Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

bristol.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 151 posts

Re: Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

#81

Post by Loocid »

mothballed wrote: post #42

When online sports gambling started in the US they were offering $500-$1000 of free bets to sign up. Very tempting to sign up, even though I don't gamble anymore than about once a decade, but I decided whoever did that offer was probably smarter than me about who would win out in the end. I've been around the block long enough to know you never take an 'easy profit' deal from someone who is in the business of making…

It was actually free money assuming you had the resolve to stop once you claimed the bonus (presumably most people didnt). As long as you were laying the other side of your bet on an exchange you could extract the full value of your free bets risk free.

I collected a few grand back then, however those sort of promotions are now illegal where I live.

Re: Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

#82

Post by AlexandrB »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #22
snarfy wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If it's so bad for gamblers, why don't they stop? That's not how addiction works.

If someone cannot stop gambling, then what moral responsibility do gambling organizations have when giving them offers?

Gambling is basically a scam (house always wins) and thus should not be a legal transaction you can make. What moral responsibility do we have to allow companies to scam people?

Re: Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

#83

Post by alex43578 »

mynegation wrote: post #73
alex43578 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alcohol should only be legal in pubs and bars; alcohol in Disney World, on planes, and in grocery stores is very problematic.

You probably meant it as a quip but alcohol in every grocery store and definitely on planes is problematic.

It genuinely is, and I’d sooner see regulation targeting it than someone’s multileg parlay. There’s a much clearer line between alcohol on demand and public misconduct or injuries from DUI, than gambling and a more nebulous societal harm.

Re: Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

#84

Post by 3eb7988a1663 »

cm2012 wrote: post #20
beloch wrote: post #8

>“Although the findings relate to direct marketing, I see no reason why the same or similar adverse effects wouldn’t occur for gambling advertising on TV or social media.” Controlling/banning advertising for Alcohol and Tobacco results in significant health benefits. Sports gambling used to be illegal in many places or limited to specific places. Now that it's available in your pocket, like a pack of smokes or a flas…

The US Supreme Court made it illegal for states to ban gambling ads, as a first amendment issue. I think it was a bad decision.

Then why was it possible to ban cigarette commercials on TV? Or is it just that they cannot ban the ads in general? You have no right to the airwaves, so television access is easy to restrict.

Re: Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

#85

Post by rsync »

mothballed wrote: post #42

When online sports gambling started in the US they were offering $500-$1000 of free bets to sign up. Very tempting to sign up, even though I don't gamble anymore than about once a decade, but I decided whoever did that offer was probably smarter than me about who would win out in the end. I've been around the block long enough to know you never take an 'easy profit' deal from someone who is in the business of making…

“… you never take an 'easy profit' deal from someone who is in the business of making money from them while in their own domain…”

Laura ingalls wilder said it best, in Farmer Boy:

“never bet your money on another man’s game”

Re: Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

#87

Post by cm2012 »

3eb7988a1663 wrote: post #84
cm2012 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US Supreme Court made it illegal for states to ban gambling ads, as a first amendment issue. I think it was a bad decision.

Then why was it possible to ban cigarette commercials on TV? Or is it just that they cannot ban the ads in general? You have no right to the airwaves, so television access is easy to restrict.

Correct, broadcast tv is easy

Re: Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

#88

Post by nsnzjznzbx »

xXSLAYERXx wrote: post #58
abcde666777 wrote: post #10

I've always found the marketing around gambling (and most things really) completely disgusting. As a society I think we're far too tolerant of these things. A lot of the ads basically go along the lines of: 'you could win big and have a great time, awesome! (disclaimer: will probably ruin your life)'. It should be like it is with smoking - photos of lung cancer patients on the package. People will still do it of cour…

At this point I question whether they should even be allowed to advertise.

No. A lot of the Australian ads play on the "this gimmick feature means if you lose you win!"

What it aleays means is you still win or lose a bet they just shuffled the permutations so that you win and lose in different outcomes.

But emotiionally they sell it as them giving you a chance. Pretty manipulative.

Examples would be like "money back if your horse comes second" or "bet on horse coming 3rd 4th or 5th" or "if your team is up at half time we count it as a win".

They are just offering a different wager!

Re: Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

#89

Post by wat10000 »

Loocid wrote: post #81
mothballed wrote: post #42

When online sports gambling started in the US they were offering $500-$1000 of free bets to sign up. Very tempting to sign up, even though I don't gamble anymore than about once a decade, but I decided whoever did that offer was probably smarter than me about who would win out in the end. I've been around the block long enough to know you never take an 'easy profit' deal from someone who is in the business of making…

It was actually free money assuming you had the resolve to stop once you claimed the bonus (presumably most people didnt). As long as you were laying the other side of your bet on an exchange you could extract the full value of your free bets risk free. I collected a few grand back then, however those sort of promotions are now illegal where I live.

There are sometimes free lunches out there to be had. They’re playing the averages and accepting some losses if they know they’ll make it up from other customers. But you’d better be sure you’re not one of the suckers if you do it.

Re: Bombarding gamblers with offers greatly increases betting and gambling harm

#90

Post by rsync »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #35
sd9 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were friends with an alcoholic it would be pretty shitty to give them a bottle of vodka for their birthday. People are not machines, it’s not as simple as deciding whether to do something or not. You have stronger and weaker days. Temptation makes it harder to do what is in your best interests, even if you’ve decided on another day that you’d rather not partake. Getting concrete about gambling: lots of people…

It seems like a gambling addiction is the same as not having the capacity to choose not to. Is that a misunderstanding?

I wish that mark pilgrim had not taken his blog off-line… He had a very insightful and moving peace about alcoholism and described it in a very striking and understandable way.
Post reply on HN