bet365 boss pays herself £265 MILLION

Participant said:
Right so let's ban pubs then and liken landlords to drug lords. Let's stop the directors of Mitchell and Butlers paying themselves for their commercial success. After all, promoting happy hours is profiteering from addiction and illness.

You must surely know that the legislative approach to cannabis is being relaxed in many countries. Where's the line between drug lord and pharmacologist? That's right - legislation.

You can't unfortunately provide for every idiot in society. Many people enjoy gambling (and drinking) as a casual hobby and know when enough's enough. Those that don't know when to stop - we need to help them of course, but legislation and hampering industrial entrepreneurship isn't the answer to everything.
Click to expand...

Celebrating a person/company for financial success, without considering how they achieve that success, is incredibly shallow. Particularly when that success is gained at the expense of public health and social well-being. Your point about cannabis is a good one - it shows how laws and legislation evolve. The law is not an immovable object, which is why it is silly to claim what these companies do is OK because it's legal.

The cigarette industry is the perfect comparison to the gambling industry in this debate. Introducing the alcohol issue to the conversation does nothing to strengthen your point. All 3 are devastating to society and at different stages of departure from our society. Unfortunately, gambling will continue to peak before the law evolves to deal with it properly. In the meantime, people will continue to reap enormous profit and many more will be ruined in the process.

The Bet365 success is celebrated while this just quietly slips under the RADAR.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/nov/21/number-of-problem-gamblers-aged-11-16-rises-to-55000
 
Diddums said:
Except it's not that simple is it?
Click to expand...

If you mean it is simpler to blame someone else who profits off their lack of ability to manage money then yes. If they were not betting on 365 they'd just use another site to bet on. Don't see how someone cashing out millions from her own company can be seen as wrong because if such large profits off the back of peoples losses.

If people can't understand one way or another the bookmaker always wins then you can't really blame the bookmaker. They laid the odds it was up to the punter to accept them.
 
Jonnybmac said:
If you mean it is simpler to blame someone else who profits off their lack of ability to manage money then yes. If they were not betting on 365 they'd just use another site to bet on. Don't see how someone cashing out millions from her own company can be seen as wrong because if such large profits off the back of peoples losses.

If people can't understand one way or another the bookmaker always wins then you can't really blame the bookmaker. They laid the odds it was up to the punter to accept them.
Click to expand...

That comment had nothing to do with her or B365, she did well, fair play to her.
 
Diddums said:
That comment had nothing to do with her or B365, she did well, fair play to her.
Click to expand...

In terms of being addicted then no it isnt, but ot goes down to lack of self control which is the individuals problem and not the bookmakers. You can't blame a bookmaker on the fsct someone can't manage their money and put it all on a horse expecting to win, or bet more than they can afford and chase losses.
 
Angilion said:
Why are you assuming she pays much tax? She's probably paying accountants to evade avoid tax for her. That's what they're paid for.
Click to expand...
Because I run my own company and I have to pay my fair share when I take a chunk out. There's no mention of sending the money abroad or anything so if it's a straight dividend take she'll have to pay the appropriate tax. SOme seem to think accountants can perform izzy wizzy lets get dizzy magic spells but they can't. Any "evasion" would result in loss of her reputation and damage tothe company if caught.
Being so high profile I'm sure HRMC will take a closer look.

I am surprised if the other poster is correct that the amount equals half a years profit. I take less than that out of mine (% wise) so it can keep ticking over if bad times were to come. And no, it's not £265million (I wish) :)
 
plasmahal said:
A typically low brow, bigoted attitude.... Tar everyone with the same brush. no doubt 'your wild assumptions' attitude dictates you think all Muslims are terrorists as you think all people with a bit of money are drug users.

Sad and shameful.
Click to expand...

It's you that's saying that, i really actually don't care if she snorts coke or not, it was just an amusing imagery of a particular social class that usually does partake (while being ******* hypocrites, like almost literally every politician currently sitting in Westminster is, wrt drugs then go on stupid tirades about lesser folk doing it). I was simply taking stock of the idea that she earned it morally, which she didn't.
 
DarrenM343 said:
There's no mention of sending the money abroad or anything so if it's a straight dividend take she'll have to pay the appropriate tax.
Click to expand...

Most of it isn't even that, she's taken 220 million as her basic salary she's almost certainly paying a big chunk of tax on that - unless someone wants to explain what deductions she's possibly getting away with there? The firm has also paid out circa 90 million in dividends of which she gets 45 million thanks to owning just over 50%.

Ordinarily I'd have assumed the other shareholders would be having a fit over the salary figure, but the other shareholders are her family members so....
 
dowie said:
Most of it isn't even that, she's taken 220 million as her basic salary she's almost certainly paying a big chunk of tax on that - unless someone wants to explain what deductions she's possibly getting away with there? The firm has also paid out circa 90 million in dividends of which she gets 45 million thanks to owning just over 50%.
Click to expand...
You mean the bitch is paying 50% tax on most of that, and it's going back to the country? Who the hell does she think she is?!
 
randomshenans said:
You mean the bitch is paying 50% tax on most of that, and it's going back to the country? Who the hell does she think she is?!
Click to expand...

Indeed, I believe so, what an utter selfish **** she is, helping to fund the NHS, welfare, policing, defence etc... how thoughtless of her. Maybe if the papers carry on then she can just **** off to Monaco where she belongs and then not pay a penny in tax to the UK ever again. :D
 
dowie said:
Most of it isn't even that, she's taken 220 million as her basic salary she's almost certainly paying a big chunk of tax on that - unless someone wants to explain what deductions she's possibly getting away with there? The firm has also paid out circa 90 million in dividends of which she gets 45 million thanks to owning just over 50%.

Ordinarily I'd have assumed the other shareholders would be having a fit over the salary figure, but the other shareholders are her family members so....
Click to expand...
Well, if it's basic salary that's worse from a tax/NI perspective so she's seems to be ensuring she's paying her fair share.
yeah it's a very large amount so in a public company it wouldn't be acceptable but she can do what she likes. Seems a disgusting amount but it's her/their company :). It would be frowned upon if the company were to get into financial trouble however, but there's still no law about draining cash out atm.
Wonder if she could do with some company ? :D. I could help her fill her sheds with £££.
 
Last edited:
She should give her staff a pay rise. I bet the lowest staff like the telephone customer service staff are paid national minimum wage e.g. she would pay them less if she could get away with it.
 
LeeUK said:
I bet the lowest staff like the telephone customer service staff are paid national minimum wage e.g. she would pay them less if she could get away with it.
Click to expand...
Do you have proof of this? People in this thread have actually stated they know people who work there, who get paid really well and love their jobs. So maybe some foundation for your assumptions?
 
icehot said:
Exactly. A bunch of self righteous *****, just focus on whats important to you.
Click to expand...

?

Do you not understand how many people I have to see who are on the brink of suicide because they simply have no time to raise their children, no time to feed their family, they realise that when they die they will leave their children a beat up house which they only half own, for 75 years, any and all of their living life is sucked bone dry by the capitalist system and that greedy **** at the top so he can amass billions on the shoulders of his slaves. And some of these people are on 60K+. Some are on 100K and still not content because they've been brainwashed into never being able to be content.

And you think I voice my concerns because it's important to me??? That is such an upside down view it's almost laughable!

Heck if I was actually thinking about me, and just me, and I was a greedy money fuelled fiend then I would say **** it make more slaves make more people depressed, the more people who are depressed the more patients I get eh, keep em coming. (a lot of psychiatrists actually do this :( especially those looking to commercialise things like transgendr etc.)

Just goes to show how people's thoughts are just upside down. No one has chosen this capitalist society lol, they are brainwashed into it from about 3 years old. They brainwash people into thinking certain things = success.

It's important to at least 80% of all the people who will ever live, the promise of money being their liberation, will NEVER occur. They will waste their one and only chance at life, stuck in a cycle of milking gold for a slave master.

And you think I'm thinking about me? :( I'm actually thinking about 80% of anyone that will ever live!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom