ChatterBank9 mins ago
Gotta Love The Irony..
9 Answers
http://
shame they dont go out of business completely...no better than drug dealers
shame they dont go out of business completely...no better than drug dealers
Answers
1 to 9 of 9
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by bazwillrun. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Not sure it is the good news you think it is. They are making more money than ever...
// The firm said sales lifted 3.2% in the year to £1.2 billion, but in the second half of the year revenues rose by 5%, signalling that investments such as new betting terminals in stores were beginning to generate growth. //
They are using accountancy procedures to show a loss
// The business revealed £99 million of exceptional items over the period as a result of its three-year investment programme announced in July, including a £53.2 million writedown against the value of its retail estate of over 2,000 UK shops. //
They are actually getting stronger as a business, and more people, not less are gambling with them.
// The firm said sales lifted 3.2% in the year to £1.2 billion, but in the second half of the year revenues rose by 5%, signalling that investments such as new betting terminals in stores were beginning to generate growth. //
They are using accountancy procedures to show a loss
// The business revealed £99 million of exceptional items over the period as a result of its three-year investment programme announced in July, including a £53.2 million writedown against the value of its retail estate of over 2,000 UK shops. //
They are actually getting stronger as a business, and more people, not less are gambling with them.
Yes that's perfectly true. Sharp accountancy has reduced their profits (and their tax liabilities). Having said that, even if they were struggling, I'm not so sure I'd celebrate (I never celebrate when a business, large or small, struggles).
Never having been the victim of any sort of addiction (unless you count my predilection for wine gums and jelly babies) I speak from a fairly weak position. However, there is no doubt in my mind that gambling can become an addiction and in some cases quite a devastating one at that. I suppose the analogy that baz and Jordy are drawing is that to provide facilities to feed an addiction is perhaps not desirable. But this accusation can be levelled at any legitimate business providing such facilities (those selling alcohol or tobacco, for example). It can even be levelled at businesses like fast food outlets.
Parliament has decided that gambling and the other potentially addictive activities I’ve mentioned are legal whilst drug possession and dealing are not. It’s hard to see why this distinction should be drawn. Certainly in the case of gambling and alcohol, in moderation those products cause little or no harm to the consumer or anybody else. But the same certainly cannot be said of tobacco. But we are where we are.
Moderate affordable gambling gives pleasure to many people. The problems only start when addiction kicks in. I’m not so sure the same can be said of illegal drugs. Most of them are harmful even in small amounts and the effects that they might have on those taking them usually impinge on those around them (and this, too, can be levelled at alcohol).
On balance I don’t think I would put High Street bookmakers on par with drug dealers. They provide a service which many people enjoy without any problems. Problematic addiction levels to gambling are, I believe, fairly low whereas addiction to illegal drugs is considerably higher. Some reports say that up to 80% of acquisitive crime is committed to feed a drug habit. So I think the analogy is a little harsh.
Never having been the victim of any sort of addiction (unless you count my predilection for wine gums and jelly babies) I speak from a fairly weak position. However, there is no doubt in my mind that gambling can become an addiction and in some cases quite a devastating one at that. I suppose the analogy that baz and Jordy are drawing is that to provide facilities to feed an addiction is perhaps not desirable. But this accusation can be levelled at any legitimate business providing such facilities (those selling alcohol or tobacco, for example). It can even be levelled at businesses like fast food outlets.
Parliament has decided that gambling and the other potentially addictive activities I’ve mentioned are legal whilst drug possession and dealing are not. It’s hard to see why this distinction should be drawn. Certainly in the case of gambling and alcohol, in moderation those products cause little or no harm to the consumer or anybody else. But the same certainly cannot be said of tobacco. But we are where we are.
Moderate affordable gambling gives pleasure to many people. The problems only start when addiction kicks in. I’m not so sure the same can be said of illegal drugs. Most of them are harmful even in small amounts and the effects that they might have on those taking them usually impinge on those around them (and this, too, can be levelled at alcohol).
On balance I don’t think I would put High Street bookmakers on par with drug dealers. They provide a service which many people enjoy without any problems. Problematic addiction levels to gambling are, I believe, fairly low whereas addiction to illegal drugs is considerably higher. Some reports say that up to 80% of acquisitive crime is committed to feed a drug habit. So I think the analogy is a little harsh.
-- answer removed --
It depends where and how the losses are handled. Many companies inc the major oil ones have left subsidiaries collapse leaving the financial egg on the investors' faces - usually the banks...construction companies use offshore vehicles like Cyprus to hold their contracts and let that go belly-up if there are issues....there are loads of loopholes and mechanisms that any decent bus-dev executive/comm lawyer have to look out for or consider. There's also this increasing trend with new CEOs is to get all the trouble and dross written off in one go, sustain a hefty loss for a quarter or so and then move onwards and upwards with a more streamlined business(es). This seems to be what Ladbrokes is up to.
And on addiction for some, there's not that much difference between a pub/booze shop or a bookies.....hard drugs are another magnitude of seriousness as to the nigh on instant addiction and depth of it for all concerned.
And on addiction for some, there's not that much difference between a pub/booze shop or a bookies.....hard drugs are another magnitude of seriousness as to the nigh on instant addiction and depth of it for all concerned.
I have a bet almost every single day but i can assure you, i am not always seeking that lucky break. I always bet within my means, never chase my losses and i am fully aware that when i do have a decent return, the bookmaker is merely lending some of MY money back to me in order for me to continue playing the game. I don't smoke, rarely drink and, like the majority, i pay my way. I see gambling on the horses and football as a very harmless pastime.
1 to 9 of 9
Latest Posts
Starmer & Lammy A Marriage Made In...
News17 mins ago
ChatterBank30 mins ago
Damn Savage Why Is This Only Common...
Law52 mins ago
Home & Garden62 mins ago
69M Uninformed Horrible People....and...
News63 mins ago