Jump to content

E-gaming is a sector we can be proud of, says Quayle


BallaDoc

Recommended Posts

Wealth ultimately has to be based on real things.  I agree that the City makes a lot of money pushing pixels around computer screens, but at the bottom of that there has to be real stuff; real coffee, sugar, oil or whatever the pixels represent, otherwise the pixels and the activities associated with them are meaningless.  Similarly with Airbnb and Uber: somewhere behind the screens there has to be real activity in the real world, people cleaning rooms, making beds, filling cars with petrol, and so on.  I worry about an economy which is based on little more than sleight of hand, or skimming off profits from the people doing the real work, because it seems to be that it's vulnerable to going away if circumstances change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 351
  • Created
  • Last Reply
15 minutes ago, BallaDoc said:

Wealth ultimately has to be based on real things.  I agree that the City makes a lot of money pushing pixels around computer screens, but at the bottom of that there has to be real stuff; real coffee, sugar, oil or whatever the pixels represent, otherwise the pixels and the activities associated with them are meaningless.  Similarly with Airbnb and Uber: somewhere behind the screens there has to be real activity in the real world, people cleaning rooms, making beds, filling cars with petrol, and so on.  I worry about an economy which is based on little more than sleight of hand, or skimming off profits from the people doing the real work, because it seems to be that it's vulnerable to going away if circumstances change.

But this is evolution. In a world where 3D printers can build houses and an App on a smartphone can do away with your local branch of a bank we either move with the times or we wither and die.

Granted we need to balance the economy with real things and I think quality organic food production can be one important market, hemp and medicinal cannabis if we had forward thinking politicians could be another. However we can't be too choosy about how we grow our economy, only that it grows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GD4ELI said:

Gambling has been around for 5,000 years at least and there are no signs that it'll disappear any time soon.

I bet it’s longer than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BallaDoc said:

Ye Gods.  Am I the only one who has a problem with this?  As I understand it, the basics of e-gaming are these: you take a pound from each of 100 people on the basis that they all have a chance of winning a lot of money.  99 out the 100 get nothing.  The remaining one gets 85 pounds.  The organisers get 15 pounds (assuming a gaming yield of 15%, which I believe is the industry standard).  No physical goods are produced.  And this, according to Quayle, makes up 28% of our economy, and that's a good thing. 

Point of information - this is not a description of Pokerstars business model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bobbie Bobster said:

Point of information - this is not a description of Pokerstars business model.

Really?  I would be genuinely interested to know what the PokerStars business model is, and in particular, the gaming yield.  I spent quite a long time trying to find out what the percentage profit skimmed from the punters by the gaming companies is.  I did multiple Google searches for phrases like "gaming profits", "gaming overheads" "gaming revenue" etc. but came up empty handed each time.  I eventually found this under "gaming yield":

 https://mannbenham.com/gaming-law-on-the-isle-of-man-chapter/

which is sort of what I was looking for, and mentions a figure of 15%, but I don't know if Poker Stars' profits are higher or lower than this.

For an industry which makes up 28% of the economy, it's surprisingly difficult to find out basic information about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, doc.fixit said:

.......I still don't understand, how can finance and production  just keep on growing?

You raise a good point. Far too few people have a basic concept of these issues - given that basic economics is at the root of our ability to fund essential services.

The increase in the production of spoons and specific widgets,  is clearly finite. Growth per se clearly isn't. And liquidity, which facilitates spending, can be created and destroyed at will by governments in concert with central banks. It's just about money really - which is just some numbers on a screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Billy One Mate said:

Must admit I struggle with this being a positive from a moral prospective in that its an industry just distributing money from one person to another and not actually producing anything, although some would say people get enjoyment from it just like drinking a pint down the pub. However its a Global Industry, here to stay so why not have a good share of it on the Island and encourage its growth as it definitely produces economic benefits for our Island.

Anything to stop us going back in time and becoming savages eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...