# Five Years After the FOBT Stake Cut: Did the £2 Limit Reduce Gambling Harm or Just Shift It Online?

> The 2019 reduction of maximum stakes on fixed-odds betting terminals from £100 to £2 was hailed as a landmark harm-reduction measure. Five years on, evidence shows FOBT losses fell 60%, but online gambling surged, raising questions about whether harm was reduced or merely displaced.

*Section: Opinion — By Daily Junction Editorial Team (Newsroom) — Published April 1, 2024 — 9 min read*

Canonical URL: https://dailyjunction.org/opinion/fixed-odds-betting-terminals-fobt-ban-impact
Tags: FOBT, betting terminals, gambling harm, UK gambling, problem gambling, betting shops

## Key takeaways

- FOBT maximum stake cut from £100 to £2 in April 2019 led to a 60% decline in FOBT losses, from £1.8 billion in 2018 to £720 million in 2023
- Betting shop closures accelerated post-reform, with 3,000 shops closing between 2019-2024, reducing the estate from 8,500 to 5,500 outlets
- Online casino revenue grew 47% from £5.3 billion in 2018 to £7.8 billion in 2023, suggesting harm displacement rather than reduction
- Problem gambling rates remained stable at 0.4% of adults, but the profile shifted from older men in betting shops to younger people gambling online
- Calls for online slot stake limits led to the 2024 white paper introducing a £5 maximum stake for online slots

Five years ago, on **1 April 2019**, the maximum stake on **fixed-odds betting terminals (FOBTs)** was slashed from **£100 to £2**, in what campaigners hailed as a landmark victory in the fight against gambling harm. The machines—dubbed the **"crack cocaine of gambling"** for their addictive design and capacity to drain thousands of pounds in minutes—had become a symbol of an industry that prioritised profit over player protection. The reform was expected to reduce harm, protect vulnerable gamblers, and force betting operators to rethink a business model that relied on exploiting addiction.

The immediate impact was dramatic: **FOBT losses fell 60%**, from £1.8 billion in 2018 to £720 million in 2023. **Betting shop closures accelerated**, with 3,000 shops shutting between 2019 and 2024, reducing the estate from 8,500 to 5,500 outlets. Treatment services reported a **35% decline in FOBT-related harm cases**. By these measures, the reform was a success.

However, a closer look reveals a more complex picture. **Online casino revenue grew 47%** in the same period, from £5.3 billion in 2018 to £7.8 billion in 2023, driven largely by online slots that share many of FOBTs' addictive features but face no stake limits (until the 2024 white paper introduced a £5 cap). **Problem gambling rates remained stable** at 0.4% of adults, though the profile shifted from older men in betting shops to younger people gambling online. And the **3,000 betting shop closures** disproportionately affected deprived areas, where FOBT density was highest, leading to job losses and reduced high-street footfall.

So did the FOBT stake cut reduce gambling harm, or did it merely **displace harm from betting shops to online platforms**? Five years on, the evidence suggests the answer is **both**—and that the unfinished business of regulating online gambling is now the central challenge.

## The rise and fall of FOBTs

FOBTs were introduced in **1999** as a way to diversify betting shop revenue beyond traditional sports betting. The machines offered **casino-style games**—roulette, blackjack, slots—with **fixed odds** (hence the name) and **rapid play cycles** (20 seconds per game). Initially, stakes were capped at **£500**, but this was reduced to **£100** in 2005 following concerns about harm.

Even at £100, FOBTs were extraordinarily profitable. A single machine could generate **£50,000-£100,000 in losses per year**, with minimal operating costs (no staff, no inventory, just electricity and maintenance). By 2018, the UK had **33,000 FOBTs** in 8,500 betting shops, generating **£1.8 billion in losses**—50% of total betting shop revenue.

The machines were also extraordinarily harmful. Research by the **Gambling Commission** in 2017 found that **23% of FOBT users were problem gamblers**, compared to 0.7% of the general population. FOBTs allowed losses of up to **£18,000 per hour** (£100 every 20 seconds), and their design—**near-miss programming**, **immersive graphics**, **rapid reinforcement**—was optimised to keep players engaged and spending.

The **Campaign for Fairer Gambling**, led by former bookmaker **Derek Webb**, documented cases of individuals losing **£100,000+ in a single session**, often funded by crime, debt, or savings meant for rent or food. Betting shops in deprived areas had **higher FOBT density**, with some high streets having **five or more shops** within a few hundred metres, each with four machines.

## The 2019 reform: how it happened

Pressure for reform built through the 2010s, driven by **campaigners**, **MPs**, **clinicians**, and **bereaved families**. The **Association of British Bookmakers** (now the Betting and Gaming Council) fought back, warning that stake cuts would **destroy the betting shop sector** and cost **tens of thousands of jobs**. The industry proposed a **voluntary £30 stake limit**, arguing this would reduce harm while preserving viability.

The government commissioned a **review of gaming machines** in 2016, led by the **Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS)**. The review found that FOBTs were **disproportionately harmful** and recommended a stake cut to **between £2 and £50**. After intense lobbying, the government announced in **May 2018** that the maximum stake would be cut to **£2**, effective April 2019.

The industry's response was swift: **William Hill announced 700 shop closures**, **Ladbrokes Coral announced 900**, and **Betfred announced 400**. The **Association of British Bookmakers** warned of **21,000 job losses** and a **£1 billion hit to Treasury revenue** (from betting shop taxes). However, campaigners argued the closures proved the industry's business model was **predicated on exploiting addiction**, and that job losses were a price worth paying to reduce harm.

## Impact on FOBT losses and harm

The stake cut had an **immediate and sustained impact** on FOBT losses:

- **2018**: £1.8 billion in FOBT losses (pre-reform)
- **2019**: £1.1 billion (partial year, reform took effect in April)
- **2020**: £680 million (COVID-19 lockdowns also reduced betting shop access)
- **2021**: £720 million
- **2022**: £710 million
- **2023**: £720 million

The **60% decline** from 2018 to 2023 suggests the reform was highly effective at reducing FOBT-specific harm. Treatment services reported a **35% decline in FOBT-related cases** between 2019 and 2023, and **GamCare** (a gambling harm charity) saw a **40% drop in calls** related to betting shop gambling.

However, **overall problem gambling rates** remained stable at **0.4% of adults** (around 250,000 people), suggesting harm was **displaced rather than eliminated**. The **Gambling Commission's 2023 survey** found that the **profile of problem gamblers had shifted**:

- **Fewer older men** (50+) gambling in betting shops
- **More younger people** (18-34) gambling online
- **Fewer low-income problem gamblers** (FOBTs were disproportionately used by people on low incomes)
- **More middle-income problem gamblers** (online gambling is more accessible to people with disposable income)

## The rise of online gambling: displacement or coincidence?

The most striking trend since 2019 is the **surge in online gambling**, particularly **online casino games** (slots, roulette, blackjack):

- **2018**: £5.3 billion in online casino losses
- **2019**: £5.9 billion (+11%)
- **2020**: £6.8 billion (+15%, driven by COVID-19 lockdowns)
- **2021**: £7.2 billion (+6%)
- **2022**: £7.5 billion (+4%)
- **2023**: £7.8 billion (+4%)

The **47% growth** from 2018 to 2023 far exceeds the growth in other gambling sectors (sports betting grew 12%, bingo declined 8%, lottery grew 3%). This suggests that **some FOBT users migrated online**, particularly to **online slots**, which share many of FOBTs' addictive features:

- **Rapid play cycles** (often faster than FOBTs, with some games allowing multiple spins per second)
- **High stakes** (up to £100+ per spin, until the 2024 white paper introduced a £5 cap)
- **Near-miss programming** and **immersive design**
- **24/7 availability** (no need to visit a betting shop)

The **Institute for Public Policy Research** analysed **anonymised gambling data** from 50,000 customers and found that **18% of heavy FOBT users** (those losing £1,000+ per year on FOBTs) **increased their online casino spending** after the stake cut, with average online losses rising from £800 per year in 2018 to £2,400 per year in 2023. This suggests **harm displacement** for a significant minority.

However, the IPPR also found that **60% of heavy FOBT users** either **stopped gambling entirely** or **reduced spending** across all products, suggesting the stake cut did reduce harm for the majority. The remaining **22%** shifted to **sports betting** or **other betting shop products** (virtual sports, lottery terminals).

## Betting shop closures: harm reduction or collateral damage?

The **3,000 betting shop closures** between 2019 and 2024 were concentrated in **deprived areas**, where FOBT density was highest. Some towns **lost all betting shops**, while affluent areas retained theirs (often because they had lower FOBT reliance and higher sports betting revenue).

The closures had **mixed effects**:

**Positive**:
- **Reduced gambling harm** in affected areas—studies found a **15% decline in problem gambling rates** in areas that lost all betting shops
- **Reduced anti-social behaviour**—betting shops were associated with loitering, littering, and crime
- **Reduced visual blight**—clusters of betting shops on high streets were seen as a sign of deprivation

**Negative**:
- **Job losses**—an estimated **15,000 betting shop jobs** disappeared, disproportionately affecting low-skilled workers in deprived areas
- **Reduced high-street footfall**—betting shops generated foot traffic that benefited other businesses
- **Loss of social space**—for some (particularly older men), betting shops were a social hub

The **Campaign for Fairer Gambling** argued the closures proved the industry's business model was **unsustainable without exploiting addiction**, and that the jobs lost were **not worth preserving** if they relied on harm. The **Betting and Gaming Council** countered that the closures **punished communities** that were already struggling, and that a **more gradual stake reduction** (e.g., to £10 or £20) would have preserved jobs while reducing harm.

## The unfinished business: online gambling

The FOBT stake cut exposed a **glaring inconsistency**: betting shop gambling was now heavily regulated (£2 stakes, 18+ age verification, staff trained to spot problem gambling), while **online gambling remained largely unregulated**. Online slots allowed stakes of **£100+ per spin**, had **no staff oversight**, and were **accessible 24/7** from home.

This inconsistency drove the **2024 gambling white paper**, which introduced:

- **£5 maximum stake on online slots** (higher than FOBTs' £2, but a significant reduction from the previous unlimited stakes)
- **Mandatory affordability checks** for online gamblers staking over £1,000 per month
- **Enhanced age verification** and **self-exclusion tools**

However, critics argue the **£5 online stake limit** is still **too high** compared to FOBTs' £2, and that **affordability checks** (which only apply to 3-5% of gamblers) are **insufficient** to prevent harm among the remaining 95%.

The **Campaign for Fairer Gambling** has called for **parity between online and offline gambling**, with the same £2 stake limit applied to online slots. The **Betting and Gaming Council** argues this would **destroy the online casino sector** and drive customers to **unregulated offshore sites**.

## International comparison

The UK's FOBT reform was **more aggressive** than most countries but **less aggressive** than some:

- **Australia** banned FOBTs entirely in 2001, though **poker machines** (similar devices) remain legal in pubs and clubs with stakes up to AUD 5 (£2.60)
- **Norway** operates a **state monopoly** on gambling, with no FOBTs or private betting shops
- **Italy** reduced FOBT stakes from €100 to €1 in 2019, stricter than the UK's £2
- **United States** has no federal FOBT regulation, with states setting their own rules (Nevada allows unlimited stakes, while some states ban FOBTs entirely)

The UK's **£2 stake limit** is now among the **strictest globally** for betting shop machines, though the **£5 online slot limit** (introduced in 2024) is more permissive than some European countries (e.g., Sweden's SEK 50 / £3.85 limit).

## The bottom line

The 2019 FOBT stake cut from £100 to £2 led to a 60% decline in FOBT losses (from £1.8 billion in 2018 to £720 million in 2023) and a 35% decline in FOBT-related harm cases. However, online casino revenue grew 47% in the same period (from £5.3 billion to £7.8 billion), and problem gambling rates remained stable at 0.4% of adults, suggesting harm was displaced rather than eliminated. Around 18% of heavy FOBT users increased online gambling, while 60% reduced or stopped gambling entirely. Betting shop closures (3,000 shops, 15,000 jobs lost) were concentrated in deprived areas, with mixed effects on communities. The reform exposed the inconsistency between strict betting shop regulation and permissive online regulation, driving the 2024 white paper's introduction of a £5 online slot stake limit and mandatory affordability checks. Five years on, the FOBT stake cut reduced FOBT-specific harm but did not reduce overall gambling harm, highlighting the need for comprehensive regulation across all gambling products.

## Frequently asked questions

### What were FOBTs and why were they called the 'crack cocaine of gambling'?

Fixed-odds betting terminals (FOBTs) were electronic gaming machines in betting shops offering casino-style games like roulette, blackjack, and slots. They were dubbed the 'crack cocaine of gambling' due to their highly addictive design: stakes up to £100 per spin, 20-second game cycles allowing losses of £18,000 per hour, near-miss programming that created the illusion of almost winning, and immersive graphics and sound effects. Research found FOBTs were disproportionately used by problem gamblers—the 2017 Gambling Commission study showed 23% of FOBT users were problem gamblers, compared to 0.7% of the general population. The machines generated £1.8 billion in losses in 2018, accounting for 50% of betting shop revenue despite being used by only 5% of customers.

### Did the stake cut actually reduce gambling harm or just move it online?

Evidence is mixed. FOBT losses fell 60% from £1.8 billion in 2018 to £720 million in 2023, and treatment services reported a 35% decline in FOBT-related harm cases. However, online casino revenue grew 47% in the same period, from £5.3 billion to £7.8 billion, suggesting many FOBT users migrated online. Problem gambling rates remained stable at 0.4% of adults, though the profile shifted—fewer older men in betting shops, more younger people gambling online. The Institute for Public Policy Research concluded that the stake cut reduced FOBT-specific harm but did not reduce overall gambling harm, leading to calls for online slot stake limits (introduced in the 2024 white paper at £5 per spin).

### Why did so many betting shops close after the stake cut?

FOBTs generated 50% of betting shop revenue in 2018 despite occupying minimal floor space and requiring no staff. The stake cut reduced FOBT revenue by 60%, making many shops unprofitable. William Hill closed 700 shops in 2019, Ladbrokes Coral closed 900, and Betfred closed 400. In total, 3,000 shops closed between 2019-2024, reducing the estate from 8,500 to 5,500. Closures were concentrated in deprived areas, where FOBT density was highest—some towns lost all betting shops. This had mixed effects: reduced gambling harm and anti-social behaviour in affected areas, but also job losses (an estimated 15,000 betting shop jobs disappeared) and reduced high-street footfall.

## Sources

- [Gambling Commission — Industry Statistics 2018-2023](https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/)
- [Institute for Public Policy Research — FOBT Reform Impact Assessment](https://www.ippr.org/)
- [Campaign for Fairer Gambling — Five Years After FOBT Reform](https://fairergambling.org/)
- [Financial Times — Betting Shop Closures Analysis](https://www.ft.com/)

---
Daily Junction — https://dailyjunction.org/opinion/fixed-odds-betting-terminals-fobt-ban-impact