As I go onto the Betfair homepage I am greeted by three large adverts. One of which is ‘Feeling the FOMO?’ ‘1 in 4 players already use our Safer Gambling tools to help manage their play. Do you want in?’ I should say I like the fact that Betfair does it.
What is interesting to me though is that this is an industry devoid of reliable statistics around this subject. We are told by the Gambling Commission that 0.3% of punters experience high risk issues with problem gambling. The lowest ever number. The Gambling Commission has three different tiers. The high risk is 0.3%. Moderate risk 1.1% and low risk 1.8%. Those tiers are determined by the score on the PGSI (Problem Gambling Severity Index). The numbers are based on 3 questions in a telephone survey. Obviously there are very differing levels of problem gambling but these numbers seem pretty questionable. It is treated as gospel within the industry though. It is what all the media outlets use when discussing the issue. The headline number of 0.3%.
This is how the Gambling Commission describes it. ‘Problem gambling’ means gambling to a degree that compromises, disrupts or damages family, personal or recreational pursuits. It is incredibly hard to define but so many are so confident in that 0.3% number. It is a very vague definition and if took literally, the scale of those who would be deemed problem gamblers would be significantly higher.
The only real data would have to come from bookmakers themselves, where they see all the various behaviours and that will never happen. They could see that a customer chased. They could see a customer deposited five times in an hour. They could see all the data you could ever wish to see whether someone was showing the signs of being a problem gambler. Not only that but I would be the first to question any data they did put out there as they have a huge incentive to manipulate it to suit whatever narrative they want.
So let’s think about the 25% of all customers using safer gambling tools number. Who knows whether every one of the people who are included in this 25% opted into using these tools or whether at certain times they are already opted into this option by the bookmaker. I.e. the default option would be a £100 a week weekly deposit and not a no limit. Why does it matter? It matters hugely. Are you honestly saying that of those 25% of people who are deciding to take advantage of one of those tools (i.e. opting in) that only 1 in 83 of those people, who have used one of those tools, suffers from the higher risk problem gambling? I have no idea what the number would be but anyone choosing to opt into use one of these tools is doing it for a reason. Maybe they know they have a weakness for the casino. Maybe they don’t trust themselves to not chase. They spend too long playing. Who knows. Nothing good though.
Not only is that 1 in 83 number ‘interesting’ but you will also have plenty of people who wont use these tools (i.e. within the other 75%) who have issues with problem gambling. Now it maybe that the 25% number that Betfair are quoting isn’t reflected industry wide. It might be that they are over egging the number to make it appear that they are a responsible operator. Look at us and how many people use our safer gambling tools. I honestly don’t know. Why is it important? If the industry cannot get numbers that make sense for something so serious, then you have to question all the decisions that are then made on the back of it. In the upcoming White Paper etc. All the narratives we are being sold.
As usual there are hugely incentivised parties here who are very happy to take these numbers at face value. Not least the good old bookie. If the true number was much higher, then it would have to be addressed much more thoroughly. I just get so tired of being expected to take at face value information that comes from either very motivated parties or utterly incompetent parties.
The Gambling Commission must have done a great job with this survey. Says everyone who it suits. It must be the truth. If that is the case then it would be a great surprise given how utterly incompetent they are in every other facet of regulating this industry. I think it is good to question things that are just put out there as unquestionable facts, that don’t really seem quite right.
One problem this industry has is that there are so few independent journalists who will question things. Instead we get the Racing Post running their 203rd article or editorial on Affordability Checks in the last three weeks. One side note that is worth mentioning is that the Gambling Commission dropped a question in the survey from the one done in December 2020 to the one done in March 2021 and ever since. It relates to gambling being conducted fairly and whether it can be trusted. Little wonder that question disappeared….
ProPunting 