The Con Zone
3. Misleading Advertising
Now I am the first to admit that this is not exactly a con. It is more a
bending of the truth by omission of all the facts. It is also the most common deception.
Generally you will see this approach used in teletext adds or adds in
the sporting press. Does this look familiar?
"Were you on? We told you this horse would win! Last week our
clients collected big with bets such as Red Rum who romped in at 10-1!
Black Beauty give the bookies a right bashing when she hacked up at a whopping 6-1!
We have a bet for today which our insider contacts say will not be beaten! Ring
What the add fails to point out however is that although Red Rum and
Black Beauty did oblige they were not the only horses to be given out. A long winded
message costing £1.50 per minute waffled on for ages and probably tipped about five or
six horses each day. Most likely before you were given the main "dark horse super
maximum bet" (always at the end of the message) you had to endure a couple of minutes
telling you about the sure thing that would be revealed on the late update line.
Nowhere I am sure did you see any mention in the add about the 90% of
the horses given out that didn't win. Nor will you see anything about the long term
profitability of the line. Just ask yourself why not.
With subscription services there will be no adds for a while then as
soon as a purple patch is hit the add goes in. Brilliant results for last week and
"all proofed to the racing press". Please don't be misled by a good burst of
results. Demand to see their long term profit figures.