24 Global Gaming Business FEBRUARY 2019ever practically and statistically impossible that it
was. This meant that when the bookmakers finally
started to respond, an anti-FOBT folklore was
well-established already.
Hard as it was to defend against the CFFG at-
tacks, it was not helped by the fact they did it in
the most tin-eared way imaginable. Their argu-
ment was that if there were to be any restriction
on FOBTs this would mean the closure of betting
shops and the consequential loss of jobs and tax
revenues. All undeniably true, but not a good ar-
gument against an opponent that is suggesting
that your products cause suicide, harm and mis-
ery. What this approach succeeded in doing was
losing what support the bookmaking industry had
in Parliament or the press.
The knock-on effect of this was that when the
government could no longer resist the pressure
from the anti-FOBT campaign any longer, and
had to decide what level to reduce the FOBT
stake limit to, they were forced to ignore the rec-
ommendations of their own regulator, the statu-
tory policy advisor on gambling, who had
specifically stated that any limit apart from £2 was
recommended. They went with £2 as they knew
they would lose the vote in Parliament if they
went for anything higher, such was the parliamen-
tary disdain for FOBTs.
Then, as if to rub it in, the proposed enforce-
ment date of October 2019 was brought forward to April 2019 due in
part to the resignation of the gambling minister, Tracy Crouch, MP,
whose resignation speech included the completely spurious assertion that
FOBTs were the cause of two suicides per week. Complete victory to the
anti-FOBT brigade was based on little more than anecdotes and lies. The
industry could and should have done better.Online Gaming Next?
What is increasingly evident is that the FOBT
story has seen ministers, parliamentarians, civil ser-
vants, regulators and members of the industry
ecosystem all captured by the anti-gambling lobby.
The anti-gambling sentiment wasn’t just about
FOBTs; most of these stakeholders didn’t even
know what they were. They just saw a bad smell
about gambling and have taken an increasingly
anti-gambling stance ever since, with online gam-
bling the next sector in the firing line.
The last year has seen fake news about children
gambling emanating from the Gambling Commis-
sion, and a national newspaper arguing that be-
cause it was technically possible for underaged
players to play online slots in free play mode (and
therefore not gambling) this was creating a genera-
tion of problem gamblers. The year also saw a
member of Parliament suggesting that just because
a football jersey had a gambling brand name em-
blazoned on it, the same thing would happen—an
unprompted political campaign was implemented
against gambling advertising in football by a sup-
posedly neutral charity called GambleAware—the
Advertising Standards Agency suggesting that it is
concerned about the normalization of gambling.
To top it all, the killer blow has already been
put on the roadmap by the regulator in the form
of affordability —the concept that somebody will
choose an arbitrary limit for players to deposit, and
it will be up to the players to prove they can afford to gamble more. All of
which suggests that the British gambling industry is politically approaching
the fork in the road that determines whether gambling becomes like alco-
hol—some restrictions but tolerated—or like tobacco, massive restrictions
and not tolerated. And unless drastic action is taken quickly, it’s the to-
bacco route.Sponsorships of U.K. football teams by betting
businesses is also under attackOf course, it comes down
to money. It always does.
But unlike donations to
charities, which just exist
as statements on company
accounts, the industry
should invest in tangible
stuff that provides ongoing
evidence of the industry’s
good intentions—
£5 million setting up a
residential treatment center
for problem gamblers, and
£5 million s etting up a
fund to provide funding
for grassroots sport. These
will provide the stories that
will regain the industry’s
permission to speak.
p. 22 u.k.:Layout 1 1/10/19 1:18 PM Page 24