UKGC Rules With an Iron Fist
The UK Gambling Commission, practically rules with an iron fist. A raft of new measures recently has meant that there are now stricter checks, advertising governance and severe penalties for non-compliance, effectively having a stranglehold on the market.
For smaller brands with tighter budgets it has meant a near-impossible task as far as competing and winning market share is concerned. Bigger brands - particularly those with a history in the UK, or innovators like Bet365 are swallowing any available market share and these behemoths are pouncing.
Changing Consumer Behaviours
Over the last few years, in the UK, we have witnessed a considerable shift in terms of UK gambling demographics. Where 20 years ago, younger generations were more susceptible to being converted by way of push messages or traditional betting ads, there has been a significant transition.
Now, younger generations seek transparency and ethical engagement, while media exposure about gambling harm has fuelled a shift in public sentiment about gambling and the problems that it can cause.
An increased amount of responsible gambling measures has meant that people have become more self-aware about how much they are wagering, with the ability to set deposit limits, take a time out, or even self-exclude themselves.
Marketing shifts have seen free bets UK (especially) initiatives treated with caution, with people becoming increasingly savvier about things like wagering requirements, while a clampdown on football club shirt sponsorships has seen awareness of such offers decline as well.
What Could Be Implemented Moving Forward?
Obviously, this exodus of brands has had its consequences. In what was obviously a high stakes game of poker, the UKGC imposed tight restrictions, thinking operators would 'play ball', but having now left the market, it has had costly consequences.
The taxation that gambling operators are required to pay, generates a substantial amount of income for the UK economy, which could, under the current government, contribute to the country being thrown into further financial peril.
Certainly, a lot of changes were made at once. Operators knew that this would result in a loss of income, yet their levies stayed the same. A compromise could have been a lower threshold, in exchange for complying and staying in the UK.
Such income in the past has been used to improve public services and enhance infrastructure. We're not done. It remains to be seen how many more brands will leave the UK market over the next few months with new gambling measures seemingly having an effect.
The outcome will be more and more players looking to international online casinos for the games they'll no longer be able to play as operators leave the UK market.
