It’s a mugs game pure and simple. I think gambling on the whole is pretty predatory. I personally don’t think that it should be allowed to be advertised at all, just like cigarettes. I myself occasionally put on some accas or go to the casino but I have a mate that has a real problem, and every time there is an add on Facebook it’s william hill, or anytime you watch a footie match there are 3 or 4 adds per break for different gambling stuff.

“Allowing companies to prosper from misery.” To disallow that would mean banning all gambling, not just one aspect of it. And all smoking. And drinking. And all 4x4s, which make Forest Hillbilly miserable. I’m being flippant, of course, but the point in question is whether and to what extent governments should intervene in our lives.

Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)

Should've left them alone, if people wan't to piss their money away on those let them.

Cutting the FOBTs to £2 a stake doesn't stop them betting as much as they like on a horse race every 5-10 minutes.

Another nail in the high street's coffin. All they've done is move more of the businesses, and therefore taxes and jobs, online and offshore.

Optimistic as ever

Only the FOBT’s require no skill whatsoever whereas sports betting requires some knowledge or lots give up when they realise they’re no good at it.

Some will go online, some won’t or can’t. The wife or parents might catch some online even if they try.

They’re designed to be addictive and are. Capitalism sometimes requires regulation and is the case here.

It’s a good move. I’ve little sympathy for anyone losing a job in bookies that was opened among 1-3 or more others just because it can put 4 FOBT machines in there. Last time I drove through Thornton Heath pond there were 4 on the crossing at the south side. I don’t know how many there are on or near George street and the Wetherspoons but I bet it’s a few.

I bet there’s a few in Redhill near the Argos.

Edited by Rudi Hedman (17 May 2018 1.30pm)

COYP

The point is people don't "want" to piss their money away on those machines, they're hopelessly addicted to them and can't stop. The nature of the betting (you can bet every twenty seconds) and the design (flashing lights, easy to play again etc.) are more addictive than other forms of gambling, which is why bookies make such a huge share of their profits from them.

I'm not sure it is another nail in the high street coffin either. There are times where you see two or three betting shops in a row (of the same brand!) to allow them to stuff as many FOB machines as they can into an area. Is losing that trend harmful to the high street, or does it open up capacity for other shops and cafes?

It requires no knowledge, it helps to have some, but it requires none. Hence why lots of people bet on the name or the colours etc. You could go and buy the same value of lottery tickets and scratch cards and they'd be just as random as FOBTs are and require just as little "skill".

They're designed to make profit, if you can't see that before you've even put a pound in you're an idiot. If you can't see that after you've put a pound in repeatedly and continually lost, you're an addicted idiot.

What you seem to be arguing for is a range limit of how close one bookies can be to another.

The volume of empty units is will cause will not simply be replace by other retail options. Retail is dying on it's arse.

Optimistic as ever