Offshore Bookmakers

DO, you still haven't quite realised what I was saying in my post - the levels of employment wouldn't be anywhere near as low as you think they will be and it won't be restricted to only people who work directly for bookmakers, far from it. I don't work for a bookmaker.

A Tote monopoly is a bad idea for this country and not workable. The horseracing betting industry is already too big to warrant making so many people unemployed in implementing such a move.
 
A lot more than you would think! It's not just people directly employed by bookmakers, there are all sorts of people whose livelihoods depend upon bookmakers. Many thousand would become unemployed oncourse alone. No offence DO, but I do believe that your view shows a lack of understanding of the full workings of the racung and bookmaking industries.
 
But isn't all of that 'the way of things' as economies develop (or decline) and businesses 'rationalise'?

It's a false premise to bring other peoples' livelihoods into the argument. Any redundancy from any job will have consequences for more than the person being made redundant. I'm not convinced many thousands of people on course would become redundant. We only have 50-odd courses. The courses would survive and probably even thrive, probably even creating jobs in the process.

Those involved in on-course bookmaking would suffer but how many does that amount to, considering bookies tend to use the same staff to cover several meetings a week?

There are actually a lot fewer LBOs than I thought. I thought it would be something like 20,000. By the end of 2003 it was less than 9000; it's probably less than that now. But let's round it up to 10,000 and say there are, on average, five full-time equivalent posts in each shop (two or three fulltime and a 'supply' of part time staff).

That's 50,000 people. If we work on the assumption that there are 25m people in work in this country, it amounts to 1/500th (or 0.2%) of the working population. I reckon at least 20% of them would be re-employed in the equivalent of PMU outlets, probably with far better pay and conditions, especially if a tote operation became part of the civil service, which it should, given the income it would generate for the treasury.

Also, as prize money increases and percentages to stables increase, more trainers would be able to take on a few more horses and therefore more staff. There would be more runners in races and therefore courses would require more staff to cope.

Clearly there is a serious downside to the proposal, given that so many will find themselves out of work but when has there never been a downside to any kind of change?
 
Last edited:
Yes, as it is all that simple, isn't it? Ok, let's start with the shops. On top of the staff you mention, there are relief managers, regional managers, area managers, studio operators et al. Then you can think about the internet/call centre side of things; cut out betting on horseracing and turnover would be cut by around 50%, so yet more of the staff from there would have to go.

Oncourse there are most definitely thousands of people employed in the betting industry and your posts are demonstrating clearly that you don't know the full extent of the industry. Each pitch has around 4 or 5 staff; plus reps; people 'putting on'; Betfair/Betdaq reps; then you've got PA staff - both oncourse and in studio - as well as SiS/Turf TV staff - both oncourse and in studio; ring inspectors; technical staff; betting security staff.....need I go on?

Anyway, not a lot of point going round the houses with this one since it's never going to happen. I was hoping that you might come around to seeing how unworkable the whole idea is, the UK already has a robust industry in place which doesn't need decimating, creating thousands and thousands of unemployed, on a whim.

I'm also quite disappointed that you seem to think that putting so many thousands of people out of work so you can go racing cheap a few times a year is only a 'downside'. I'd respectfully suggest that were you to have a career that wasn't guaranteed for life - with a staggeringly good pension scheme to boot - you might have a bit more respect for other peoples' livelihoods.
 
How about a tote monopoly but the tote only really runs the scoop 6 placepot etc themselves and just places the bets on the exchanges and charges a small commission they could even allow you to lay. They would (or should) have to provide off course betting but the commission from all bets would easily cover it.
 
Shadow Leader said:
Yes, as it is all that simple, isn't it? Ok, let's start with the shops. On top of the staff you mention, there are relief managers, regional managers, area managers, studio operators et al. Then you can think about the internet/call centre side of things; cut out betting on horseracing and turnover would be cut by around 50%, so yet more of the staff from there would have to go.

Oncourse there are most definitely thousands of people employed in the betting industry and your posts are demonstrating clearly that you don't know the full extent of the industry. Each pitch has around 4 or 5 staff; plus reps; people 'putting on'; Betfair/Betdaq reps; then you've got PA staff - both oncourse and in studio - as well as SiS/Turf TV staff - both oncourse and in studio; ring inspectors; technical staff; betting security staff.....need I go on?

Anyway, not a lot of point going round the houses with this one since it's never going to happen. I was hoping that you might come around to seeing how unworkable the whole idea is, the UK already has a robust industry in place which doesn't need decimating, creating thousands and thousands of unemployed, on a whim.

I'm also quite disappointed that you seem to think that putting so many thousands of people out of work so you can go racing cheap a few times a year is only a 'downside'. I'd respectfully suggest that were you to have a career that wasn't guaranteed for life - with a staggeringly good pension scheme to boot - you might have a bit more respect for other peoples' livelihoods.
Click to expand...

OK, you win. You're right and I'm, as ever, wrong.
 
One of the few things the Irish government have done right over the last few years is resisting bookmaking demands for slot machines or whatever name you want to give them.Surely the threat of taking them away from the big bookmaking chains would make them see sense.
 
how many industries have we lost in the past 25 years with hundreds of thousands of people losing their jobs

is racing different to those other industries?

basically its all down to money..and the saving of it..nothing else will come into it in the end

I haven't liked seeing people lose there jobs over the years..but reality will strike when it comes to the £..its how life works in this country
 
Desert Orchid - no need to get snippy; if someone without a good knowledge of the teaching industry was adamant that a move should be implented that would make you and thousands of others teachers unemployed whilst saying they 'don't give a shit', I'm sure you'd have something to say about it too. Not least since seemingly the main reason is to give some people a cheap day out on the rare occasions they wish to go!

EC1 - the people on here who are so vocal for the move are the ones who don't work in the betting or racing industry and don't know enough about it to hold an informed opinion. Most of them are racing fans in so much as they watch racing on Ch4 of a weekend and as such should their whims be entertained? A Tote monopoly would not work in this country, such as the betting industry is structured so far.

That's all entirely beside thinking about all the punters whinging that they can't take prices and so don't have a clue what price they would be backing a horse at until the off! I'm sure that if these weekend punters thought about this side of it they might not be so in favour of it.
 
But doesn't the education system run through one central office and I don't see too many teachers being made redundant at the moment either, other than those I believe who are working in private schools and this I believe is due to the current economy. It is the long term effects and benefits, not the short term fallout that should undoubtably be looked at.

However, having said that I am not a regular or, avid gambler, all of this is not an area (the tote etc.) to which I have ever paid much attention to and have only ever held a very basic knowledge of or, interest in, to be perfectly honest. Any information on this would be appreciated and or, where I can find out more would be helpful, as it is something I should undoubtably take further note of on many levels.
 
Shadow Leader said:
Desert Orchid - no need to get snippy; if someone without a good knowledge of the teaching industry was adamant that a move should be implented that would make you and thousands of others teachers unemployed whilst saying they 'don't give a shit', I'm sure you'd have something to say about it too. Not least since seemingly the main reason is to give some people a cheap day out on the rare occasions they wish to go!

EC1 - the people on here who are so vocal for the move are the ones who don't work in the betting or racing industry and don't know enough about it to hold an informed opinion. Most of them are racing fans in so much as they watch racing on Ch4 of a weekend and as such should their whims be entertained? A Tote monopoly would not work in this country, such as the betting industry is structured so far.

That's all entirely beside thinking about all the punters whinging that they can't take prices and so don't have a clue what price they would be backing a horse at until the off! I'm sure that if these weekend punters thought about this side of it they might not be so in favour of it.
Click to expand...

Desert Orchid might hold a different opinion to your own, but I certainly would not class him as a "weekend punter" or "ill informed". Is he as informed on the structure or the background/politics of the betting industry as you are? I am sure he is not, but if we all need to be experts on a said topic to express an opinion then the numbers of postings from all members (you and I included) would drop significantly.
 
Last edited:
Galileo - in my view, DO's view on this subject is ill informed. Not only that but in one foul swoop, what he is suggesting would leave myself and all my colleagues - as well as many friends - unemployed.

In fact, it's not even just that. Do people on here really want a Tote monopoly? Think how sterile that would be - all the character, history and the challenges ripped out of the sport in one go. The racecourse would be a far poorer place without the bookmakers, that's for sure, as well as sterile and without character.

There would also be very little scope for having an edge whilst punting - spotting something which you think is interesting but no-one else does, or spotting something early to obtain the value. All that would end if the only options left to you were punting for Nanny dividends.
 
Last edited:
"The racecourse would be a far poorer place without the bookmakers, that's for sure, as well as sterile and without character. "

Traditionally, that has always been the argument, the characters and the tic-tac etc.etc.. Is that still the case? Just sinister faces with headsets talking to themselves; the boards all showing the same prices (just about). I think that argument is running out of steam. And anyway I don't think the problem lies with the on-course bookmaker, from what I pick up, they are struggling to exist, it is the big betting-shop chains who are fleecing the game
 
They are struggling oncourse, Colin, not that many people will believe that!

Yes, it is still the case that bookmakers bring character to the course. Spend an afternoon on the rails or in the ring and you can see it all around you. There's often a good craic to be had in doing so, especially on the rails when Banksy is in a mischevious mood.
 
Shadow Leader said:
Galileo - in my view, DO's view on this subject is ill informed. Not only that but in one foul swoop, what he is suggesting would leave myself and all my colleagues - as well as many friends - unemployed.
Click to expand...

Had you not previously, and gleefully advocated various policy responses across a range of industries that would also have the same affect of putting people out of work, your concerns about a Tote monopoly might read sligthly less ironic. It does have more than just a hollow ring of NIMBYism about it. You've seemed quite happy to put people from the NHS, shop workers, Finance, Executive Government Agencies etc out of work at various times (caravan manufacturers too :lol: - alright that one is more tenuous) but you draw a line around bookmaking for some reason. Self-interest? Well you don't seek to conceal a personal agenda and there's nothing wrong with that, but when an argument is essentially laced with a 'me, me, me' agenda it's bound to colour how people perceive it with regard to the stock they accord it based loosely on the idea that turkeys don't vote for christmas.

My own suspicion is that a Tote monopoly would come to operate in a way not dissimilar to the Lottery, and that profits would be increasingly clawed back by government rather than being re-invested in racing or grass root development, and that this would then be used by the Treasury to top-slice other capital programmes by way of a budget cut.

I'm not sure we'd necessarily see the meltdown in the high street, as racing isn't the only betting medium that firms offer. I wouldn't be too surprised to see bookmakers re-invent themselves as 'arcades' possibly incorporating poker (or whatever fad is prevalent at the time) and continue to bet on non-racing events with greater aggression. Gaming machines, Portman Park and 49's are all developments in the last 15 years that are pushing the high street chains ever closer to the MO of the seaside arcade anyway. You'd lose a few (probably the independents) but the loss to communities would be less damaging than the number of pubs that have had to close since Tony Blair's smoking ban was introduced which has itself resulted in both direct and indirect job losses in line with falls in sales. Mind you, didn't you advocate a smoking ban too with scant regard for the employment prospects of the staff, the management, delivery drivers, manufacturers etc. In reality, the high street venues that would shut would likely find new end users from other areas of commerce and industry anyway (probably employing more staff and on better terms and conditions than a bookmaker pays). The offices that I could see struggling would be those in what are known as district centres, where the demand for high street floorpsace isn't as strong
 
Last edited:
Shadow Leader said:
Galileo - in my view, DO's view on this subject is ill informed. Not only that but in one foul swoop, what he is suggesting would leave myself and all my colleagues - as well as many friends - unemployed.
Click to expand...

Your argument seems to be based on how it would affect you personally as opposed to the merits of what DO is suggesting; debating it objectively would surely add more balance to the topic?
 
Hamm said:
Your argument seems to be based on how it would affect you personally as opposed to the merits of what DO is suggesting; debating it objectively would surely add more balance to the topic?
Click to expand...

What about the rest of the post (the bit you havn't quoted)?
 
I think the part I quoted is representative of the majority of SL's posts; a few lines about would we miss the characters of bookies doesn't really balance up.
 
Last edited:
This is an interesting thread so lets keep it constructive.

For what its worth SL, your response to me was far more fitting than what you had previously posted. Without knowing the ins and outs of it, the idea in itself ( a Tote Monopoly) is appealing in what it would lead to...better prize money, facilities etc.
 
More meetings, bigger turnover, less margin due to competition, economy goes int recession, turnover is not sustainable, return on capital investment is not good enough and therefore business is not sustainable. If the bookies can't afford it, or can't make it pay they will sponsor less, prize money will drop etc etc. What racing needs to do is make the product so attractive that they will keep investing.

Everyone can cry, moan etc etc but when things were good everybody was happy to milk the cash cow. This is a leisure industry, not a commodity product!!!

Perhaps the bookies could put up prices on what colour skirts the sugar babes will wear at the next newmarket nights?!
 
Forgot to add - The track record of state run monopolies is hardly glowing so I would be careful about advocating it. Someone made the point earlier that our government would end up taking a nice chunk for themselves to offset other debts.
 
Warbler said:
Well you don't seek to conceal a personal agenda and there's nothing wrong with that
Click to expand...
I'm curious now, what "agenda" can one person conceal on talking horses?:D

Is this the new quango of influence for people with 'personal agenda's"...?
 
Last edited:
Aragorn said:
Everyone can cry, moan etc etc but when things were good everybody was happy to milk the cash cow. This is a leisure industry, not a commodity product!!!
Click to expand...

I've been advocating at least an off-course monopoly for 30-odd years - since I lived in France as a matter of fact and saw with my own eyes how much more prize money is on offer and how much better the facilities are. The only unsatisfactory things were a marginally quieter atmosphere (which I'd put down to the way the French are) and longer queues to get a bet on, particularly at Longchamp on Arc weekend.

I'd be happy to see racing go down that route in the short term, ie off-course monopoly.
 
Back
Top