Pokie Perspective

The wowsers are convinced that the convention centre-for-pokies deal will increase the number of pokies by 230, and that these things are springing up everywhere, sucking in innocent bystanders and hoovering out their wallets. The reality is very different – the Dept of Internal Affairs has operated a sinking lid policy for over 10 years, and in fact has reduced the number of pokies over the whole country.

In Auckland alone, the biggest market by far, the number of pokies has reduced by 40% in 9 years. Here are the figures:  

31 March 2004:  2,030
31 March 2005:  1,900
31 March 2006:  1,749
31 March 2007:  1,634
31 March 2008:  1,607
31 March 2009:  1,497
31 March 2010:  1,482
31 March 2011:  1,384
31 March 2012:  1,345
31 March 2013:  1,224

And here’s the source:

The sinking lid policy will not let the overall number increase, so the 230 for Sky City will be balanced by 230 not being replaced at their end of life.  Those idiots preaching social responsibility (which is another way of trying to protect stupid people from the consequences of their own actions, which you can never do) are ignoring the fact that the pokie numbers are decreasing and will continue to do so. And we get a brand new convention centre, for free.

Bloody good deal in my opinion.

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • johnbronkhorst

    A reduction of about 100 per year, minimum! So by the time the convention centre is built and the 230 pokie machines come on line, this base number will have reduced by 400. Meaning an overall reduction of 170 pokie machines in Auckland!! Would be interested to know the reduction over the rest of the country. After all we don’t all live in Auckland . In fact MOST of us DON’T.

    • rockape

      Do you mean people like me in Nelson wont jump on the aeroplane,fligh to Auckland and become a gambling addict! Wow thats a relief!

      • johnbronkhorst

        Come on we all know all the “rich pricks” live and retire to Nelson….you can afford it. I only ask that when you get in your private jet, you phone me and stop off in Wellington and pick me up!

      • AnonWgtn

        Like you rockape Thank goodness I will not be dragged screaming to go to the Casino – was once there for a dinner, and took $50 to the machines – lost $40, felt that the return on capital was bad so went home and have never been back since.

        • johnbronkhorst

          Me too only been once…went to play the wife and I took $200 each…lost the lot between 7.30pm and 5am…had a bit of blast…left and haven’t had the urge to return….

          • GregM

            My apartment is about 100 metres from skycity, never been in the place. I have much better ways of wasting my money.

          • johnbronkhorst

            Agreed, it is waist of money. But it’s just one more thing off the bucket list. Went in expecting to spend $400. Spent it and left!!!

  • spollyike

    This is more like it WO, a great post! Exposing the lies the Greens tell is the best way to kill them off!

    More please…

    • Bunswalla

      I blush…

  • High_Tory

    So all this means, if I understand correctly, is the number of machines simply goes back to the number there were in 2010? correct?
    And was there carnage in the streets in 2010 because there were poker machines?

    • johnbronkhorst

      Not exactly, the base number will continue to fall by about 100 per year until 2017 when the convention centre is finished, then the 230 machines will be added ie a reduction 170 on todays level….The number of machines will NOT rise against todays levels!!! 2017 levels will rise to 2015 levels when this all come about!

      • High_Tory

        So we get a convention centre for FREE, 800 new jobs, billions in extra overseas tourist dollars and a (quick arithmetic in my head) 14% CUT in the overall number of poker machines compared with today? and Labour/Greens are against this? how dumb

        • johnbronkhorst

          Absolutely……how dumb.

        • AnonWgtn

          But the Auckland Council have still to give final “approval”.
          Bet your life that they will delay as much as possible – Not Len but the left wing majority. Len will abstain ultimately.

          • Mr_Blobby

            Did not know that Auckland Council had the final approval. Looks like some big donations coming for election campaigns. I thought Councils role was to eliminate the competition to drive punters into the city. The rubber stamp is a cert.

            This is all a red herring, the real deal in Government protecting a private company, from competition, for 35 years no less. This is a win win for sky city and there supporters and a lose lose for New Zealand in particular the punters who will be savaged without mercy.

            People will Gamble,drink, smoke if they really want to. If you want to minimize the harm, you won’t eliminate it, how about you open the market up to competition the results will be a better deal for the Punter, as they all start competing aggressively for customers. And they will compete aggressively just look at places like Las Vegas.

  • Interestingly, there was an increase of 82% in pokie numbers between the last count under National (June 1999) and June 2003, when numbers nationwide rose from 13,812 to 25,220. That number of course was inflated by the 230 additional pokies that Labour rubber-stamped for SkyCity under the agreement for SkyCity to build its first convention centre.

    Isn’t it funny that pokie machines are now the greatest evil known to mankind in the Labour/Green parallel universe? It’s also amusing that the Greens had not discovered the power of the petition back then…

    http://keepingstock.blogspot.co.nz/2013/05/chart-of-day-15-may-2013.html

    • johnbronkhorst

      NO…….don’t tell me labour are being hypocrites and judicious with the truth (AGAIN)!!!

      • Of course not John. The thought never even entered my mind…

  • Rangi

    Isn’t the distinction that machines are operated by charitable organisations which, of course, Sky City is not. And of course we have no idea what changes to legislation are in store to accommodate this deal – The deal sounds pretty careless & risky to me

    • johnbronkhorst

      NO…many are clubs pubs and resteraunts

    • island time

      At least we know upfront that pokie profits from Skycity go to that company and if you want a share then buy some shares in the company. The “charitable organisations” have a history of being corrupt and there was a real lack of transparency around the whole process of distribution.

      • Rangi

        So if you’re a sports team, special interest group, charity you’re getting your lunch cut by this deal. BTW the fraud you talk about is not significant.
        Nobody talks about the legislative changes which if not implemented, will result in damage claims against the tax payer. Not the least bit curious about that little nugget for SC??

        • BJ

          Many of the recipients of the poky funds to those sports clubs or charity no doubt presently use the pokies in their local pubs – so when the number of pokies are reduced in these communities individuals will be able to contribute personally to these groups as they won’t have spent it on the pokies. A win win I’d say – less local gamblers and more paying their own way

          • Rangi

            You do realise your forecasting is social engineering don’t you…

          • BJ

            No – merely my opinion of a likely natural consequence. I don’t want to see beneficiaries spending money they are given for their basic costs of living, so lets leave all temptations in one central place

        • johnbronkhorst

          “BTW the fraud you talk about is not significant. ”
          Not quite true…there was a case a few years ago, involving a syndicate of people, some famous sportsmen, involving $millions.

          • Rangi

            And yet that exact same motivation (profit) is behind this deal sucking in the NZ Govt using as yet undetermined legislative “amendments” – But, this meets with your approval???

          • johnbronkhorst

            YES it does!! I was also on the march to protect the Hobbit movies!!!

          • Rangi

            Oh no that’s it! Reason has abandoned you, you’ve just revealed your hypocrisy and even worse – you think the use of caps will reinforce your point. The Hobbit example was correcting defective legislation simply overlooked by Labour. Don’t get ya G banger in a twist, this is something very different.

          • johnbronkhorst

            BOLLOCKS it was all about keeping jobs here and creating jobs HERE in NZ.

          • Mediaan

            Metiria, stay behind after school and write out neatly 200 times,

            “Profit is what built the society that gave me my education.”
            “Profit is what built the society that gave me my education.”
            “Profit is what built the society that gave me my education.”

    • Chad Chambers

      Can’t see much revenue from Sky City pokies being returned to the community from whence it came.

      • In Vino Veritas

        Currently, Sky City returns about 2.5% of the revenue it makes from poker machines to the community Chad.

        You should also realise that in 2011/12, 52% of NZ’rs gambled. This includes on things like Lotto and Bingo. Of those 52% less than 5% gambled on gaming machines in Casinos. Only .3 of a percent of gamblers were problem gamblers.
        So this whole thing is basically a beat up. Poker machines are being used as a method by the Greens and Labour to attack the National party and smear some propaganda around (remember the manufacturing “crisis”? that was when manufacturing was overperforming, died a natural death now, as happens with manufactured “crises”). The implication is that they have no credible ways of making any attacks and have to resort to this sort of nonsense.

        • johnbronkhorst

          So…are you saying….2 500 000 adult population,
          52% =1 300 000
          5% of those is 65 000
          0.3% of these is195 people.
          So all this fuss is about 195 that by population distribution only 65 live in Auckland and COULD be effected by this?

          • SJ00

            Don’t throw numbers, facts and figures around.. its not how to get your point across. Scream, rant, rave, threaten, protest and bitch and moan is the way this country will do things soon. :)
            /s
            Even if it was 1000 problem gamblers, who gives a fuck about them. Its such a small proportion and if the gweens have there way they will stop everyone having a fun night out on the pokies. Thats fine, I’ll make sure I go to Vegas twice a year not once and spend my money overseas. Like Shearer.

          • BOOM. Give that man a choc fish.

          • In Vino Veritas

            jb, 52% equates to 1,833,000 in the 2011/12 study I have viewed. You are near enough right. Doing the math shows the numbers are miniscule. And for any doubters out there the info is freely available from the Ministry of Health.

          • johnbronkhorst

            Thanks…just started with a guestimate that there are 2 500 000 eligible adults in NZ. But the principle holds up!

      • johnbronkhorst

        Sure you can…………it’s called…..TAX!

        • Chad Chambers

          Everyone shares in that, even you. I’m interested in a decent proportion of the monies being returned to the same communities they came from in the form of community facilities, etc.

          • Alloytoo

            That’s not very communistic of you.

            I personally prefer a moderate redistribution through the tax system in favour of poorer communities.

            I think it leads to better overall outcomes.

          • Chad Chambers

            That would be better than nothing but most people here are against further relief for low-income families and even more against govt building of community facilities. I believe the machines are responsible for problems in specific communities and therefore the revenue gained should be partially returned to those same communities directly with facilities and upgrades that will help strengthen them.

          • Alloytoo

            So you don’t really care about removing the vices and temptations from the community, you just want placate the masses.

            In the immortal words of Eddie Grant: “keeps a brother in a subjection.”

          • rockape

            Do you realy think that the sports teams etc that benefit are made up of the problem gamblers? If so you are dumber than I thought. If you want to benefit the problem gamblers, give the returns to the Bottle shop and give them a discount. Addictive people are addictive people.

          • johnbronkhorst

            Where do you think the dole comes from. I think you need to come back from over the rainbow…Dorrothy.

          • Gazzaw

            Shouldn’t you be at work putting food on the table Chad?

          • Chad Chambers

            I am working. What about you?

          • johnbronkhorst

            He is…the tables at McDonalds

          • johnbronkhorst

            AAHH but there in lies the rub, how very Orwellian of you……some benefit more than others. There in lies the reason I will NEVER vote labour…it is they who make the definitions of who THEY believe is worthy and to them in their Gerry mandering way…choose labour voters over all others to benefit.
            eg creating a ministry for Auckland, which was transparently designed to shore up their voter base in Auckland.

          • Chad Chambers

            Yeah, some benefit more than others and, because of problem gambling, some suffer more than others.

          • johnbronkhorst

            Then they should stop gambling…simple. It’s not compulsory! 230 new pokies will not make IT COMPULSORY……..In short, take RESPONSIBILITY for yourself!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Alloytoo

            The standard left answer would be that they can’t, and need to be taken care of.

            To which I would reply, they shouldn’t be allowed to bloody vote then.

          • rockape

            How many problem gamblers are there Chad? How many in Auckland and whats your definition. Mine would be if you cant afford it its a problem if you can its not. So what are the facts Chad.

          • Lion_ess

            People have all sorts of addictions. Heard of OCD? Let’s outlaw Irons for those who need to continually check they’ve switched the iron off, lets outlaw car door locks for those who continually need to check they’ve locked the car. Both your arguments and thread-jacking attempts are puerile.

          • Chad Chambers

            That’s simplistic. Those personal issues are not damaging to communities. Stick to the topic please. You are the one who is thread-jacking.

          • Lion_ess

            Addictive gambling is also a personal problem – not a community problem as you would wish. Only an addict will decide they have a problem and need to fix it. As the Aussies say, you can bet on two flies crawling up the wall, if that is your bent. You can close all the Casino’s (and Conference Centres) and people will still play heads and tails – if they want.
            Your arguments are the simplistic ones, you want to blame anything but the underlying problem – like hungry kids – put food in schools – and not hold the parents to account. This country doesn’t have any need to starve kids, except for slack parents. Deal to the problem, not the symptoms.

          • Hazards001

            “Yeah, some benefit more than others and, because of problem gambling, some suffer more than others.”

            Good god…do you really believe that? Why is it the rest of the worlds worry that some people are fuckwits losers degenerates or just plain fucking stupid or unlucky?

            The Darwin principal has it’s place you know. Even if you and your wowser mates don’t like it.

            Gambling. porn, drugs, cigarettes, alcohol…no one can force you..it’s a personal choice. Anyone that says otherwise is a fucking liar. And anyone that gets addicted should not use that as a reason why the rest of the world can’t have some responsible fun!

            It’s well past time the PC wankers in this country such as yourself took some Viagra and hardened the fuck up!

          • Lion_ess

            Gambling problems are a first world problem – those who gamble to excess are those who believe the government (taxpayers) will fund their losses. Give them a spade and tell them to dig some income, and see how many will gamble that away. They are lazy, indolent cunts, who think taxpayers owe them a living.

          • Hazards001

            Spent most of my working life on a shovel. Although I don’t use one now the callouses on my hands run so deep they will be there forever. I like to have a gamble, I take the amount of money I am prepared to lose and lose it. When it’s gone so am I. I refuse to GIVE my money away on a no win proposition and I totally agree with your sentiments.

          • Lion_ess

            You like to have a loss then Hazards, I understand gambling pays around 82% payback. This means if you continue to play, ultimately you will lose. It’s like lotto, but in smaller amounts in as much as, when you play lotto you expect to lose, but with pokies people hope they will win. Generally they dont.

          • Hazards001

            That’s right. The odds are against you. As I said I take my money to lose. And I never touch pokie machines. I’m a poker player. All styles. And I’m a competition player. I grew up around gambling, horses, cards…. 2 flys on the wall.

            Seen it all. Got no sympathy for gambling addicts same as I have none for drunks losers drug addicts wife beaters or Australian wankers that want to be a NZ finance minister.

            Gambling like drinking whoring & fighting should only ever be done by those that are prepared to take their losses and go away and lick their wounds. But mostly what I see are revenge gamblers (and womanisers,booze hounds & junkies too come to that…) that keep it up till they lose the lot.

        • johnbronkhorst

          and rates!!!

      • rockape

        you mean to China,the US, Japan etc?

        • johnbronkhorst

          To explain to this idiot (chad)…they are the tourists that will use these pokies!!

      • In Vino Veritas

        Oh and there’s the small matter of Sky City’s tax bill, which goes straight back into the Government coffers and undoubtably get spent on those “communities” that you believe the money came from.

    • rockape

      I would like to be absolutely clear on this Rangi, you would be for pokies in the poor reas but against them where the rich prickforeigners play. Were you on the picket line at Victoria Park to stop the pokies in the pub there or were you supporting Pokies because of the good it does for the community. MeI am against pokies period. But if the stupid want to play them I would rather it was in a controlled environment and made as difficult as possible.

      • Rangi

        OK but just because you asked – you miss the point altogether, the current system serves a purpose to make up for a deficiency in Govt. That benefit has been given away by the Govt, who had no hand in it’s creation, no care for the consequences, and no indication of how it will make that loss good for the charitable organisations. I would expect this behaviour from communists.

        I agree with you, they are fundamentally bad but compare the current situation to the anticipated future situation, the former is the lesser of the two evils.

    • dyannt

      So charities that help the poor, take money off the poor, to help the poor? Sounds a bit arse about face to me.

  • get a grip

    What would also be very interesting is the number of “problem” gamblers during that period. Have they decreased because numbers of pokies decreased, ie is there a correlation between numbers of machines and numbers of addicts.
    Seems to me that gamblers anonymous are not bleating about the skycity deal???
    Best way to move this story to teh fish n chip paper is to debunk it with external facts & opinions.
    But……..sigh……if it goes off the front page, it will be replaced by some other non issue!!! as the green labour party tries to get some media coverage.

  • Jman

    This issue is a complete vote loser for the labour/greens. Nobody seriously thinks that Sky City adding an extra 200 odd pokies in their casino is going to make any significant difference to problem gambling in Auckland. It’s not like people with a gambling problem have some kind of difficulty finding a machine to play on now. Frankly I don’t understand why Sky City is so keen to get extra machines as every time I’ve been inside their casino I see rows and rows of empty machines. More likely what they really wanted was the extra tables. That’s where the money is. Real gamblers play tables. But labour/greens make the issue about pokie machines cos that’s what the poor maoris like to play.

    • Bold Cotton

      To keep the facts correct I must correct you on the first point,Slot
      machines far out earn tables games which are very labour intensive.You
      are correct on the second point about Labour/Greens suck on the scum who
      play the slots when they can least afford it.

      If I was you I
      would be more interested in the money that is paid to the sack of spit
      and sack of shit co leaders of the green party who can research these
      machine number declines WO has posted without leaving the fucking
      office.Maybe Clint does not allow internet access.

  • rockape

    Come on guys, chill out. You should all be pleased that Labour and the Greens are puting effort into this sort of rubbish rather than the things that matter to voters,the things National is actually DOING something about. I love to see the enemy wasting its energy and effort. Just remember if Napolean hadnt wasted all that effort going to Moscoc we would aall have been speaking french by now.. The fith principal of war-economy of effort!

    • johnbronkhorst

      I have repeated this.
      To answer their question……Where are the jobs?
      Answer: HERE THEY ARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Bobrob

    Why do skycity so desperately want to add machines? So they can exploit people and rip them off. 230 more machines at sky city is 230 more machines at sky city…and the 230 extra pokies at SkyCity come without even the dubious benefit of funding for community groups which the non-casino pokies provide. Similarly for taxation. The casino pokies pay much less tax than pokies elsewhere out in the community.

    • rangitoto

      Could be something to do with fleecing thousands of convention delegates. Many on foreign govt funded junkets, which a large percentage of conventions are so why not clip the ticket.

      • johnbronkhorst

        Even companies like AMWAY hold LARGE conventions as rewards for their sales forces. As you say, why not “clip the ticket”

        • rangitoto

          Probably a good time to buy shares in the local brothels.

    • Lion_ess

      You do realise people are not forced to go there?

  • bobrob

    THe numbers listed don’t include the Casino machines at all.. This is fact picking at its worse. Total number of machines at the Auckand casino is 1,647 machines, plus the 230. Means 50% of all pokie machines for the Auckland region will be in one venue.

    • Lion_ess

      How many venues would you like them to be in?

    • Salacious T Crumb

      Are you a troll or a wowser?
      Surely the governments first responsibility is to the greater populace, not the needs of an extremely small minority.
      Until we stop pandering to every perceived victim group this country will forever be condemned to hand wringing economic stasis.

      • bobrob

        wow, resorting to name calling already? come back with a decent argument first, then call me names…

      • Lion_ess

        Troll, there’s a few new ones to have some fun with.

    • Hazards001

      Which therefore means that anyone that goes there knows exactly what they are going for. Who made you and Chad the worlds protectors huh? A casino by definition is place one would expect to find…gee…gamblers? Drinking? Salacious behaviour even? If it offends you stay out. If it harms you stay out. If it has nothing to do with you..stay out.
      The reality is…its well past time wowsers and wankers learnt to stay out!

    • johnbronkhorst

      So what??? You are arguing a pro casino stance…..If 50% of Auckland’s pokies are in the casino…it will be easier to track and BAN problem gamblers.

  • Mediaan

    Good one. These people are logic-free zones, though, and this washes over them without attaching to their brains in any way.

32%