View Single Post
Old 09-07-2003, 12:51   #23
Stuart
-
 
Stuart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Somewhere
Services: Virgin for TV and Internet, BT for phone
Posts: 26,546
Stuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver bling
Stuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver bling
Quote:
Originally posted by bob_a_builder
"At the moment, it is perfectly legal to operate a fruit machine which pays out just 5% or even 0% of its takings. The 70% minimum at which most machines currently operate is purely voluntary and not enforceable by law. We want a legal minimum to be set and enforced. This would also require setting a specific period over which the percentage had to be attained, since the current indefinite period makes any percentage figure meaningless"

Quote source
While I agree that the companies should be forced to define how they derive the 70% payout figure, and that all companies should be forced to stick to the same method for deriving this figure, and that maybe a legal minimum payout should be set, bear in mind that if a fruit machine payout is too low, people will not go back to it.
Stuart is offline   Reply With Quote