× Gambling News In-Depth iGaming Calendar Connections GI Friday Trafficology GI Magazine
GGA 2019 AffiliateCon
Nicole Abbott

Nicole Abbott

News | Press Releases
12th September
A minor problem?
12th May
The ABB retaliates to Labour’s pledge to reduce maximum FOBT stakes
12th May
Amaya hires William Hill’s Robin Chhabra
10th May
ASA bans Bear Group ad for objectifying women
5th May
Media Relations Director of Ladbrokes steps down
4th May
Q1 sees LeoVegas returning to profit
4th May
Ladbrokes Coral announces Q1 results
4th May
Failure of Florida bill quashes hopes for the legalisation of DFS
3rd May
MGM Resorts partners with GVC to launch playMGM brand
2nd May
Paradise Park approved by Wynn Resorts
28th April
STS completes acquisition of Greep Ltd.
27th April
Andy Duncan steps down as Camelot UK's CEO
27th April
UK Government scraps free play tax in Finance Bill ahead of the general election
26th April
US casinos experience 2% revenue decrease in February
25th April
Merger talks end between Margaritaville Casino and Alabama Indian tribe
24th April
Melco and Hard Rock set to open casino in Cyprus
21st April
Casino cheating laws: Is clarity being lost?
13th April
Federal appeals court overturns ruling blocking gambling facility in Massachusetts
13th April
Scientific Games completes acquisition of Spicerack Media
12th April
888 Holdings may consider moving to Malta after Brexit
11th April
2017 Grand National was officially the busiest day of the year for NYX
11th April
US Department of Justice establish repayment plan for victims of Absolute Poker’s “Black Friday” fraud
7th April
Sky Betting & Gaming prepares to enter German market
6th April
Californian casino under investigation for money-laundering
30th March
Nevada's table games and slots takings down 4.48% in February
29th March
39 arrested in Malaysia following gambling crackdown
29th March
Galaxy teams up with SBM to bid on Japanese casino licence
28th March
Habanero revels in revenue growth ahead of European expansion
27th March
New Hampshire considers bill allowing construction of two casinos
27th March
Kindred consider using AI to prevent problem gambling
24th March
Consortium propose casino and shopping complex in Malta
22nd March
Florida’s bill to freeze casino expansion passes through House committee
21st March
Adelson tops Forbes' rich list again
20th March
MGM Grand introduce skill-based interactive golf suite
17th March
West Virginia introduces first online gambling bill
17th March
Pennsylvania table games revenue drops 3% during February
17th March
Two casinos rejected by Mississippi Gaming Commission
17th March
‘Political risks’ expected to delay Cebu casino
16th March
Gambling Commission urges parents to be wary of video game gambling
16th March
Connecticut’s Public Safety Committee approves two casino expansion bills
15th March
Lottoland hopes to be the first private lottery operator in Germany
15th March
Norway threatens to crackdown on skin betting
14th March
Bwin confirmed as title sponsor of Grand Slam of Darts 2017
14th March
Mississippi governor approves Daily Fantasy Sports legislation
14th March
Industry financiers tap into eSports betting market with Blinkpool investment
13th March
Tabcorp switch regulatory supervisor of Tatts Group merger
10th March
Sky Racing World Expands Partnership with TVG
9th March
GambleAware appoints four new trustees
8th March
GVC extends agreement with Leap Gaming
6th March
Illinois Senate approves plan for six new casinos

Gaming Industry Conferences (22:37)
The role of gambling media (27:11)
What is the role of a Gambling regulator? (29:09)
The Future of Gambling Sponsorship in Sport (30:50)
IN-DEPTH 11 October 2019
Landing on a monopoly

Matthew Enderby asks who benefits from a monopoly-driven gambling market and if there is any point in maintaining one.

It can appear anti-capitalist, like the government wants total control. Players are ushered to a single, often state-run operator, and only one supplier is contracted to provide the platform, making the gambling market seemingly easier to manage. But does that hold true? When monopolistic gambling markets are enforced, who is the winner? Do the players benefit from what is meant to be a safer environment? Will the public perception of gambling be more positive than in an open market?

To answer these results-based questions, the motivations behind a monopoly-driven market need to be looked at first. The initial question is always: Why? A few quick answers spring to mind. It might be testing out gambling and observing how its country responds once the option to have a bet is made legal and available. With only one operator in place, player protection seems like a reasonable motivator.

It would be easier to keep track of addiction and factors leading to problem gambling as all the data, theoretically, could be accessed in one location. The main motivator however, is revenue. With the market dominated by a single legal operator, all of the country’s gambling revenue will flow through it and to the government. But for this to be effective, there cannot be any offshore operators present.

The Swedish gambling market was opened up at the start of the year, and private companies were free to apply for a license. The reasoning for this, according to state-run operator Svenska Spel, was to achieve fair market conditions and bring order. Life before the update in legislation was not entirely different to what it is today. Despite being closed to private companies, Patrik Hofbauer, CEO of Svenksa Spel, says the previous market was only a monopoly on paper.

He tells Gambling Insider: “Around 90% to 95% of the companies now operating with licenses in the Swedish market have been here for more than 10 years, so we are already used to competition.”

Offshore operators were present in Sweden for more than 10 years. They did not pay tax and found ways to navigate around the law. Up until the start of the year, there were three legal operators. Svenksa Spel handled betting, ATG specified in horseracing, and Postkodlotteriet managed the lotteries.

A MediaVision study from October showed 60% of Swedes aged between 18 and 74 had a registered account at the end of June 2018; a 12% rise year-on-year. Roughly 58% of these accounts were with one of the three state-run operators.

On the surface, this seems like a success story for the monopolistic market, but where are the rest of them registered? Nearly half of Sweden’s gamblers, 42%, were registered with international operators. These companies held no Swedish license or authority to offer a service in the country.

What’s worse, where the monopoly is concerned, is 60% of all new accounts registered within the 12 months leading up to 30 June were with these businesses. With so many players setting up with unregistered companies, the idea of a monopoly making gambling safer, with upheld regulation, is incorrect.

Now the market has gone through its changes and levelled out, Hofbauer finds order is in place and player protection has improved. He says: “We now have a level playing field for gambling operators, increased revenues for the state, and clear rules to protect customers against excessive gambling thanks to stronger and better consumer protection. It has ultimately benefitted the Swedish customers, which is the biggest win.”

The move away from a monopolistic approach has not exactly produced a goldmine for other operators, and certainly not for Svenksa Spel. A look at its first quarter results shows a 6% year-on-year decline in revenue to SEK 2.05bn ($197.4m). Its land-based operations, Casino Cosmopol & Vegas, fell 17% to SEK416m, while lottery dropped 6% to SEK 1.1bn. It reported SEK 544m in revenue from sport and casino, a 4% increase. Operating profit for the quarter decreased 55% to SEK 519m. Svenska Spel paid SEK 401m in gaming taxes for the quarter.

While it won’t be impressed with revenue for Q1, the operator stressed one of the biggest challenges in the transition was launching three new products. Hofbauer says: “Business wise, it is positive that we now can offer our customers products like online casino and horseracing, and also offer more competitive pricing."

Improved pricing is another reason Swedish customers will be happy with the change in legislation. So who exactly has been benefitting in the monopolistic structure besides state operators making easy tax revenue? Suppliers might have the most to gain from a monopolistic market. Being selected by the government to provide technology solutions for its online or land-based operations signifies trust. Suppliers will have to earn that trust by proving their platforms can generate the most revenue for the government’s operator.

The appeal behind branding in this case is also undeniable and the opportunity for a supplier to be the leading face is not one to be missed. Building brand recognition in a country where you are the only brand is obviously much easier. The competition exists, but only through unlicensed companies that will not want to attract further attention to their operations in that specific location.

In April, Kambi extended its contract with Bulgaria’s National Lottery JSC, parent company of the Moldovan National Lottery, to supply online and retail sportsbook. The operator is expected to enter Moldova in the summer, where a monopoly is in place.

Kambi CCO Max Meltzer spoke exclusively to Gambling Insider after the deal and said: “From a technological standpoint and user experience, it will be like going into an ATG shop in Sweden right now. We are really excited to say this is not a monopolistic situation where players will get a bad experience from a bad solution."

The sports betting supplier was keen to emphasise that players in this monopoly would not be neglected as a result of the structure set out by the government and it would supply the same level of technology as it would to any market across the world. Only time will tell if Moldova’s bettors do receive this standard of solutions. But what we do know is, with a lack of legal competition for market share, the Moldovan National Lottery will not be pushing its supplier as much as it would have in an open market, to develop niche solutions.

The evidence is stacked against monopolies and it is clear governments still using them are doing so in a misguided attempt to stay in total control and generate state revenue. The irony is the complete opposite is true. More state tax is made in the open market and players are being protected better when operators are acting under approved licenses. Drop the monopoly, it’s good for nobody.