my fave hop shut friday. been there since before i was born

chapman

chapman

Well-known member
Messages
228
Reaction score
339
Points
63
walked down friday to put a fiver on and its got the shutters down and a laminated sign. thats it. no warning nothing
been going in there since i was 16 with me dad. mick behind the counter knew what i wanted before i opened me mouth
and the app has gone to shit as well. all me free bets vanished, the price boosts are gone, they used to do 2 quid back if the acca lost by one leg and thats not there anymore either. whats happened. is this everywhere or just up here??
 
sorry to hear that mate, that's rubbish
 
well is there any chance bingo got better? the 90 ball rooms i play have more sessions on now and the tickets are cheaper than they were in march. everything else has got worse tbh
 
Remote gaming duty went from 21% to 40% on 1 April. That's the whole answer to most of this.
It applies to online casino and slots, not sports betting yet. Sports goes to 25% next April, and bets on UK horse racing stay at 15%. So the free bets and price boosts disappearing on the sportsbook side is anticipatory rather than forced. They know what's coming.

The shops are a separate but connected problem. William Hill is owned by Evoke, and Evoke is being bought by Bally's Intralot for £243 million. Shareholders vote on it Monday. Their half-year results came out on Wednesday and they carry two material uncertainties about the company continuing as a going concern, both hanging on whether that deal completes.
Your shop closed because the sums stopped working, and the sums stopped working partly because of the tax.
 
ok yeah 40% FORTY!! so i put a tenner in and they take four quid off the top before i've even spun anything
and this is the same lot who spent two years telling us it was all about protecting vulnerable people. affordability checks, bank statements, prove you can afford it. now suddenly they've found a way to make a billion a year off the exact same activity they said was too dangerous. funny how that works isn't it. never about harm. never was
 
BillThornes said:
ok yeah 40% FORTY!! so i put a tenner in and they take four quid off the top before i've even spun anything
and this is the same lot who spent two years telling us it was all about protecting vulnerable people. affordability checks, bank statements, prove you can afford it. now suddenly they've found a way to make a billion a year off the exact same activity they said was too dangerous. funny how that works isn't it. never about harm. never was
Click to expand...
thats not how it works. duty is on the operators gross gaming yield, stakes minus what they pay back out. it never touches your deposit. HMRC bills the operator, not you. so the reason you feel it anyway is that they recover it somewhere, and the two places they can reach are bonuses and RTP
 
that's the bit that's been doing my head in actually. i've kept a spreadsheet on my roulette sessions for two years, same stakes same table same everything, and since about may the numbers have drifted in a way they never did before
i thought it was just me running bad. everyone always says its variance don't they
 
@Scott1baird your instinct is probably right and roulette is actually the wrong game to spot it on, the maths there is fixed by the wheel. slots is where they have actual room to move. numbers are worse than people realise. a slot at 95% costs you 5p on every pound you put through it. drop that to 90% and it costs 10p. same game, same graphics, same everything you can see, and you're paying double. nobody announces it. it goes in the info panel and that;s considered telling you.
oh and there's also the bonus side. one industry forecast has igaming bonus spend going from about 17% of revenue down to 7%. that's where your free spins went.
 
grand shame chapman, thats a proper loss that. we had one go in ninety eight and the lads still talk about it
none of this touches us over here mind, different jurisdiction entirely, but half me regulars have english accounts on their phones and they've all been moaning the same. one fella showed me his acca on saturday and the prices were shocking compared to what he got last year
 
does this mean bet365 will do the same? i've been restricted with them for over a year so i've been shopping around and everywhere i've tried has got noticeably worse on football prices since spring

or is that a different thing
 
my bro manages one over in Wolverhampton mate. he said the list came down in march and they got told theirs was staying open, then it changed twice before may. nobody knew anything, area managers included
he reckons the ones going are the ones with two shops within walking distance of each other. keep one, shut the other
 
@ak47 the vote is Evoke's shareholders deciding whether to accept the Bally's Intralot offer. It's a scheme of arrangement under Gibraltar law, so it needs a court meeting and a general meeting.
If it passes, completion is expected Q4 this year or Q1 next, subject to regulators.​
If it fails, the going concern warning is the answer to your question. Evoke said in its own results that without the deal it would need materially improved profitability to refinance, and called that a significant execution challenge. They carry about £1.8 billion of net debt.​

The board is unanimously recommending it and the Shaked family, who founded 888 and still hold 19.2%, are backing it. It would be unusual for it to fail from here.
 
right so hang on. if the vote goes wrong and the whole thing falls over, what happens to me account? i've got 40 odd quid sat in there and a bet on for next weekend
 
what nobody's saying out loud is that this was always the plan and the harm rhetoric was the cover story. over a hundred labour MPs signed a letter pushing for exactly this before the budget, Gordon Brown out front of it, and the framing was funding the two child benefit limit removal. so the money was spent in someone's head before it was raised. and now you've got the treasury with a permanent billion pound line item that depends on people continuing to gamble at roughly the same rate. think about what that actually means. they are now financially invested in the thing they claim to be reducing. every affordability check that works costs them revenue. every player who quits costs them revenue
that's not a conspiracy theory that's just what a budget line is. and the same government has the online safety act and the digital ID rollout running alongside it. all of it is the same instinct, they just have different departments doing it so it doesn't look coordinated
 
The Treasury's own position wasn't hidden though. They stated they expected operators to pass on up to 90% of the increase to consumers through higher prices or reduced payouts. That was in the documentation.
So the "they didn't know this would happen" argument doesn't hold. They knew. They costed it in. Whether that's cynical or just honest depends on your view, but it wasn't a surprise to anyone drafting it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top