Discussion on SEN: Pokie revenue

Joined
Feb 21, 2002
Posts
55,213
Likes
87,587
Location
Port Adelaide 5015
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Port Adelaide Magpies
Moderator #101
If you really want to knock yourself out, read the 810 page Australian Gambling Statistics 28th edition, 1984-5 to 2009-10 produced by the Queensland Government (released Dec 2012).

Of interest to SA is Table SA17 Real Gaming Turnover, which lists turnover of various gambling forms over this time frame. This comprises Casino; Gaming machines; instant lottery; Keno; lotteries; lotto; minor gaming; pools.

Of particular interest are the years 1993-4 and 1994-5.

In 1993-4 the gambling turnover in SA was $1.3 billion.

In 1994-5 the gambling turnover in SA was $3.2 billion.

The difference? In 1994-5 pokie machines were introduced in SA. These contributed a total turnover of $2.2 billion. So while some forms of gaming suffered a hit, overall gambling in SA increased 146%. In the first year poker machines were introduced, they accounted for 71.4% of gaming turnover in SA.

From this initial figure of $2.2 billion, pokie machine revenue in SA increased steadily to a peak $8.7 billion in 2006-07. This accounted for almost 90% of gambling turnover in SA.

The pokie machine and overall gaming figure declined since from 2006-07 to 2009-10, coinciding with the Global Financial Crisis. Pokie machine turnover still accounted for $7.7 billion, still 89% of gaming turnover.

Clearly it is a fallacy to say people who are into pokie gaming would find another gambling outlet for their addiction. Poker machines introduced a whole new stratum of gamblers to the gaming scene, and these machines are aimed to bleed you dry. There is a psychology to these machines, from intermittent positive reinforcement to combinations of lights, colours, sounds and images.

Government revenue from gaming (Table SA 26) is also interesting reading.

In 1994-5 revenue from gaming machines was $62.6 million, 'only' 40% of the total and less than Lotteries, Pools and Keno.

By 1997-8 the figure was $160.7 million, 62% of the total and more than twice the revenue of Lotteries, Pools and Keno.

In the peak year of 2006-07 the figure was $313.8 million or 74% of the total and over three and a half times the LPK figure.

By 2009-10 the figure had dropped to $282.7 million or 70% of the total and around three times the LPK figure.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Dalphonso

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Posts
3,716
Likes
1,855
Location
Alice Springs NT
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Territory Thunder,Waratahs FC
Quite a few people have condemned stockbrokers and financial planners for losing a fair chunk of their life savings without an ounce of remorse or any consequence for their actions.
I don't see Nick Xenephon and the likes jumping up and down to wipe out superannuation investments though.They too area gamble.Look how much money on paper people lost after the GFC. If they left it there it would just about be back up where it started but most panicked and pulled their money out.
 

Dobie G

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Posts
1,339
Likes
869
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I don't see Nick Xenephon and the likes jumping up and down to wipe out superannuation investments though.They too area gamble.Look how much money on paper people lost after the GFC. If they left it there it would just about be back up where it started but most panicked and pulled their money out.
The former government had legislation in place for greater consumer protection against investment advisors (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/investments-and-other-money-matters.1044830/) but Tony Abbott knocked it back- the big end of town rules, what else is new?
 

Killer Power

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Posts
7,235
Likes
10,366
Location
Dungeon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
What would you like to hear?

I for one agree that they can be a destructive force. Like alcohol, coffee, fast food and cigarettes are. I'm yet to see any of the anti pokie crowd make the leap from that to giving the government a moral mandate to ban their use by adults.
Just a skerrick of evidence to back up some of the claims made (not necessarily by you) such as; 99% of people can play pokies with no issues caused, if pokies didn't exist that money would fully transfer to other forms of gambling, that the nett benefit of the introduction of pokies has been a positive one for society as a whole....

The idea that people should self regulate to control addiction is a utopian one. And the industry sure as hell isn't going to regulate itself (look at the miniscule amount it puts in to assist those addicted to the very machines they promote). That leaves the government as the body that can help protect people from themselves, which whether people like it or not is a core responsibility; to make decisions for the betterment of its electorate as a whole.

The pokies are here to stay, i can't change that. In fact one of the great ironies of my situation is that I helped (in a small way) to make it what it is. In the early 90's straight out of Uni my first job was for a hospitality supply company with the rights to one of the first 2 brands of pokies to hit the SA market, the VLC. I sold hundreds of these over a couple of years and rode the wave of earning bonuses etc. It wasn't long before I began to see / hear evidence of the social impacts. I looked after all the pubs north of Gepps X and it was nothing unusual for me to turn up to my first venue of the morning before the doors had opened and see line ups waiting. Bars handing out numbers to patrons awaiting a machine to become vacant. Kids in their school uniforms in cars waiting for mum to come out to take them to school. Bar staff telling of people desperate to reserve a machine they had just pumped cash into so they could go hock something at Cash Converters convinced that machine was due to pay out, unscrupulous pub owners who would pay a staff member to sit and push cash through a machine because his data told him it was due to pay out soon......etc, etc.

The horse has bolted as far as not having them at all but a hell of a lot more can be done to limit the impact IF the will to do so exists. Would i like our club to be pokie free, you bet ya. Can they afford to be? Probably not.
 

Dobie G

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Posts
1,339
Likes
869
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Again. Nothing about what you quoted justified the above statement.
It seems hypocritical for pro pokies to want free choice and still be happy with government intervention with wages and consumer laws. Is that something you can understand or is it just me?
 

raman

Premium Platinum
Joined
Apr 8, 2005
Posts
22,057
Likes
62,191
Location
Enemy terriroty
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
It seems hypocritical for pro pokies to want free choice and still be happy with government intervention with wages and consumer laws.

Explain how that is hypocritical. Do you honestly believe there is no middle ground between the proverbial Nanny State and laissez-faire Anarcho-capitalism? If you do, I'd like to point out that we're already living in that middle ground. :confused:
 

Killer Power

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Posts
7,235
Likes
10,366
Location
Dungeon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I don't see Nick Xenephon and the likes jumping up and down to wipe out superannuation investments though.They too area gamble.Look how much money on paper people lost after the GFC. If they left it there it would just about be back up where it started but most panicked and pulled their money out.
Ridiculous. Again. In case you missed it there was a government response to the impact of the GFC on Super. Self managed super ring a bell at all? Provide some evidence that "most people panicked and pulled their money out".
 

Dobie G

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Posts
1,339
Likes
869
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Explain how that is hypocritical. Do you honestly believe there is no middle ground between the proverbial Nanny State and laissez-faire Anarcho-capitalism? If you do, I'd like to point out that we're already living in that middle ground. :confused:

Of course it’s hypocritical, free choice when it suits.

The argument goes people should have free choice with pokies.
Wage and consumer laws do not allow free choice for employers, employees, manufacturers and sellers of goods and services, the government has laws to protect perceived injustices.


2 questions now.

Question 1: If I make an app which crashes some the time and corrupts your phone so you have to buy a new one, is that your bad luck for buying it?

Question 2: If I make a pokie machine that is programmed to always take your money and causes a family breakup, is that is that your bad luck for playing it?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

raman

Premium Platinum
Joined
Apr 8, 2005
Posts
22,057
Likes
62,191
Location
Enemy terriroty
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Of course it’s hypocritical, free choice when it suits.
Again, you're being deliberately simplistic in order to make what you seem to have deluded yourself into believing is a point. And you fail to acknowledge the point that of course there is a middle ground which must obviously exist because we live in it every day.

The argument goes people should have free choice with pokies.
Wage and consumer laws do not allow free choice for employers, employees, manufacturers and sellers of goods and services, the government has laws to protect perceived injustices.
I'm going to tell you for the third or possibly fourth time, that I'm in favour of government regulation, I just want that regulation to be sensible, and to be in the service of individual liberty rather than against it.

Question 1: If I make an app which crashes some the time and corrupts your phone so you have to buy a new one, is that your bad luck for buying it?
Is that what the app is designed to do, and was it written in the description?

Question 2: If I make a pokie machine that is programmed to always take your money and causes a family breakup, is that is that your bad luck for playing it?

Is that what the machine was designed to do, and is that information freely available?
 

raman

Premium Platinum
Joined
Apr 8, 2005
Posts
22,057
Likes
62,191
Location
Enemy terriroty
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Just a skerrick of evidence to back up some of the claims made (not necessarily by you) such as; 99% of people can play pokies with no issues caused, if pokies didn't exist that money would fully transfer to other forms of gambling, that the nett benefit of the introduction of pokies has been a positive one for society as a whole....

Yeah, I for one haven't made any of those claims, and they don't interest me in the slightest.
 

bomberclifford

Importer/Exporter
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Posts
21,117
Likes
55,766
Location
Cerebral Cortex
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Port Adelaide Magpies
Of course it’s hypocritical, free choice when it suits.

The argument goes people should have free choice with pokies.
Wage and consumer laws do not allow free choice for employers, employees, manufacturers and sellers of goods and services, the government has laws to protect perceived injustices.
So you are for total government control of everything? Is that what you are saying?
If not, doesn't that make you a hypocrite?
We can all play the false dichotomy game.


2 questions now.

Question 1: If I make an app which crashes some the time and corrupts your phone so you have to buy a new one, is that your bad luck for buying it?

Question 2: If I make a pokie machine that is programmed to always take your money and causes a family breakup, is that is that your bad luck for playing it?


Look, I'm not even for Pokies but this is just ridiculous.

If the machines were somehow faulty, and inadvertently accessed bank accounts without the players' consent or knowledge then your two questions might make more sense.

Besides, even if the machine is programmed to "always take your money", it is the players' continued choice to play when their finances are exhausted, that causes the family breakup, not the machine. The machine is working exactly as intended; provide a simple form of gambling 'entertainment' and occasionally pay out some wins.
 

Dobie G

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Posts
1,339
Likes
869
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Dobie G said:
Of course it’s hypocritical, free choice when it suits.

The argument goes people should have free choice with pokies.
Wage and consumer laws do not allow free choice for employers, employees, manufacturers and sellers of goods and services, the government has laws to protect perceived injustices.​
So you are for total government control of everything? Is that what you are saying?
If not, doesn't that make you a hypocrite?
We can all play the false dichotomy game.


No, not total govt control, it needs to be balanced as people need protection in certain circumstances.

It makes the pro pokies people hypocrites when they advocate "free choice" as their main argument for pokies, I said when it suits them.
Not everyone can make rational free choices and that's where the government needs to step in because there's always people who take advantage of the less fortunate, the pokies are a case in point.
Dobie G said:
2 questions now.

Question 1: If I make an app which crashes some the time and corrupts your phone so you have to buy a new one, is that your bad luck for buying it?

Question 2: If I make a pokie machine that is programmed to always take your money and causes a family breakup, is that is that your bad luck for playing it?​


Look, I'm not even for Pokies but this is just ridiculous.

If the machines were somehow faulty, and inadvertently accessed bank accounts without the players' consent or knowledge then your two questions might make more sense.

Besides, even if the machine is programmed to "always take your money", it is the players' continued choice to play when their finances are exhausted, that causes the family breakup, not the machine. The machine is working exactly as intended; provide a simple form of gambling 'entertainment' and occasionally pay out some wins.

Calling a 'family breakup" as being a simple form of gambling entertainment is insensitive and cruel.
If you can, have a read through some of previous posts in this thread and "working exactly as intended" is exactly the problem which needs to be addressed.
 

raman

Premium Platinum
Joined
Apr 8, 2005
Posts
22,057
Likes
62,191
Location
Enemy terriroty
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
No, not total govt control, it needs to be balanced as people need protection in certain circumstances.
I'm glad to see the concept of nuance isn't entirely alien to you. Perhaps we can move forward and recognise that the disagreement is over the "certain circumstances" and not your absurd false duality.

Calling a 'family breakup" as being a simple form of gambling entertainment is insensitive and cruel.

Yeah, he didn't do that at all.
 

Dobie G

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Posts
1,339
Likes
869
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Quote
Besides, even if the machine is programmed to "always take your money", it is the players' continued choice to play when their finances are exhausted, that causes the family breakup, not the machine. The machine is working exactly as intended; provide a simple form of gambling 'entertainment' and occasionally pay out some wins.
End of Quote

Pretty clear "family breakups" are seen as part of the gambling entertainment
 

raman

Premium Platinum
Joined
Apr 8, 2005
Posts
22,057
Likes
62,191
Location
Enemy terriroty
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Quote
Besides, even if the machine is programmed to "always take your money", it is the players' continued choice to play when their finances are exhausted, that causes the family breakup, not the machine. The machine is working exactly as intended; provide a simple form of gambling 'entertainment' and occasionally pay out some wins.
End of Quote

Pretty clear "family breakups" are seen as part of the gambling entertainment

Serious question: how did you used to go with comprehension exercises in school?
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2002
Posts
55,213
Likes
87,587
Location
Port Adelaide 5015
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Port Adelaide Magpies
Moderator #120
Besides, even if the machine is programmed to "always take your money", it is the players' continued choice to play when their finances are exhausted, that causes the family breakup, not the machine. The machine is working exactly as intended; provide a simple form of gambling 'entertainment' and occasionally pay out some wins.
The machine is working exactly as intended; to take as much of your money as it can while keeping you hooked. There is no sugar-coating here to make these devices sound innocuous.Their purpose is to make you spend as much money as possible.

As cited earlier, a Productivity Commission report estimated that 40% of the money that is lost on the pokies comes from people with a serious gambling problem, and another 20% from those with a moderate or developing problem. These people are either addicted or on the way. They often have a co-morbid mental health problem which makes them more vulnerable. Are these people making a rational choice? The whole psychology of these machines and the environments gaming houses create is designed to keep you at the machine and take your money.

The machine is contributing to family breakup because it is a tool to prey on people's vulnerabilities in what seems a harmless way but is far from it. Look at the gambling figures I cited earlier to see how quickly and how widely these machines took hold in SA. And the government reliance on them for revenue means they are here to stay.
 

raman

Premium Platinum
Joined
Apr 8, 2005
Posts
22,057
Likes
62,191
Location
Enemy terriroty
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Family break ups aren't seen as part of the entertainment of gambling - that is an extreme position.
An extreme position that no one has taken btw, except perhaps in Dobie's feverish imagination.

They are however viewed as acceptable collateral damage. Brutal economic rationalism.
I'm as moved as anyone by the personal tale that KP related, but when I read it I don't see pokies as the bad guy, and I certainly don't see this magical catch-all scapegoat spectre that we call addiction as the bad guy. I see his ex wife as the bad guy.
 

bomberclifford

Importer/Exporter
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Posts
21,117
Likes
55,766
Location
Cerebral Cortex
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Port Adelaide Magpies
Quote
Besides, even if the machine is programmed to "always take your money", it is the players' continued choice to play when their finances are exhausted, that causes the family breakup, not the machine. The machine is working exactly as intended; provide a simple form of gambling 'entertainment' and occasionally pay out some wins.
End of Quote

Pretty clear "family breakups" are seen as part of the gambling entertainment

You, my friend, are insane if that's what you thought I meant.
 
Top Bottom