Green Shoots: When having a flutter is no longer fun
You will have seen these adverts all over our television screens, and heard them on radio. Some of our favourite sports teams have been renamed according to their sponsors – Hollywood Bets Sharks is my rugby team of choice, and they play their home games at Hollywood Bets Kings Park Stadium, up the road from Hollywood Bets Kingsmead Stadium where cricket is played. And fan favourite rugby world cup winner Makazole Mapimpi is their brand ambassador, along with soccer legends like Teko Modise and Jerry Sikhosana.
Gambling in this country is big business. Gross gambling revenue (GGR) was R59 billion in 2024. Since COVID in 2020, this revenue growth has been at 42% per year. Gambling is a significant contributor to economic activity and apparently supports 32 000 jobs, with most revenue generated in the Western Cape, Gauteng and Mpumalanga.
I'm a little concerned about this phenomenon. We are suckers for a slick advertising campaign, and the saturation messaging of these betting platforms should be cause for concern – indeed, alarm – in more sections of our community, including government and the appropriate regulatory authorities. I found online information on gambling fairly easily, and so I clearly am not alone in feeling uneasy.
Industry research says that the reasons respondents give for their gambling appear to be increasingly connected to financial strain, with more than half of surveyed punters saying they gambled because they needed the money.
This survey clearly provided the option for multiple answers, because more than two thirds were hoping to win a large sum of money, and down the list somewhere 14% said they had lost their job. When the bet is placed because you need to survive, you know you're in trouble. The online source of my data is an investment firm, and they say that 'problem gambling' prevalence has increased five-fold since 2017, with 21% of problem gamblers unemployed and 84% earning under R15,000 per month.
People, we have a problem. And this isn't even considering those for whom gambling is an addiction they cannot beat. Imagine trying to quit a habit when every corner and screen and broadcast is almost brow-beating you to place the bet. Some may say the tax revenue that is generated should be able to ameliorate the social costs ofgambling.
Apparently casinos paid about 10% of their revenue in taxes last year, and betting platforms a paltry 7%. Is that supposed to ease the destruction that this practice has for people who are not recreational gamblers? For perspective, cigarettes are taxed at 40% and spirit alcohol at 36%. You don't see your favourite tipple on the telly anymore, and we're a short step from having cigarette packets with no branding expect really disturbing pictures of what happens to your gums when you smoke (I saw those in Thailand recently).
I am no prude, and I have been known to wager a bit every now and then. I am no advocate for a nanny state – we cannot over-regulate the choices and behaviour of grown up people. And I know that jobs are at stake. Apparently Tsogo Gaming and Sun International employ half the gambling industry's workforce. With the lower cost and greater accessibility of online platforms, there is a real danger of job losses. For all these reasons, will the authorities please see reason and common sense, and control the bombardment of advertising of these online betting platforms.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
32 minutes ago
- Daily Maverick
New Tebogo Malaka bribe footage verifies IDT CEO said there's ‘sixty' in Dior bag
Newly released video footage of this journalist's infamous meeting with Tebogo Malaka pours cold water on the suspended IDT CEO's denials of her role in a highly publicised bribe attempt. Daily Maverick has decided to release fuller clips from secret recordings of a meeting between this journalist and Tebogo Malaka, suspended CEO of the Independent Development Trust (IDT). Malaka can clearly be heard saying the word 'sixty', after she was asked how much money she and IDT spokesperson Phasha Makgolane had brought with them. Makgolane can also be heard confirming that the sum of money in the Dior shopping bag amounted to R60,000. The meeting at a wine farm near Stellenbosch took place on Sunday, 3 August. Daily Maverick's subsequent video and a related exposé into Malaka's Waterfall property has sent shockwaves through South Africa. The story that Malaka wanted to bury delves into a botched IDT EPWP scheme and prominent businessman Collen Mashawana's involvement in a property currently being built for Malaka inside Gauteng's Waterfall Country Estate. Mashawana funnelled at least R200,000 into House Malaka. This while his eponymous charitable foundation secured a R60-million contract from Malaka's IDT to run employment schemes for nearly 2000 people across five provinces. Scores of the EPWP workers were ripped off by the Collen Mashawana Foundation, with some of them receiving only fractions of the salaries that were due to them. Despite the video evidence, Malaka and her family trust have gone on the offensive, claiming that she had no knowledge of the money Makgolane placed on the table. She also claimed that she was somehow being 'set up' by unnamed forces. In the extended footage we can now release, Malaka can be clearly heard discussing a cash bribe and further lucrative tenders in exchange for this journalist's silence. Malaka can also be heard admitting that Makgolane had briefed her on earlier discussions over possible payments to this journalist. DM
TimesLIVE
8 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
Higher funding limits in Political Funding Act 'will promote secrecy'
The proclamation that doubled the disclosure threshold and annual donation limit in the Political Funding Act will deepen secrecy in political funding and make it easier for private interests to influence our politics and for corruption to occur. This is the view of My Vote Counts (MVC) after a proclamation signed by President Cyril Ramaphosa was published in the Government Gazette on Monday. The new annual donation limit will be R30m, up from R15m, and the new disclosure threshold will be R200,000, up from R100,000. 'This is indeed a setback for our democracy. We cannot allow those in power to jeopardise our democracy and water down constitutionally protected rights for their narrow, self-serving interests,' said MVC's project lead on money in politics, Joel Bregman. He said politics required funding and the role parties played in a democratic system was vital. 'But there needs to be a balance between ensuring that parties are adequately funded, and that such funding is regulated and mitigates the risk of undue influence from donors.' Bregman said the immediate impact of a higher disclosure threshold and donation limit was that there would be more secrecy in political funding. 'The details of all donations under R200,000 will not be known to the public. This is an enormous sum for most South Africans and donations of such amounts should be made public knowledge to facilitate scrutiny of parties' relationships with donors and ensure that donors are not receiving anything in return.' He said the state has never provided a legitimate reason all donations should not be disclosed to the public. 'The past four years of disclosure data show that a handful of wealthy individuals dominate our private political funding landscape. Doubling the amount a donor can donate to a party in a year to R30m will give donors an even greater ability to have an outsize influence on our political system.' Bregman said the change would make parties more susceptible to undue influence. 'And because the law does not regulate donations from related parties through the different legal entities they control, wealthy donors can now have an even more significant impact.' Bregman said when the Political Funding Act was first developed in 2017, MVC was concerned that the original limits would dilute the act, but nevertheless celebrated the fact that, for the first time, the country had a law that provided 'a light into the darkness'. MVC said while recognising the act's importance, it was clear that the law had many defects that limited its ability to achieve its objectives. In 2023, the MVC initiated legal proceedings to challenge the constitutionality of the act and the case was heard before a full bench of the Western Cape High Court in February 2025. 'A key component of our challenge is that the original limits were not formulated with reference to empirical evidence and were therefore irrational and unlawful.' MVC asked the court to find the limits unconstitutional and refer them back to parliament for remedying. Judgment is pending. 'Should our case succeed, the amendments to the act will be set aside with full retrospective effect, including the determination of these new limits. While we await judgment, we are considering other legal options to address the president's action.' Bregman said MVC will be writing to Ramaphosa to request that he release the reasons and full record of factors that were considered as he applied his mind to the matter.
Eyewitness News
9 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
Perfecting the political funding arena still a work in progress
CAPE TOWN - The Electoral Commission said perfecting the political funding arena was still a work in progress. But it would not be drawn on whether the recently raised limits for declaring private donations were sufficient. Addressing the concerns of civil society and political parties in Cape Town on Wednesday, the commission said it was for Parliament to grapple with these matters. Newly proposed regulations from Parliament raising the private donation limit to R30 million a year and the declaration threshold to R200,000 are yet to be promulgated by the president. Responding to concerns that political parties are advising donors to donate in smaller amounts so as to avoid having to declare it to the IEC, the commission said there was nowhere to hide and all funding eventually had to be accounted for in the annual financial statements of parties. The commission's George Mahlangu said that government funding to represented political parties was also strictly monitored. "The law is clear: section seven of the act provides on how these funds can be utilised, that's why the books of the political parties have to be audited by independent auditors." He said that the Multi-Party Democracy Fund, from which all political parties can benefit, had, however, not been as successful as the commission had hoped. Only around R45 million had been raised over the past four years. "We were so optimistic that this would do well, but to our surprise and disappointment, it doesn't receive the contributions that we expect." Mahlangu said that represented political parties were being sanctioned for not complying with declaring their spending.
