Rumour Two current AFL stars have lost $1 million each on the punt

[Scotland]

Excellent post, and this section in particular is good. Imagine if every time somebody logged into their account, it told them how much they were up/down for the day/week/year/lifetime of account.

It really needs to track total deposits. I had an account once with $100 in it. Lost about half a dozen small bets and that balance was basically 0 and if that account is still open it will still be 0 today. I reckon a lot of people maintain an account balance with regular top ups but don't track that. So your sports betting account could have $20k in it but your Commbank account has doughnuts.

 

[Belnakor]

It won't make any difference. Gambling companies will still advertise except for during AFL games. Now I was talking about the AFL removing itself from association with Gambling, the government certainly will not do it.
And has smoking been reduced? They are saying the black market for selling smokes has tripled in the last 5 years. Been out lately? Plenty of people still smoke and its even more concerning just how many young women that smoke.

 

[Belnakor]

Excellent post, and this section in particular is good. Imagine if every time somebody logged into their account, it told them how much they were up/down for the day/week/year/lifetime of account.

great idea. I'm not a gambler by any stretch of the imagination but when i log on to through some money at the melbourne cup once a year i'm always staggered by how difficult it is to see your previous bets and history.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I am not disputing that, those are government figures based on what they know they sell. They do not take into account the black market on smokes. I don't have that many mates that smoke but the ones I do none of them buy smokes through legal channels, they all buy through the black market.
Anyway who really cares. My point still stands that if the AFL industry overnight said we are withdrawing all contact and sponsorships with gambling companies it would have zero impact on Gambling companies turnover.

 

[Toump Ass]

I can confirm that your confirmations mean nothing to me.

Of course they do. Why would would you respond otherwise?

Have a nap 6yearsold, you're tired and grumpy.

 

[Belnakor]

I am not disputing that, those are government figures based on what they know they sell. They do not take into account the black market on smokes. I don't have that many mates that smoke but the ones I do none of them buy smokes through legal channels, they all buy through the black market.
Anyway who really cares. My point still stands that if the AFL industry overnight said we are withdrawing all contact and sponsorships with gambling companies it would have zero impact on Gambling companies turnover.

the black market would not be taking up 50% of the market. The rate of smoking has dropped from 28% to 14% in the past 20 years.

It is demonstratively false that it would have no impact. if the gambling companies weren't making any money out of advertising they wouldn't be doing it. They aren't a charity.

AFL being in bed with the gambling agencies is distasteful and ironic considering how they want to get the moral highground on pretty much everything else. I think the fact the current CEO is a massive punter doesn't help.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

the black market would not be taking up 50% of the market. The rate of smoking has dropped from 28% to 14% in the past 20 years.

It is demonstratively false that it would have no impact. if the gambling companies weren't making any money out of advertising they wouldn't be doing it. They aren't a charity.

AFL being in bed with the gambling agencies is distasteful and ironic considering how they want to get the moral highground on pretty much everything else. I think the fact the current CEO is a massive punter doesn't help.

They would still advertise, just not through AFL games.

 

[JackOutback]

I think we’re arguing at cross purposes; the AFL refusing to accept advertising vs a government ban. The AFL acting alone wouldn’t be as effective as a government ban, no question, but it probably would have some effect.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I think we’re arguing at cross purposes; the AFL refusing to accept advertising vs a government ban. The AFL acting alone wouldn’t be as effective as a government ban, no question, but it probably would have some effect.

Agreed, Governments will never ban Gambling advertising I don't think.

 

[Cuzz09]

I heard somewhere that gambling addiction is right up there with smoking/drug addiction but the government make SOOOO much $$ from people gambling that you very rarely see big anti gambling campaigns.

You might see a few stickers/drink coasters at pubs or by ATMs etc but its in their interest to make sure people keep spending their hard earned.

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Belnakor]

I heard somewhere that gambling addiction is right up there with smoking/drug addiction but the government make SOOOO much $$ from people gambling that you very rarely see big anti gambling campaigns.

You might see a few stickers/drink coasters at pubs or by ATMs etc but its in their interest to make sure people keep spending their hard earned.

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

i think the main issue is the government is too gutless to go against the gambling industry. The industry has massive margins so they have the abiility to throw alot of money around. For example in Tasmania when the Labor government wanted to ban pokies they had a massive campaign run against them.

 

[JackOutback]

Agreed, Governments will never ban Gambling advertising I don't think.

They did it to smoking, not to alcohol. Personally, I’m happy to have all three perfectly legal but advertising banned. Advertising is inherently dishonest and is usually what takes a sin product and transform it from localised problem to social problem.

 

[Minka Beaver]

i think the main issue is the government is too gutless to go against the gambling industry. The industry has massive margins so they have the abiility to throw alot of money around. For example in Tasmania when the Labor government wanted to ban pokies they had a massive campaign run against them.

Is Australia still the nation with the largest gambling expenditure per head of population? That was certainly the case a few years ago. Governments love the gambling industry because it's an enormous revenue raiser. Licensing laws mean that it is highly lucrative indirect taxation.

The only way Federal and State governments will alter their stance on gambling (pokies, online, casinos, controlled totalisators etc). is when the costs to society outweigh the revenue gain.

 

[Belnakor]

Is Australia still the nation with the largest gambling expenditure per head of population? That was certainly the case a few years ago. Governments love the gambling industry because it's an enormous revenue raiser. Licensing laws mean that it is highly lucrative indirect taxation.

The only way Federal and State governments will alter their stance on gambling (pokies, online, casinos, controlled totalisators etc). is when the costs to society outweigh the revenue gain.

yes we are but there are a couple of things that make it a bit misleading in that poker machines are 50%+ of our spend on gambling, and we have a very high per capita and our income distribution is quite good which means our "poor" people are amongst the wealthiest in the world.

I think costs to society have outweighed the revenue for a long time, the government is too gutless to go after the industry. Pokies are the obvious one, which the WA government had the balls to block early (and hence WA's per capita of problem gamblers is way lower than anywhere else).

If we didn't have pokies we'd still be high but not the top.

 

[Chuckie357]

We live in a society.

You're gambling when you insure your car too

Hello Ned Flanders

 

[WD Roo]

Because it keeps 6 or 7 clubs afloat in a 10 team State.

And kept your club afloat from the profits the AFL makes and passes onto via COLA?

 

[Tedeski]

And kept your club afloat from the profits the AFL makes and passes onto via COLA?

No. By us moving to Sydney & for each & every owner that tried their hand running our club, a licence fee was paid to the AFL & distributed tp EVERY one of the other 11 Victorian clubs, thus keeping some more non viable clubs afloat, North being one of the. Now you can thank us for the huge TV rights dollars we are responsible for bringing into the competition.

Don't bight the hand that feeds you.

 

[Hairydawg]

I have a mate who’s a big gambler and for what it’s worth I think it’s a horrific addiction. There’s nothing like the gut-wrenching feeling of having lost the last month’s pay that you worked so hard for. And that happens to him all the time. Drinking is a bad addiction too, but it’s hard to spend all your money on it. With gambling you have a bookmaker in your pocket 24-7 now, and with two clicks you can lose it all.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Leather Poisoning]

I heard somewhere that gambling addiction is right up there with smoking/drug addiction but the government make SOOOO much $$ from people gambling that you very rarely see big anti gambling campaigns.

You might see a few stickers/drink coasters at pubs or by ATMs etc but its in their interest to make sure people keep spending their hard earned.

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

Sort of.

When you say 'up there with smoking/drug addiction' what do you mean? Affects as many people? Causes a similar level of damage?

Vic State Gov gets a ridiculous portion of their budget from pokies (from memory it was about 9% of the total VicGov revenue when I checked about 6 years ago - happy to be challenged on that). Considering every state department claims they're massively underfunded, taking a 9% haircut is going to receive a lot of push back. Yep, there is an ironic element of the government debt chasing.

The Vic government set up the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation. It is set up to serve the minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation. It's one of those interesting things where the minister that approves licenses for gaming venues also oversees the foundation that is designed to reduce the harm that those approved licenses contribute to. It makes sense, but also has an element of contradiction to it.

The gambling industry is so much more profitable than alcohol or tobacco. Like insurance, the thing they are selling is probability. The difference being that gambling addiction works on an individual psychology. It's an addiction to the feeling of anticipation more than it's an addiction to the feeling of winning.

Large anti-gambling campaigns do exist. Tim Costello, the World Vision guy ran a huge push called "don't let the pokies play you". The Southern Cross Station steps were covered in anti gambling advertising for a while - there have been efforts. But most of the big public health campaigns you've seen ( drink and drive bloody idiot, smoking shock ads) are from para-government bodies like TAC and VicHealth. The responsible gambling founding doesn't have anywhere near the same advertising budget as these guys and their message is "do it responsibly" rather than "this thing will * you up and wreck your family" like the other two campaigns mentioned.

 

[BlueE]

I am not disputing that, those are government figures based on what they know they sell. They do not take into account the black market on smokes. I don't have that many mates that smoke but the ones I do none of them buy smokes through legal channels, they all buy through the black market.
Anyway who really cares. My point still stands that if the AFL industry overnight said we are withdrawing all contact and sponsorships with gambling companies it would have zero impact on Gambling companies turnover.

No the Australian numbers are not from legal sales figures of cigarettes. They are based on government surveys on households where around 24,000 participants were chosen based on representative population, although doesn't include people who are homeless. The numbers are compared to similar surveys done since 1998, so the downward smoking trend is independent of where they source their cigarettes from.

I believe questions about gambling should be asked on surveys like this, which look at substances detrimental to an individuals health, to get a better understanding of the prevalence of gambling and whether it is a problem.

Prohibiting advertising of smoking and sponsorship of sports by tobacco companies were big factors, although not the only things in reducing the total number of smokers in Australia.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

No the Australian numbers are not from legal sales figures of cigarettes. They are based on government surveys on households where around 24,000 participants were chosen based on representative population, although doesn't include people who are homeless. The numbers are compared to similar surveys done since 1998, so the downward smoking trend is independent of where they source their cigarettes from.

I believe questions about gambling should be asked on surveys like this, which look at substances detrimental to an individuals health, to get a better understanding of the prevalence of gambling and whether it is a problem.

Prohibiting advertising of smoking and sponsorship of sports by tobacco companies were big factors, although not the only things in reducing the total number of smokers in Australia.

24000 out of 25 million people. That survey could be out by as much as 90% or be as correct to within 10%.
They have to go off something I get that but just like TV ratings it’s probably not even close to being correct.

 

[triggyscrewedus]

This thread is boring..
I'm going to the pub for a pint and punt.

 

[Cuzz09]

This thread is boring..
I'm going to the pub for a pint and punt.

Gamble responsibly.

Dont drink and Drive.

Ummm...

Back the grey in the wet

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[WD Roo]

No. By us moving to Sydney & for each & every owner that tried their hand running our club, a licence fee was paid to the AFL & distributed tp EVERY one of the other 11 Victorian clubs, thus keeping some more non viable clubs afloat, North being one of the. Now you can thank us for the huge TV rights dollars we are responsible for bringing into the competition.

Don't bight the hand that feeds you.

Gee that’s a bit rich. Must be a big bubble in Sydney and its well and truly centred around you.

 

[JackOutback]

24000 out of 25 million people. That survey could be out by as much as 90% or be as correct to within 10%.
They have to go off something I get that but just like TV ratings it’s probably not even close to being correct.

Actually, 24,000 would be an entirely valid representation of 25 million people. Provided the survey was genuinely random. The number of people required to be statistically relevant is almost always smaller than people think.