altenar2.gif
altenar2.gif
altenar2.gif
CLOSE
× Gambling News In-Depth iGaming Calendar Connections GI Friday Trafficology GI Magazine
GGA 2019 AffiliateCon

|
30th August
The mobile marketing challenge: Personalising push notifications
19th July
Outlook positive for Gaming Realms as H1 finances rise
17th July
Scientific Games secures six-year Colorado Lottery deal
17th July
GAMING1 CEO Sylvain Boniver: "Any regulating territory is a target for us"
17th July
GIG strengthens hand in the Nordics with STK Marketing acquisition
13th July
NetEnt revenues up as mobile growth continues
11th July
Marathonbet becomes official sponsor of Dynamo Moscow
10th July
Paddy Power and SIS pen broadcasting deal
7th July
LeoVegas Sport goes live in Denmark
7th July
Sky Racing World to bring South Korean racing to America
7th July
PokerStars to reimburse PKR players
6th July
AGTech launches instant scratch lottery product in joint venture with SF Holdings
6th July
Global Gaming expands executive team
6th July
Nektan records full year growth of 130%
6th July
GVC posts net revenue rise in encouraging H1 report
5th July
21.co.uk ad banned following ASA investigation
5th July
Betfair partners with Juventus
4th July
Catena Media snaps up Bettingpro.com
4th July
IGT CEO Walter Bugno: A world of opportunity
3rd July
NJ casinos could shutter if budget resolution not found
3rd July
Unibet becomes Aston Villa’s principal partner
3rd July
Betway announced as major sponsor of ESL One Cologne 2017
30th June
Pair of appointments boost Betsson management
30th June
Four EU regulators to sign poker liquidity agreement
30th June
Malta Gaming Authority and Esports Integrity Coalition sign MoU
30th June
IWG inks 888 agreement
29th June
Yggdrasil games go live in Georgia
28th June
Intralot pens two-year Ohio Lottery extension
27th June
Lottoland faces £150,000 fine for “advertising failings”
27th June
Seventh iGaming licence issued in Portugal
26th June
Royal Panda pens QPR sponsorship deal
26th June
Philippines: A cocktail of potential and uncertainty
23rd June
CJEU rules Hungarian licensing regime incompatible with EU law
23rd June
Tempobet renews Burton Albion sponsorship
22nd June
Unikrn boosts eSports product with Betgenius deal
21st June
K8.com nets Manchester City partnership
21st June
GVC updates tennis offer as Wimbledon draws near
20th June
US Federal Trade Commission seeks to block FanDuel-DraftKings merger
19th June
LeoVegas announced as Brentford’s new shirt sponsor
19th June
Sporting Index completes Touchbet acquisition
16th June
Betsafe launches horse racing markets
15th June
32Red extends Rangers sponsorship deal
9th June
PAGCOR suspends Resorts World Manila’s licence
7th June
Betfair to offer markets on professional drone racing
5th June
MGM and Caesars announce Atlantic City casino plans
22nd May
Paddy Power first to launch with Facebook Messenger chatbot
19th May
ASAP Italia confirms CTO appointment
16th May
Fun88 secures Newcastle partnership
15th May
Sportsbet comes under fire for advert featuring Ben Johnson
12th May
Cherry acquires stake in Highlight Games



2019_42_enteractive.gif
GI FRIDAY: WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
THE GI HUDDLE PODCAST
NEW! #006 - LISTEN NOW
Gaming Industry Conferences (22:37)
#005 - LISTEN NOW
The role of gambling media (27:11)
#004 - LISTEN NOW
What is the role of a Gambling regulator? (29:09)
#003
The Future of Gambling Sponsorship in Sport (30:50)
ANALYSIS
MUST READ
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.

READ MORE
PREMIUM CONNECTIONS