Remix.run Logo
▲ NichoPaolucci 6 hours ago

“Gambling company leans into its target demographic”

I worked with a state lottery that did similar things. Their target demographic was the “every day players” that would compulsively buy at the gas station.

I quit that job because it seems to be morally wrong.

Betting apps are just this taken to the extreme, I feel for people with this addiction but it’s not going away anytime soon.

▲Loughla 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I worked with a state lottery as well. They had very clear training for the retailers they worked with to identify and stop problem gambling. There was space reserved in ever ad and on every retailer counter for stop gambling assistance. The few meetings I attended all began with what they had done to reduce problem gambling.

So I'm guessing this varies state by state.

▲bunderbunder 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's hard for me to view that as anything other than mostly for show.

The retailers still have every incentive to sell as many lottery tickets as people will buy, because that's how they make a sizable portion of their money.

And the gambling addiction hotlines are too little too late. I've known people who struggled with gambling. They never admitted they had a problem until they had bottomed out. At that point I doubt the lotteries and casinos particularly care because that well's already run dry, anyway.

If the gaming industry really wanted to put their money where their mouth is on this one, they'd figure out ways to prevent people from getting into that situation in the first place. Putting limits on how much money anyone person can lose, even if only at a single establishment, is one idea that wouldn't even be hard to implement. But of course we won't see that because, unlike gambling addiction hotlines, that runs the risk of reducing their profits.

▲jcomp 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I worked with a heroin distributor as well. They had very clear training for the dealers they worked with to identify and stop problem heroin use. There was space reserved in every text and on every dealer’s coffee table for stop heroin assistance.

Not equating your work for a lottery with dealing heroin, I’m just pointing out that to say you don’t want people addicted to heroin while still selling heroin isn’t sufficient, and I think the same applies to lotteries. If they acknowledge the problem stop even offering it as a product.

▲skippyboxedhero 5 hours ago | parent [-]

The difference is that the regulator controls your licence to operate. So if you do something that fails to meet the guidelines they create for responsible gaming then they take away your licence.

Acknowledging the problem doesn't make it go away: you must be a big war on drugs guy? right?

▲jcomp 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Fair point, and I’ll concede that regulation is an attractive concept here. But in the gambling case specifically it seems that regulation has resulted in an explosion in gambling. The hotlines and responsible gaming stuff appears totally ineffectual and geared more towards the operators being able to say “we care and are doing something” when what they’re actually doing is using AI to prey on people. At least with drug decriminalization or legalization there are genuine attempts at harm reduction.

▲reducesuffering 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Imagine having a "stop gambling assistance" section of your fking AD to promote gambling to people

▲fckgw 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Betting apps are just this taken to the extreme, I feel for people with this addiction but it’s not going away anytime soon.

Why? This wasn't a thing that existed 10-15 years ago, this isn't some long-standing institution. We could ban online betting apps today if we wanted to.

▲cortesoft 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

When widespread sports gambling was illegal before, there were not rich and powerful people whose ability to maintain and grow their wealth and power was tied to keeping sports gambling legal.

Now those rich and powerful people exist, and they will use their wealth and power to keep it legal. It is not easy to put the genie back into the bottle.

▲treis 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Sports gambling definitely existed 10-15 years ago. And it's hard to ban things on the internet with cryptocurrency being a thing.

It's pretty wild that we let it be advertised and boggles my mind that pro leagues jumped on the train.

▲someonebaggy 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Before cryptocurrency there was Liberty Reserve, anyway.

▲Ajedi32 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I worked with a state lottery that did similar things. Their target demographic was the “every day players”

That's wild. Wasn't the whole point of having a state lottery to put the state in a better position to be able to discourage people from becoming addicted? The very idea of a "target demographic" seems contrary to that goal; the "target" should be to have nobody buying tickets.

▲supertrope 3 hours ago | parent [-]

One of the arguments was to make gambling legal, less harmful, and regulated to protect players from cheating. In my state the state lottery company puts out TV ads. Stores have scratch off vending machines with strobe lights on top. So much for harm reduction and making gambling something that you have to actively seek out.

▲jleehn 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> “Gambling company leans into its target demographic”

This was my takeaway as well. Is anyone surprised at this outcome?

▲LogicFailsMe 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Ban state lotteries while we're banning DraftKings IMO. I find I cannot have a productive conversation with anyone who thinks the odds of winning the lottery are higher than winning in the stock market buying total market funds.

Ah... Got it... The same galaxy brains that think p(foom) has a materially greater value than an epsilon minimally >0 to avoid divide by zero errors believe in lottery tickets. Got it. Explains a lot, thanks...

▲evilkorn 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"poor tax" framed by the state to help fund things education.

▲triceratops 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It would be fairer if the state returned the money to taxpayers and funded education out of the general fund.

▲SoftTalker 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And yet somehow education still doesn't seem to have enough funding, despite the lotteries raking in cash.

▲twoodfin 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Education has plenty of funding. Per pupil K-12 spending has grown relentlessly higher than inflation for decades.

▲LogicFailsMe 5 hours ago | parent [-]

And somehow academic performance rarely improves and at a guess that's because raw spending is the wrong metric...

https://www.americanexperiment.org/study-finds-weak-relation...

▲gambiting 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Well, aren't they though, technically?

Your $1 lottery coupon has extremely low chances of winning a million dollars, but they aren't zero. No one will sell you any stocks for $1, but even if they did what is a chance of a random $1 stock increasing in value one million times?

▲toast0 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> No one will sell you any stocks for $1,

You have been able to buy mutual funds in dollar increments for like forever, with the significant caveat that there's often a minimum purchase amount, but once you hold that you can add in single dollars if you want +/- they only deal in a certain number of decimals.

Fractional share trading of stocks and ETFs happens at a lot of brokers for the past several years, too. Do they really want you to buy $1 of BRK.A? probably not, but you probably can.

Also, there's like penny stocks. :P

But yeah, there's no mechanism for that $1 to turn into millions of dollars within a few days. It can happen with a very well timed purchase, many decades, and some inflation, but that's not very exciting.

▲prepend 3 hours ago | parent [-]

ETFs have sold for $1 for quite a while.

▲LogicFailsMe 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Expected return on a total market fund is 9 to 10% annually. Expected return on a lottery ticket is 30 to 50 cents on the dollar.

Just like AI p(Doom) in the next decade is approximately zero, but we all have to pretend to it's between 1 and 10% so American frontier labs can implement regulatory capture.

So if what you're saying is you are willing to bet $1 if I give you a 1 in 1 billion chance of winning $1M, I will take that bet. And I will take that bet as many times as you'd like.

But your best chance of winning $1M? Start with $10M.

▲prepend 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The expected return on lottery is -30-50%.

▲LogicFailsMe 3 hours ago | parent [-]

So 30 to 50 cents on the dollar then like I said?

▲ac29 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I dont think the post you are replying to was saying gambling on lotteries is rational. They are just saying the best possible outcome of buying a lottery ticket is much, much higher than buying an index fund (and the average, median, and worst outcomes are much worse)