Printable View
Makes me sad this, as I really like Coral and they treat us affiliates really well, but this has been doing the rounds on facebook/twitter today and in the Daily Mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...se-pay-up.html
I mean obviously without knowing the ins and outs of it, these mistakes are terrible for PR and maybe they should just climb down and pay the man to save face?
Palpable error rule. The punter appears to have known the odds were wrong which is why he queried the odds and then got the bookmaker to sign his slip.
Yeah I agree, hopefully it will blow over quickly but you can see by many people's reaction on the various Facebook/Twitter betting accounts that this hasn't gone down well with punters.
Obviously the article in the Daily Mail gives the impression the punter has been conned, rather than the truth that he was paid out correctly. As I have been both a bookmaker and a journalist in previous lives I can see it from both sides. I would have written the same article knowing all along that the bookie was right.
Must be nice to be unemployed yet able to afford £100 bets :o
On a more related note, this has happened quite frequently online but usually the bookie catches on before the bet is settled and adjusts the bet accordingly, I'm sure the negative PR won't hurt coral to much ;)
No wonder our taxes are so high.
Maybe we can make a claim for part of the win since we paid for it!Quote:
Originally Posted by justbookies
Suppose it was never likely for a bunch of affiliates not to 'notice' this yesterday!
I don't have any additional info beyond what's already been shared but I too am surprised at the negative impact of PR that all bookies in this situation appear to be willing to put up with.
I can only imagine that they don't want to pay out and set a precedent when the 'next' human error may cost them an awful lot more if they are forced to pay out on that one.
Or when someone get's their buddy who works in a bookies to accidentally give them the wrong odds...Quote:
Originally Posted by HodgeyBoy
Most of the chatter I've seen about this have been more about the fact that an unemployed guy was betting £100 rather than the Coral aren't paying out on the wrong odds - nicely deflected!
I think your completely right on this one, imagine if they misquoted a punter a million/1 by accident. I saw this arcticle, saw the reaction and like everyone else I've already forgotten about it. Coral's press is being affected much more positively by their £Million jackpot in my opinion especially with the stories of the unusual winners.Quote:
Originally Posted by HodgeyBoy
True about the unemployed aspect, I noticed that as well! people have no sympathy for the unemployed, well done Tory brainwashing!!Quote:
Originally Posted by baldidiot
I think it's because the money they get paid from the government (i.e. our taxes) should probably be going to things like groceries and the cost of living, not gambling.Quote:
Originally Posted by RacingJim
He may claim benefit but is he unemployed? I think Coral should look into this. A smear campaign could be on the cards!
I am surprised some newspapers were interested in this.
I am bettor myself and get 10s of winning bets voided. This guy was lucky to get at least some win, it is more than fair approach.
There are so called "Las Vegas" rules that say what is still good line and bad line. Odds like 12 vs 90 is wrong line without any doubts.
Every day at any bookie happens this. Even the best pro bookies like Pinnacle change their approach now. Few years ago they had rule that you can choose to pay the money and be kicked out or agree with void, nowadays they void bad lines as well.