NRL and AFL tackle PM over plan to curb the use of poker machines

[bobmar28]

That's the way it should be. Get people in and off the pokies then no reform can kill them.

Have you thought about why those events are all free. Pokie profits are used for the benefit of members and the community.

 

[Raiderdave]

According to who? Gould? Clubs NSW? Gallop? The AFL?

Can't see the problem. Write down $1000 on the form and sign it. Big f**king deal.

yep .. all of them
& they're right .... unlike the Govt on this one

a stupid new set of conditions that are not required for the vast majority of people
tackle the problem without killing the Industry & its a lot more then just pokies

& heres the problem for tunnel visioned clowns like you
people won't be nannied like this ... they won't patronise the clubs if they are forced to sign something like this & I don't blame them , it is a big
F--king deal .... its ridiculous ,

thats the problem
this Labor Govt is clueless , & the indepedants more so... it & they need to go

 

[Flapper]

Have you thought about why those events are all free. Pokie profits are used for the benefit of members and the community.

Exactly, a lot of the non-pokie related events and programs run by clubs that benefit community groups and particularly the elderly are subsidised by pokie profits. Without the pokie profits the events would understandably have to be cut.

 

[franklin2323]

Have you thought about why those events are all free. Pokie profits are used for the benefit of members and the community.

Would they be free if you bring a picnic lunch? Or an Esky? Bar takings etc get more profit then Pokies. After the power, Maintenance etc. Most days of the week they actually cost money.

How can Penrith Bowling club have stuff all pokies. Have cheaper food and drinks then Panthers? Yet still Sponsor Netball, Cricket and Soccer?

 

[Dogs Of War]

This argument that rugby league is riding on the backs of a few problem gamblers is wearing a bit thin. Problem gamblers are 1% of the population, make them get a card. Why should the rest of us need a license to play?
Anyway problem gamblers would probably just go home and play on line casino so what's the point?

Studies have shown that problem pokie gamblers actually do not play other forms of gambling if they give up the machines. The reason is that pokie players tend to enjoy the repetitive nature of the machine interaction, which other forms of gambling do not provide.

 

[franklin2323]

Exactly, a lot of the non-pokie related events and programs run by clubs that benefit community groups and particularly the elderly are subsidised by pokie profits. Without the pokie profits the events would understandably have to be cut.

To an extent. Although Gaming managers won't be needed. Maintence guys, Gaming box attendents. All the big clubs need these. Smaller bowling clubs etc the bar is usually the sign in point and the pokie payout. So smaller overheads.

 

[Noa]

You can be sure AD is talking out both sides of his mouth. Publicly he'd be saying one thing while making sure the likes of Maguire & Kennett do as much agitating as they can.

 

[betcats]

Would they be free if you bring a picnic lunch? Or an Esky? Bar takings etc get more profit then Pokies. After the power, Maintenance etc. Most days of the week they actually cost money.

How can Penrith Bowling club have stuff all pokies. Have cheaper food and drinks then Panthers? Yet still Sponsor Netball, Cricket and Soccer?

I studied accounting at tafe a while ago and for one question we used the balance sheet from a few years ago of a bowlo from Sydney somewhere in the hills district. They ran their Bistro and their Bar at a loss, almost all profit was from pokies. This was before the new smoking and pokie laws came in but still, they were selling their beers at a loss.

 

[Dogs Of War]

yep .. all of them
& they're right .... unlike the Govt on this one

a stupid new set of conditions that are not required for the vast majority of people
tackle the problem without killing the Industry & its a lot more then just pokies

Any industry built on exploitation of problem gamblers deserves to suffer. A good example is the Bulldogs Leagues club this year, gave $1.6mil to the "community", yet the board paypackets where more money than that.

& heres the problem for tunnel visioned clowns like you
people won't be nannied like this ... they won't patronise the clubs if they are forced to sign something like this & I don't blame them , it is a big
F--king deal .... its ridiculous ,

thats the problem
this Labor Govt is clueless , & the indepedants more so... it & they need to go

Here is some news for you. It is already law that if you live within 5kms of a club, you must become a member, thus signing something. So whats the difference with making the membership card part of the deal, sign up, you get your gambling card.

As for your people won't be nannied. We already are, it's why you can't buy takeaway alcohol after midnight, there are many ways we are nannied already, and really, 90% of people won't be impacted as they can still enjoy there casual punt on the pokies WITHOUT owning a gambling card. So if that 10% who want a card so they can play more, they will be in control of setting there limit, and have some control over how much they spend. The option is still for them to set a huge limit, just that it takes 24hrs to become active. The clubs say how much it will cost them to install card readers, yet they already have these in most clubs so you can accrue "points", hmm, they didn't complain about the cost of installing those did they?

Why not do some actual reading into problem gambling and the effects, and don't believe everything the clubs say.

 

[franklin2323]

I studied accounting at tafe a while ago and for one question we used the balance sheet from a few years ago of a bowlo from Sydney somewhere in the hills district. They ran their Bistro and their Bar at a loss, almost all profit was from pokies. This was before the new smoking and pokie laws came in but still, they were selling their beers at a loss.

Ok. That's interesting. Looking at the last finanical balance for Panthers. Using bar and the rent to Osso, Panarotti's, Krispy Kreme etc. It was a profit. The Pokies was still 60m profit. The 12m loss was on the assests. So drop 4 clubs that wipes that and even if the pokies half. Use Minx for bands and a few other improvements and it's no worse off. They are just usung fear to get the message accross.

I am a social pokie player. I will just just type in I want to lose $1000 and won't come close but I can gamble the same. Not that I should have to.

 

[gUt]

Some discussion and all that:

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2945590.html

It's Cash-Strapped Clubs versus Wilkie's Wowsers

PETER LEWIS

When Rugby League legend Phil 'Gus' Gould stopped his on-air spruiking of sports betting for long enough to attack the Gillard Government's responsible gambling laws on Friday night, he was blowing the opening whistle for what is looming as the match of the season.

Cash-Strapped Clubs versus Wilkie's Wowsers shapes as a classic encounter, a contest where there can't be any compromises, where a loss could spell death for one side, a victory worth self-evident, if ill-gotten, riches for the other.

Cash-Strapped Clubs, traditionally one of the principle sources of funding for NRL clubs, have been targeting New South Wales and Queensland Labor MPs for months claiming they would be driven to the wall if people were given the option of nominating a maximum losing amount before they hit the poker machines.

Now a number of AFL notables, several with strong Liberal Party ties, are parroting the dubious proposition that sporting clubs need the proceeds of problem gamblers to remain viable entities. Ignore the millions in broadcasting fees just secured; if people who can't control their gambling are protected from themselves, the code itself is in peril.

That's the message that coursed through the two codes over the weekend; with what appeared to be paid on-air reads, coordinated free media splashes, shmicko websites – all designed to create the impression of a grassroots 'campaign'.

We at Essential didn't see this extraordinary play coming, so we don't have fresh polling on the issue this week. But we do know that, from a question a few weeks ago, the public – when given the question in dispassionate terms – are overwhelmingly behind the Government.
continues...

Podcast debate on the Nanny State.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bigideas/stories/2011/3322798.htm

From internet filtering to junk food advertising to cigarette packaging... just how much should government be regulating our lives? After all we're all adults and perfectly capable of making our own decisions... aren't we?

This debate was recorded in the Great Hall at the University of Sydney.

Guests

Simon Chapman
Professor of Public Health at the University of Sydney

Elanor Jones
Fourth year Arts/Law student at the University of Sydney and finalist in the Austral-Asian and world debating championships.

Christopher Zinn
Spokesperson for the Australian Consumers' Association

Chris Berg
Research Fellow with the Institute of Public Affairs.

Rowan Dean
Executive creative director of Euro RSCG.

Patrick Bateman
Champion university debater

 

[Raiderdave]

Any industry built on exploitation of problem gamblers deserves to suffer. A good example is the Bulldogs Leagues club this year, gave $1.6mil to the "community", yet the board paypackets where more money than that.



Here is some news for you. It is already law that if you live within 5kms of a club, you must become a member, thus signing something. So whats the difference with making the membership card part of the deal, sign up, you get your gambling card.

As for your people won't be nannied. We already are, it's why you can't buy takeaway alcohol after midnight, there are many ways we are nannied already, and really, 90% of people won't be impacted as they can still enjoy there casual punt on the pokies WITHOUT owning a gambling card. So if that 10% who want a card so they can play more, they will be in control of setting there limit, and have some control over how much they spend. The option is still for them to set a huge limit, just that it takes 24hrs to become active. The clubs say how much it will cost them to install card readers, yet they already have these in most clubs so you can accrue "points", hmm, they didn't complain about the cost of installing those did they?

Why not do some actual reading into problem gambling and the effects, and don't believe everything the clubs say.

another tree hugger
no idea about what most people feel on... well most issues

yep we are nannied
& we've had enough .... time to draw a line

how bout you stop reading press releases from the salvation army & the office of Mr Wilkie ... & believing everything you read too

gambling is a problem for a miniscule % of the population
but these draconian measures will affect a far larger % unfairly & unnecessarily
& it won't fix a thing.

 

[Raiderdave]

Studies have shown that problem pokie gamblers actually do not play other forms of gambling if they give up the machines. The reason is that pokie players tend to enjoy the repetitive nature of the machine interaction, which other forms of gambling do not provide.

more tree hugger hogwash :roll:
they are addicted to gambling .... you remove one type ... they'll find another

 

[joshreading]

Not sure if this has been posted but I think it blows the argument for Pokies out of the water.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/the-games-up--pokies-reform-not-so-taxing-for-footy-20110926-1ktgx.html

I am somewhat disgusted that people on here presume that because the vast majority of players are responsible that we should do nothing to stop those that are addicted and protect their families. It is pathetic that our sport relies on maintaining the misery and poverty of others.

If a club can't stand without Pokies it should fall

 

[Dogs Of War]

another tree hugger
no idea about what most people feel on... well most issues

yep we are nannied
& we've had enough .... time to draw a line

how bout you stop reading press releases from the salvation army & the office of Mr Wilkie ... & believing everything you read too

gambling is a problem for a miniscule % of the population
but these draconian measures will affect a far larger % unfairly & unnecessarily
& it won't fix a thing.

Na mate, I don't need to read that stuff, cause I have had a gambling problem, I know of others with gambling problems. I know what is out there currently to help support problem gamblers, and there just isn't anything decent unless you go out of your way to get help via a psychologist (privately).

You make these generalised statements saying "nannied", "tree hugger" and so on to try and belittle my argument, while ignoring the facts that 90% of people won't need to own cards to gamble, just the high rollers, the most likely people to be problem gamblers. So your statement that a large percentage of people will be effected is WRONG!

It will still be up to the individual to set a suitable limit for themselves, but at least it allows a general element of control for these people. It's not like the other measures in place work (self exclusion, yet there are 97K pokies in NSW alone, just walk down the street and you can get your fix elsewhere). So anythign else that can be done to assist people have some control over the situation is welcome.

Anyway, how about you man up and produce your so called "fact" that it's only 1.6% of social gamblers make up the problem gambling percentage.

It really seems like you have a vested interest in the clubs industry, sprouting rubbish to try and "rally" the troops. The clubs industry will go on, no different to when the clubs industry said that the smoking ban will be the end of clubs, oh no, more nanny state stuff from the government, when will it ever end.

 

[Perth Red]

Hey Perth Red what's your thoughts on some pawn brokers..

Their business model is based on preying on human misery, buying stolen goods from drug dealers etc

Offering terrible interest rates on pay day loans to the country's under privileged

And not giving a red cent back to the community

Your ex team was happy to take money from such people.

Don't have a problem with flogging stuff you no longer need, and there are a myriad of checks and legal constraints to minimse the sale of stolen goods (of course it happens but an international company like Cash Convertors know their business would be massively damaged if any outlet got done for dealing stolen property). Do agree that the loan bit is a rip off, but then so are mortgages! Nice divert attempt.

Does anyone know how much money actually goes to RL clubs from pokie empires?
A breakdown of NRL club grants and grassroots funding would be nice to see. Heard on the radio during AFL's very clever distancing tactic that the news guy reckoned around $30mill a year goes to AFL at different levels in Victoria from pokie clubs.

 

[Green Machine]

Na mate, I don't need to read that stuff, cause I have had a gambling problem, I know of others with gambling problems. I know what is out there currently to help support problem gamblers, and there just isn't anything decent unless you go out of your way to get help via a psychologist (privately).

You make these generalised statements saying "nannied", "tree hugger" and so on to try and belittle my argument, while ignoring the facts that 90% of people won't need to own cards to gamble, just the high rollers, the most likely people to be problem gamblers. So your statement that a large percentage of people will be effected is WRONG!

It will still be up to the individual to set a suitable limit for themselves, but at least it allows a general element of control for these people. It's not like the other measures in place work (self exclusion, yet there are 97K pokies in NSW alone, just walk down the street and you can get your fix elsewhere). So anythign else that can be done to assist people have some control over the situation is welcome.

Anyway, how about you man up and produce your so called "fact" that it's only 1.6% of social gamblers make up the problem gambling percentage.

It really seems like you have a vested interest in the clubs industry, sprouting rubbish to try and "rally" the troops. The clubs industry will go on, no different to when the clubs industry said that the smoking ban will be the end of clubs, oh no, more nanny state stuff from the government, when will it ever end.

All good points Dogs. I agree with you the machines should be just recalibrated to accept a lower amount you can lose in an hour. The Pub and Club industry have just taken for granted that they can exploit patrons for as must as they can get out of them. Machines being calibrated to extract $1,200 @ hour is over the top. On top of allowing Clubs and Pubs to set up these “So Called” outdoor smoking areas full of machines to keep the addicts playing is disgraceful.
I heard Phil Gould on Alan Jones’ show about a month ago and he said 98% of people who play poker machines are not problem gamblers. He went on to say its only the 1% who have a problem (he lost 1% somewhere). I’m not sure where these figures come from that only 1 or 2% have poker machine addiction. I’ve heard him say on many occasions that the people bringing in these reforms would have no idea how it fix the problem. As a bloke who has worked in the highly sophisticated sales of poker machines (an industry that invested heavily in technology in the extraction of money out of addicts), I am yet to hear Phil give a solution to help solve poker machine addiction.

 

[Big Mick]

I'd have no drama's with this if the pokie tax was scrapped.

Clubs are getting f**ked on from all directions.

Hey lets tax pokies...ok...but wait...lets also make you put millions into additional infrastructure which will do f**k all, and we'll reduce your revenue as a result of costing you more money while still charging you more tax than any company.

Anyone that doesn't see the BS in that is deluded.

I will say again...What causes more problems in Australia today. Obesity or problem gambling? Obesity is causing issues on the medical system with having to have additional facilities available for those with heart disease as well as diabetes.

These growing issues are far more pressing than raping the clubs that actually do something with the money that's positive, as opposed to Governments who waste it all on stupid projects that don't help anyone.

But where are the calls to ban fast food advertising, to slap an obesity tax on outlets like McDonalds, KFC etc. Why not? they can bloody well afford it. Why not set fat people a limit as to how many cheeseburgers they can eat in a month. Its about as valid as this pokie reform.

Will this pokie reform have impacts on online gambling which is far more accessible than actually getting off their ass and going to a club. All this will do is push MORE people into online gambling, and hey...someone said before...NSW Lotteries introducing a $15 scratchie. Go figure hey! What is their impact.

To isolate all problem gambling to Poker Machines is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. This legislation will do absolutely BUGGER ALL! to stop gambling in this country. All they'll do if you are a problem gambler is say "F-that!, I'll just go online...or I'll duck to the tab and bet on the horses, or I'll play poker online".

Ensure that these guys get counselling...fine...but this stupid legislation isn't going to fix anything...and anyone believes that it will...has no idea how easy it is to gamble in Australia.

 

[Green Machine]

I'd have no drama's with this if the pokie tax was scrapped.

The legislationfor Mandatory Commitment for poker machines that lose over $1,200 @ hour is not a tax.
There is no proposal for Mandatory Commitment for machines that lose up to $120 @ hour.

 

[Big Mick]

The legislationfor Mandatory Commitment for poker machines that lose over $1,200 @ hour is not a tax.
There is no proposal for Mandatory Commitment for machines that lose up to $120 @ hour.

Did I say it was a tax.

I said if they plan to do this, then scrap the existing additional pokie tax that is currently in place.

But this initiative will cost millions to implement in infrastructure as well as reducing revenue...so why is there a need for additional tax on top of that any more?.