Is this blog post too harsh? (Or fair!)
https://www.onlinebetting.com.au/blog...live-odds.html
Is this blog post too harsh? (Or fair!)
https://www.onlinebetting.com.au/blog...live-odds.html
Personally I dont think the govt had any choice but to make a change. The constant advertising in front of kids had gone too far. Whilst I have no issues with the advertising in general, I dont think kids should be seeing it as openly as they were...
Having said all that, sportsbetting is still only 15% of the total gambling spend by Australians, so it isnt actually resolving the bigger problems.
Should they not ban slot machines in public places such as bars /restaurants as well then? Or that is bringing in to much money to the state
I agree that it needs to be banned until 9-10pm, it will at least solve the major problem. Kids are definitely getting too relaxed with the concept of betting (which is the aim of the advertising). Moving it until later will help resolve that issue until they are old enough to understand.
Re slot machines - it doesn't look like that will ever change now. Money talks here.
I don't think its too harsh at all.
You just have to see how much gaming advertising is within a particular game itself, listed a few of the top of my head:
sports team sponsorship
in game stadium advertising
running across the bottom of the screen
during ad breaks
segments named after betting companies
during half time segment to talk about the current game odds
And then 1 company spent a crap load of money which took advertising to the next level, and pretty much polarised everyone in saying "now its gone too far" . The company is Tom Waterhouse.
- having the spokesman of the betting company, look and act like he was part of the commentary team talking about betting odds of tomorrows races
- and then giving him a microphone so he was on the ground, talking about the odds he liked, looking like he was part of the commentary team.
From what I understand, the big 4 sports betting companies in Australia have cemented themselves here. And to really break into the market, and be with that big group, you have to spend quite a bit money to get your name out there. What they have ended up doing is getting everyone to know their name, but maybe of the wrong reasons.
The other sports betting companies have been pretty quiet about it all.
Anthony-Coral (29 May 2013), dfiocch (29 May 2013), Muppet (29 May 2013), RyanH (29 May 2013)
The thing is - can the television companies afford to lose the massive revenue?? How are the government going to compensate them!?!
That's always the big question, especially after these multi million dollar deals with the various sporting groups (to buy TV rights).
I think as with tobacco it's their issue long term - they can sort it out.
Stephen
Television can't afford to lose that advertising revenue. But from what I understand, TAB will be picking up the advertising after the TomWaterhouse deal breaks down. Government doesn't have to compensate them, its for the TV Stations, Sporting League and Advertisers to work out within the legal framework.
The TW deal I think was a 5 year, 40 million a year deal? Something along those lines.
I dont think gambling teams will be stopped from advertising or sponsoring teams, just no showing of odds.
Agree totally with Rak. The advertising on TV and in game has gone way beyond what any reasonable person would consider acceptable. When you have kids at a rugby league game asking a smarmy bookmaker (who also happens to be the son of a notorious crooked bookmaker who was banned from racetracks for over a decade and has a significant interest in the business) for his autograph after he has just done a half time talk on camera with the commentators on the sidelines of a game, you know that something is very wrong. That post linked is harsh and reads like a baby crying because someone took his rattle.