addictive behaviour.
I've always wondered what would happen if pokies were made to be truly reflective of what they are at the core - a random number generator. What I mean by that is, they were made for instance black and white, with a random number generator on the screen, which simply shows a completely random number, and spits out a random number of coins (or in many cases none at all). At the heart, that is all a poker machine is. The rest is just the bells and whistles.
I'd fathom a guess what would happen in such a case, but who knows. A large part of the allure of pokies, beyond the lure of winning cash of course, seems to be the 'entertainment factor'. I've never really understood that to be honest as I find them as boring as batshit, but each to their own in that sense.
I would argue while in the same 'vein' of thinking, that's not really the same Kappa. At the end of the day you don't smoke the packaging cigarettes comes in do you? It has been a long time now since packaging of cigarettes truly had strong 'commercial' value as part of the product, or been part of the allure.
Whereas the 'bells and whistles' of poker machines are fundamentally part of the consumed product - its a significant part of the 'allure' of playing pokies for those that play them. Change that and I postulate that you would see a fundamental change to behaviour associated with them, as you remove to a large degree what gives the 'kick' associated with them.
Plain packaging for cigarettes doesn't fundamentally change the kick or the nature of the actual product consumed. Hence why it hasn't conclusively been proven to be an effective public health strategy, with mixed evidence at best.
Think of it this was- if you were told the only way to 'watch' footy was to be put in a black box, and then you were simply told what the score was and that was it, would that change at all the allure of it?
After all, all that matters at the end of the day is the end product, who wins and loses. Its simply a results based game. The rest is just 'entertainment' on top, no different to a poker machines 'bells and whistles'. The only difference (and the proliferation of sports betting is arguably changing this) is that for most, there is no money on the line with a footy game. But the same principle arguably applies.
Reckon it’s more to do with boredom or escaping something in their lives than entertainment.
Dave
Premium Platinum
Essendon Player Sponsor 2024 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin
Veteran
Essendon Player Sponsor 2023 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin
10k Posts
Essendon Player Sponsor 2022 - Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti and Archie Perkins
Podcaster
Sensible Type
Essendon Player Sponsor 2021 - Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti and Archie Perkins
Where does that money come from. If the clubs currently making a profit from pokies stop contributing to the equalisation fund stop doing so will it be capable of providing handouts to all who need them?
Personally I'd prefer my club to not rely on them, and they are working on getting out of the business, but talk is cheap. At the same time they have to be able to replace the lost revenue otherwise I suspect they might be in breach of their duty as directors.
Not an easy situation, would have been better had they never been legalised IMO.
shintemaster
Brownlow Medallist
Personally I think pokies (and gambling in general being smeared across sport left, right and centre) is very disappointing. Given the majority of clubs (in Victoria at least) are essentially enjoying not for profit status and the tax benefits to go with these along with very healthy Government support for facilities etc I’d like to see this kind revenue stream for clubs wound back completely. If clubs want to act as profit enterprises in this manner they can give up their tax free status and stop putting their hands out for “community facilities” and upgrades from the Government. This is already double dipping as the Victorian Government is making huge revenue off the same pokies / gambling addictions.
The data doesn't back that up though, it is just your opinion. Pokies dwarf all other forms of gambling in trends of losses.
The HILDA survey is a great source of information.
I know this is spend rather than loss but on average electronic machine rank fourth behind poker, casino and racing in terms of average spend per punter.
https://aifs.gov.au/agrc/publications/gambling-activity-australia
The survey noted no significant difference in at risk or problem gamblers between electronic machines, horse racing and sports betting.
Private, casino tabletop and poker players had the highest rate of problem gambling.
https://aifs.gov.au/agrc/publicatio...stralia/4-gambling-problems-and-participation
While electronic machine gambling is the biggest loser, the survey separates horse racing and sports betting. If you combine those two, they are well in front of electronic machines in terms of expenditure
https://aifs.gov.au/agrc/publicatio...australia/5-gambling-problems-and-expenditure
Problem gamblers spending on sports betting and racing is on average greater than problem gamblers spending on electronic machines (noting that there are socio economic variables in play here as well)
https://aifs.gov.au/agrc/publicatio...australia/5-gambling-problems-and-expenditure
So the data does back up the assertion that sports gambling is at least as bad as pokies. I'm not saying one is better or worse than the other. Just pointing out that hard data shows that the argument: pokies = bad, sports betting = OK is simply not true.
I'll leave with this quote from the analysis
Race betting, EGMs and particularly sports betting expenditure had a much stronger connection with risk.
Not at all. But if you think that young children should be subjected to that, well suffer the children as they say.
There is a reason that advertising of alcohol is restricted and smokes is banned. If you haven't worked that out with your false equivelance, who am I to argue.
When they are grown up, my kids can do as they please. However, I do not take my children to the football so they can be bombarded with sports betting advertising to feed a machine that doesn't give a flying * about anyone but their own bottom line.
- Feb 5, 2018
- 14,134
- 34,091
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Chicago Blackhawks Melb Renegades
One is accessible from your couch at home. Give it time.
They have already been in for 20 years in Tasmania, closer to 25. I left hospitality back in 2007, after working 10 years. I left because as a worker there is no money to be made, as your on minimum wage. To get back on topic, during my time, I worked at several gaming venues. Initially you would receive notification of people barring themselves from your venue, probably once a month. It then turned into once a week, where, as I was leaving the industry, it wasnt uncommon, for at least two notifications Dailey of people barring themselves. That’s a lot of photo graphs to remember. So to say it isn’t an issue, laughable. To say that it hasn’t had a negative impact is rather naive. From a social aspect, I think it’s right up there, with social media, smart phones ect, where it’s very anti social, as the users very rarely interact as you would by having a beer in the bar for example, where you are at least interacting with real people.
- Mar 28, 2018
- 10,491
- 8,454
- AFL Club
- GWS
The lure is complex. Frankly I'd be with the "people should deal with it" group except there's evidence that pokies exploit a fundamental flaw in how our brains work.
https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&...Vaw2IRkbblC0QFLE-P62wDx0Q&cshid=1540967731673
So clubs who don't have pokies are financially poorer? You could argue poor management there. It's available, it's legal, is it moral? Well that is up for debate. I think gambling is moral but there are aspects of it which aren't such as the promotion of gambling.
I don't like the pokies but people are responsible for themselves as much as modern society makes out they aren't this simply is not true. If footy clubs don't own then then someone else will. May as well be owned by organisations that do some good which football clubs do. Football clubs taking a moral stance against pokies will have zero impact.
Besides, pokies aren't 100% evil, a lot of do gooders on here love to jump on anything gambling related and get high on their own morals. A lot of the times the revenue goes towards really good things. Yes there are some people who can't help themselves and they let their habit bring problems to their lives. A lot of people using poker machines aren't having the time of their lives but some are elderly or lonely and it gives them a chance to get out of the house and do something which is not a bad thing. Football clubs owning or not owning pokies has no influence on that. These places will exist regardless and most people who attend are in control. Pokies do enable people to bring harm to their lives but they do a fair bit of good as well. There are a lot of community clubs out there like bowls and golf clubs which are pivotal to the community and provide people with a means to get out, socialise and enjoy life. A lot of the time these facilities are as good as they are, cheap as they are, as easy to maintain and exist because of pokies.
Next time you go into a venue with poker machines and wonder why the beer and food is cheap, the team has a bus, the greens are in excellent conditions and the clubhouse is so good then perhaps you should reconsider if you chose to enjoy these amenities if you are strongly against poker machines.
Yes things need to be done to prevent problem gambling but sporting clubs owning gaming venues isn't going to impact this. We could ban the pokies, make things an even greater nanny state and just keep removing things from society because some individuals can't control themselves and eventually nothing would exist.
Nothing wrong with a bit of a punt but if it's out of control then the individual needs to do something about it unless of course they don't care.
Alcohol can be bad, but I bet people who want the pokies banned would not want alcohol banned. Alcohol contributes to government revenue and sponsors sporting leagues which filters funds down to grass roots and promoting exercise through sport. I enjoy a drink, it doesn't cause problems for me but it's probably causes more harm than gambling. Fast food is bad, but I am sure McDonalds and KFC should not be banned. Fast food outlets sponsor and put a lot of money towards grass roots sports and sporting bodies which in turn do the same. Yet they also allow people to eat food which can ruin their health and effect or end their lives long term. What potentially harmful things can we eliminate next? Fast cars? Contact sport? The ocean?
I'm all for minimising the promotion of unhealthy habits but it's not as black and white as good and bad. What is bad is developing a society of people who do not take responsibility for their actions, have poor coping skills and struggle to solve life problems.
I don't like the pokies but people are responsible for themselves as much as modern society makes out they aren't this simply is not true. If footy clubs don't own then then someone else will. May as well be owned by organisations that do some good which football clubs do. Football clubs taking a moral stance against pokies will have zero impact.
Besides, pokies aren't 100% evil, a lot of do gooders on here love to jump on anything gambling related and get high on their own morals. A lot of the times the revenue goes towards really good things. Yes there are some people who can't help themselves and they let their habit bring problems to their lives. A lot of people using poker machines aren't having the time of their lives but some are elderly or lonely and it gives them a chance to get out of the house and do something which is not a bad thing. Football clubs owning or not owning pokies has no influence on that. These places will exist regardless and most people who attend are in control. Pokies do enable people to bring harm to their lives but they do a fair bit of good as well. There are a lot of community clubs out there like bowls and golf clubs which are pivotal to the community and provide people with a means to get out, socialise and enjoy life. A lot of the time these facilities are as good as they are, cheap as they are, as easy to maintain and exist because of pokies.
Next time you go into a venue with poker machines and wonder why the beer and food is cheap, the team has a bus, the greens are in excellent conditions and the clubhouse is so good then perhaps you should reconsider if you chose to enjoy these amenities if you are strongly against poker machines.
Yes things need to be done to prevent problem gambling but sporting clubs owning gaming venues isn't going to impact this. We could ban the pokies, make things an even greater nanny state and just keep removing things from society because some individuals can't control themselves and eventually nothing would exist.
Nothing wrong with a bit of a punt but if it's out of control then the individual needs to do something about it unless of course they don't care.
Alcohol can be bad, but I bet people who want the pokies banned would not want alcohol banned. Alcohol contributes to government revenue and sponsors sporting leagues which filters funds down to grass roots and promoting exercise through sport. I enjoy a drink, it doesn't cause problems for me but it's probably causes more harm than gambling. Fast food is bad, but I am sure McDonalds and KFC should not be banned. Fast food outlets sponsor and put a lot of money towards grass roots sports and sporting bodies which in turn do the same. Yet they also allow people to eat food which can ruin their health and effect or end their lives long term. What potentially harmful things can we eliminate next? Fast cars? Contact sport? The ocean?
I'm all for minimising the promotion of unhealthy habits but it's not as black and white as good and bad. What is bad is developing a society of people who do not take responsibility for their actions, have poor coping skills and struggle to solve life problems.
The reason is because in this word we have campaigners who think they have some divine right to tell others what to do. Insidious humans they are.
That's the reason, no other.
Don't take them to the football then. Problem solved.
People have to suffer other people's annoying brats all the time at the football.
Starting to think banning kids is a better idea than banning other things.
Yeah smartphones a game changer. Online bookmakers do have means whereby you can limit use, I think they need to be enforced more.
Pokies are also available online though. I've even seen folks in libraries using the computers to play online pokies. Sad. They ate probably there because they got kicked out of a licenced venue. Who knows.
My 20 year comment was more around sports betting as much as anything - on the basis of the way it has proliferated into society alongside the explosion of smart phones. There is a generation growing up now that will see sports betting as absolutely 'normal' behaviour - what I mean there is that it'll be part of the 'must do' thing when watching the footy, watching the cricket, whatever it is. While again while most will have reasonable amounts of control, there will always be people that are vulnerable along the way that will end up in the curb and pretty screwed up as a result.
The anonymity factor is in my opinion a key factor why pokies do some much harm to those that truly lose control, and its not dissimilar for online gambling/betting either.
The current mechanisms in place to try and help those that self identify as having problems are frankly laughable in the large majority of cases, and a result of a complete lack of true resolve from anyone involved (Governments, operators etc) to recognise the substantive detrimental impact these products have on some people in society, significant change is not going to happen anytime soon. We saw how powerful the vested interests were with the Wilkie reforms (A fairly light handed change, that all in all would not have had a significant impact on a large majority of people), and the Tassie election last year.
I hold a similar view to some degree - when you know too much about how these machines are designed, how they are programmed to encourage addictive behaviour and to exploit potential flaws as your link suggests, then its hard to say leave it to the individual to deal with it. They are sophisticated machines designed to do every single thing possible to eek out every dollar from those that are vulnerable to their charms - with devastating effects. Of course do everything within reason to try and encourage better individual control, but if people are serious about treating problem gambling harm (and this applies more generally to just pokies), then it will need a strong interventionist approach.
Last edited:
The counter argument to that being, if the money put into pokies was instead spent in the broader economy, the benefits of the 'multiplier effect' would most may well comfortably far outweigh the lost benefits upfront. I.e. more money circling around the economy in more productive uses = higher employment, higher tax take in other spaces, more government funding available for things such as sporting facilities etc etc.... Pokies in and themselves are an 'easy fix' though for organisations and governments, so considering seriously the alternative approach is not on the agenda in most cases.
WA shows sports clubs and pubs can thrive in the absence of poker machine revenue. I don't think a tenable argument can be made that without pokies, it would all wither and die away.
It is however all at the end of the day a judgment call as to whether the harm done by having pokies so proliferate in our community is outweighed by the benefits to the community, or whether in another 'equilibrium' the same outcomes could be delivered without the need for that product delivering extremely bad outcomes for a small proportion of the population. There is no simple answer - and while Governments and operators are so tied to the teat with them, things are unlikely to change unless the general populous decides that enough is enough. And in that regard its a very split population.
And for the record, while I used to in my uni days go to clubs with mates a bit (mainly to watch overseas football in the days pre-easy net access/being able to afford Foxtel), I haven't set foot in one for the good part of 10 years now. Just not my thing, knowing just who is funding more than a fair proportion of that cheap shcnitty, or (not that cheap) beer or the footy team. But then again, the club industry in Canberra where I live in my honest opinion is right up there with the most insidious of all of them across Australia.
- Jun 19, 2006
- 10,059
- 18,487
- AFL Club
- Geelong
You really shouldn't just make up numbers to pretend your argument is reasonable. Over 15% of those who gamble on the pokies at least once a week are classified as problem gamblers. Around 40% of the money gambles on pokies is from problem gamblers. It's likely that this vastly understates the level of problem gambling as the prevelence of problem gamblers is measured by self-reporting tests where it's human nature is to understate the issues (there's a reason doctors double or triple a patient's claimed rate of drinking to get a reasonable result). Your claim that 99% of gamblers don't have problems is completely false.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-05-25/key-facts-gambling-in-australia/2730414
- Moderator
- #250
cats have a huge new function centre for one
Similar threads
