Rumour *Separated discussion* Board, Mick, Rogers, whiteanting, powerbrokers, competency or lack thereof

[MrsEddieBetts]

My nana has a court ordered no entry card. She can go to the bistro but not into the pokies.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

My nana has a court ordered no entry card. She can go to the bistro but not into the pokies.

I don't recall my local having anybody that stands at the door and checks a list or ID or anything, unless you look underage. Would certainly have trouble collecting if you did sneak by though.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

I don't recall my local having anybody that stands at the door and checks a list or ID or anything, unless you look underage. Would certainly have trouble collecting if you did sneak by though.

Yeah well trust me, they police it.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Yeah well trust me, they police it.

I have no doubt. Just wondering how it would work at my local. Last time I went there to have a quick tilt, nobody even looked at us. I only go once or twice a year though.

 

[GoBlues!]

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/on-a-winner-20120713-221gg.html

Its not just the AFL who rely on pokies or gamblers that are addicted to pokies.

The Kirner Labor government, worried about the $400 million flowing into NSW, decided to legalise the machines in the state in 1992, after much public debate. The consequences of that decision have been enormous - almost $38 billion has been lost on poker machines in Victoria in the past two decades. In 2010-11 alone the losses reached $2.65 billion.

At some venues, particularly those in Melbourne's poorer suburbs, punters now rack up losses of $21 million a year. So where has all that money gone? Who really wins from pokies?

A handful of major operators are the big winners. And their spoils are enormous.

The state is also a big winner. In 2012-13, the state government's tax on poker machines will account for more than 7 per cent of its taxation revenue, at $1.12 billion. It is forecast to raise nearly $4.8 billion over the next four years. Government addiction to that revenue stream has deepened since the early '90s. In the first year the government received $95 million in pokies tax, rising to $258.8 million the next year. By 1996-97 it was $589.4 million. A former top government finance figure said poker machine revenue made up about 3 per cent of the government's total budget and the only way it could be replaced was to increase the state's GST take by the same amount. He said the poker machine revenue was critical for state finances. ''If you didn't have it you would have to cut services by 3 per cent or go into debt.''

 

[thylacine60]

kowrecked

 

[TheKITC]

Going to weigh in here and probably post a fairly lengthy response...

I really applaud the clubs stance and alignment with the VRGF. Those who are saying that it is hypocritical to do this, in cutting our ties with sports betting agencies yet still derive much of our income from pokies venues are off the mark I feel. There is a considerable difference between having a responsible attitude to gambling than it is to be against it, or anti-gambling.

Let me say that I am a regular punter in terms of horse racing and very occasionally on sport. I for one hate the ads that are rammed down consumers throats, whether it be on television, on social media, billboard, apps etc. they have become way over the top, intrusive and ingrained in the sports themselves. The club has joined the chorus of organisations saying no to this and specifically said that it is trying to stop the gambling exposure to those under the age of 18. A reasonable and bold stance to take, but an easy and necessary decision given the morality of the situation. I applaud this, even as a punter. If I want to check the odds, as an adult who earns a wage that i'll do as I please with, i'll jump on the app and have a look. I think it's ******* wrong that little kids are exposed to odds and betting and that it has become a normality.

It's safe to say that I gamble. It's also safe to say that I have never gambled more than I could 'afford to lose' or put myself under any financial strain as a result of gambling. Others do and that is not a good thing, it's horrible. I have managed several gaming venues in my time and have seen it all; the ecstasy of a massive win, the little old lady betting 1c per spin and winning a 'fortune' of $150 to the horrible, gut wrenching scene of someone who has most likely just done their families last dollar.

There are problem gamblers out there, just as their are drug addicts, alcoholics, sex addicts etc. There are also people who love the social aspect of coming to a place where people know their name, where they get involved in a raffle, punters club or have a cheap meal and are willing to have a flutter and walk away if they have a loss; just like there are people who can have a few beers and have fun, or those that enjoy having an occassional root wherever they can.

I believe not to ban or admonish these venues and in the process kill community hubs, local pubs, sporting organisations (yes, CFC included) not to mention thousands of jobs, but instead that problem gamblers need adequate support, information and responsible gambling practices adhered to and resources available.

I've worked in venues where, until I was calling the shots (not trying to pump myself up or be a moral crusader here for the record) they have been completely irresponsible and downright disgraceful in their tactics and practices. The small things like lying to patrons about not having $100 notes (pokies don't take them) and giving out only dollar coins as change, to the insidious things like telling patrons that certain machines are about to be lucky when they are looking like leaving, taking an excessive amount of time to write out a winnings cheque so patrons will be tempted to play as they wait, letting people constantly withdraw money to gamble when they are clearly impaired by alcohol, letting customers use a work computer to transfer money to gamble.... Really I could go on.

However what I will continue on with is how good, moral and responsible gaming attendants and businesses can be run. Reminding and reassuring customers in distress that there are help services, distracting 'locked in' players with a coffee and a chat in an area away from the gaming floor, adhering strictly to RSA and RSG laws and self-exclusion policies, announcing and reminding customers of the time, having responsible and gambling help information readily available etc. etc.

Some of you on the total anti-pokies side it seems would be amazed at the amount a responsible attitude among staff and management at a gaming venue can have on problem gamblers, I've witnessed it first hand. I personally think this move is to be applauded, not had eyes rolled at.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

All this talk and no one has asked; 'What do the VRGF actually do?"

Good post TheKITC

Education, counselling, financial advice, youth work, research according to their web page.

I see that Carlton's agreement takes pride of place on their front page at the moment. We look at this as being a Carlton marketing ploy but have to remember agencies such as this actively canvass organisations to sign up as it promotes their cause. From that point of view, this is just as important for the VRGF as it is for us.

From their page:

Signing the charter means the club says no to sports betting sponsorships, has committed to ensuring its venues meet the highest possible standards and increasing player and membership education on gambling issues.

So, we are not promoting or supporting invasive sports betting, we are lifting the standards at our venues (and I look back at what TheKITC posted here) and we are committing to educating players and members.

I'd call that a damn good start and far more practical than holding off until we decided to end our association with pokies. Potentially help somebody now vs not appear hypocritical to some. Option 1 thanks.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I didn't see it as a marketing ploy but heard Trigg announce a willingness to change.

Baby steps, slowly becoming responsible corporate citizens.

If it was a marketing ploy then it may have been for the VRGF. Who knows...............they may have even approached the CFC?

Undoubtedly in my mind. This is what organisations like this do. They don't sit around waiting for people to contact them to get on board, they ask, they present, they convert.

Why do we assume that the CFC had an ulterior agenda when we really don't know any better?

Some of us have become pre-conditioned to not having a lot of trust in things. We are all at different levels. Not sure I'd be on board either were it not for those currently enforcing and driving change at the club. Would it be as convincing if it were Swann driving it for example?

 

[thylacine60]

racing......

 

[FootyGeek]

There are a small number of people who are addicted to football forums. They spend hours out of every day on the forum instead of spending that time with their significant other, their children, their friends or doing the work they are supposed to be doing. Marriages have been destroyed and families ripped apart, people have lost their jobs and become unemployed. Football forums are a blight on society.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

There are a small number of people who are addicted to football forums. They spend hours out of every day on the forum instead of spending that time with their significant other, their children, their friends or doing the work they are supposed to be doing. Marriages have been destroyed and families ripped apart, people have lost their jobs and become unemployed. Football forums are a blight on society.

Pfft, that's not me. I can stop anytime I want.

 

[thylacine60]

same

 

[thylacine60]

was the site just down for 20 seconds? anyone know? everything back up and running now? Chief?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

was the site just down for 20 seconds? anyone know? everything back up and running now? Chief?

Just breathe. Won't happen again until Carlton beat Richmond on Thursday night.

 

[thylacine60]

swear it

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

swear it

It won't ****ing happen again until Carlton beat ****ing Richmond on Thursday ****ing night.

 

[thylacine60]

better

 

[thylacine60]

more asterisks than a Windy Hill team sheet..........

 

[bluedabadee]

try saying asterisks 21 times quickly

 

[KnaveyBlue]

If the figures quoted by KnaveyBlue are correct, then there is no way the big money is made out of problem gamblers. Clubs (& there are thousands of them) couldn't possibly survive on the back of problem gamblers... I'd be interested to know the proportion of overall gambling revenue which comes from poker machines

70% of Aussies gamble in one way or another, raking in around $19b a year, $12b of that goes into pokies. And about $4.8b of that comes from problem gamblers, who apparently contribute $21k per year on average. (I find a lot of the data contradicts itself and varies significantly depending on which source you read from. I'm drawing from the govt's productivity commission figures and their gambling reference resource though.)

Long story short, you're right - the industry couldn't survive on the back of problem gamblers, they only make up about 40% of pokie revenue. But that's still a huge number to draw from such a small percentage of problem players.

In reality though, it's hard to make definitive case for or against pokies because the figures are so rubbery, what constitutes a "problem gambler" is subjective in itself, and the backgrounds of the players themselves would just be so varied. I imagine the big spenders, or "whales" as they're often known, would be dragging the average "spend" of the problem player higher than it is.

For example, imagine a club only gets 3 pokies players for the year (humour me).
Two of them are working class guys who put through $20k each for the year, while the third is a multi-millionaire who drops $960,000 across the year, but for him it's a drop in the ocean.
You'd have to assume all three would be classed as "problem" players. But suddenly you have a gambling crisis in the community because "problem players are spending $333,333 each on the pokies on average."
You really need a specific breakdown of who is playing, their net worth, and how much they spend to gauge the interest on the everyday player, and I'm just not sure how that could be attained.

Pokie haters needn't worry however - the old machines will be phased out in a few decades. Because there's a newer, lazier generation of gamblers coming through - and they're not gonna drive all the way to the pub to push buttons and gamble when they can sit at home do it with the click of a mouse. There'll be a whole new system for people rage against!

 

[JustaBattler]

'Whales' are most often money launderers - casinos are the world's best money laundering services. You bring a bag of cash or transfer 100 bags of cash into casino - you then withdraw X amount of cash via chips you pretend to play for a few days - enjoying the freebies of airfares/best rooms and other incentives - whilst you understand that you are going to 'lose' an acceptable percentage to the casino - in exchange for a clean balance.

Either way - your money has passed through the casino system and what is left of it is now legit.

There are no 'whales' who gamble significant large sums via pokies - they prefer to sit down and play the stupidest game ever invented - baccarat.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

the old machines will be phased out in a few decades. Because there's a newer, lazier generation of gamblers coming through - and they're not gonna drive all the way to the pub to push buttons and gamble when they can sit at home do it with the click of a mouse. There'll be a whole new system for people rage against!

This is a scary proposition. Tap a few buttons, enter a credit card number that stays on file and off you go. Online poker is big business and I see the pokies apps under the guise of harmless fun rising everywhere. It's not straight out money losses, you play free but can purchase money using real credit cards if you run out. It's the next best thing. The net is full of this stuff with all sorts of games having purchases built in if you want to progress.

 

[JustaBattler]

Poker is much more popular than pokies on line - and to think - all these people could be reading and posting on BF - wot a waste!!

 

[KnaveyBlue]

There are no 'whales' who gamble significant large sums via pokies - they prefer to sit down and play the stupidest game ever invented - baccarat.

I wasn't drawing a comparison between big-spending casino-goers and big-spending pokie players, there's no point as it's a whole different ball game. But there's still rich guys who sit and lose thousands a day on pokies. I know because I've seen it.

And I just googled Baccarat and am baffled!