Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: Foreign.
Welcome back to Right to the Source. My name is Robin Harrison and I'm here, as ever, with the Bebop to my rock steady Mr. Ed Birkin. Ed, how are you today?
[00:00:25] Speaker B: I am all good, thank you. I think he'd be more. I think you've done that one. Have you not talked about the turtles before?
[00:00:31] Speaker A: I haven't done a Bebop from Rocksteady before.
[00:00:34] Speaker B: Rocksteady. Let's see which one Rocksteady is.
Be a bit. Is Rocksteady the rhino?
[00:00:42] Speaker A: Yes.
[00:00:42] Speaker B: Okay.
I would probably put you more as maybe Donatello.
[00:00:48] Speaker A: Why Donatello?
[00:00:50] Speaker B: Raphael is a kind of cool one. So you're not him.
[00:00:53] Speaker A: Everyone wanted to be Raphael.
[00:00:55] Speaker B: No, I didn't want to be Raphael. My brother wanted to be Raphael.
[00:00:59] Speaker A: Who did you want to be?
[00:01:00] Speaker B: I think maybe Leonardo.
[00:01:01] Speaker A: Really? What, the officious, bossy one? No.
[00:01:04] Speaker B: Well, I like blue. She.
Yeah, I wasn't. I mean, let any of them be pretty cool, to be honest.
[00:01:09] Speaker A: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. All right. Well, yes, welcome.
[00:01:14] Speaker B: Thank you, Robin. Thank you. Great to be here. Great to be back.
[00:01:17] Speaker A: Feel that the more obscure that these get, the more it throws you off at the start of the episode.
[00:01:23] Speaker B: Yeah, but that wasn't obscure because actually knew what they knew who they were.
[00:01:26] Speaker A: But it still threw you off. Not as much as Googling the Olsen twins trousers, but.
[00:01:33] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:01:34] Speaker A: That sounds really bad when I put it like that, doesn't it? It does.
[00:01:37] Speaker B: Really?
[00:01:37] Speaker A: Yeah. Yeah.
[00:01:39] Speaker B: Anyway, no, let's, let's. Let's make this snappy. Let's talk about gambling. What nuggets of journalistic gold have could I find if I panned through the IGB website?
[00:01:50] Speaker A: Wow, you really tortured that metaphor.
[00:01:52] Speaker B: I did.
[00:01:53] Speaker A: Well, I mean, there's a lot out there at the moment. Two of the things that really can jump out is quite interesting that tie into things we've been talking about these recent weeks. So one of them is obviously the suspensions by the Turkish Football Federation. I think in total, 1024 players have been suspended for illegal gambling activity. You know, one of the most high profile players was a Galatasaray player.
And he's come out and said it was a bet that he made five years ago, hasn't done anything since. So we're getting an idea of the timescale that they're monitoring and looking for this historic activity. And this obviously followed a load of referee suspensions because they were found to have betting accounts. And I think it's quite interesting to bring that up in the wake of the. A gambling related arrest. Not all betting Related, as we hasten to add in the US But I think just the scale is quite remarkable of this investigation. Like, this is obviously coming as part of, you know, part of an emerging crackdown from Turkey on legal gambling. Turkey is obviously spoken in slightly harsh terms in the industry at the moment, I think after a, after the case involving gvc. So I thought that was quite interesting, but it's not.
[00:03:12] Speaker B: I mean, if people really looked at it properly and looked at the nuances and kind of said, well, it happens in countries where this. It's illegal gaming and legal, legal betting, therefore isn't the cause of these integrity issues. But no one's going to do that. It's just still just more bad press whether it's illegal gambling, legal gambling, but.
[00:03:29] Speaker A: In this case it is specifically for what we know, illegal gambling, because they haven't said it's, you know, it's from. Is it Millie Piano, the. They kind of the sportsbook Monopoly.
[00:03:43] Speaker B: Yeah, but, but you should kind of be able to go look, this is pointer and go look, this is what happens when you don't regul it and have all the, all the people making alerts, etc. In a regulated market actually offers better protection. But it won't be, it'll just be used as another example of betting is bad, therefore we shouldn't regulate betting, despite the fact that not regulating betting has led to this issue.
[00:04:05] Speaker A: But I would say that argument that regulation brings it into the light whether it's true or not. And I agree that that's what should be the takeaway from this. That's not landing.
[00:04:17] Speaker B: No, no, no communications problem again. Well, actually, in fairness, people also don't want to hear it. You know, if you're anti gambling, you're anti gambling. It doesn't matter.
[00:04:26] Speaker A: I think this is it. I mean, like we mentioned it before, but it really comes down to gambling as an emotive issue. And I think that makes that argument very hard to cut through.
[00:04:36] Speaker B: Yes. Can I tell you my story of the week?
[00:04:38] Speaker A: Okay.
[00:04:39] Speaker B: Wow. Yeah, please do. Ed, you've got some really interesting stuff. I'd love to hear it. Thanks, Robin. It's not even about the Jaguars. It is on gambling. It is that FanDuel and DraftKings are to give up their Nevada license so they can enter predictions markets or be involved with predictions.
[00:04:55] Speaker A: And if you read a Scott Longlease Compliance and more today, you will have seen they've also pulled out the aga.
[00:05:01] Speaker B: Have they? No, I haven't read that, but. Right. So here is my. And I was going to save this until we got one of the predictions attorneys on and to kind of actually knows what they're talking about and the viewers are vague. This is going to take a long, long time to kind of sort out and it's going to go through to different district courts and then get further and further up on rulings. I am going to throw it out there now. Even though Donald Trump Jr. Is on the board and investor and all of that, these prediction markets, they've got 10 to 15 billion dollars valuations. Looks like DraftKings, FanDuel are going there. I don't think it's going to work. I think they're going to get clamped down on and their valuations be worth next to zero. I think DraftKings and FanDuel are going to look pretty bad out of this. Are they going to get threatened to lose their licenses in a lot more states? Personally, if I were the gambling regulator there, I'd get them all club together to follow, follow what Nevada are doing and just force anyone doing anything with it just completely out of it. Nip it in the bud. I mean it's not really in the bud. Yeah, I don't think this will be successful. I think this will be a flash in the pan and a lot of people are going to get their fingers burnt and look not great.
[00:06:15] Speaker A: Wow, that's a bold prediction. I mean I think one of the interesting things, I think it was on the flutter call the other week. Peter Jackson essentially said he doesn't see predictions performing well in states with legal sports betting. So that would almost kind of lend itself to what you're saying. Essentially it has a short term life, it's purely targeted at markets where sports betting is not regulated. You know, I mean that's kind of, that's kind of the quiet part of the loud part that he said.
[00:06:45] Speaker B: So but if like, I mean you could say why would they do that? But apart from the fact of just kind of what's right and solidarity of, you know, states rights, you know, if New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania or the regulators got together and said if you offer sports predictions in markets where it's not explicitly legal, which is California, Florida, etc. Then you'll have your license revoked here effectively like Nawilda's done, I think they would have to change their view pretty quickly.
[00:07:10] Speaker A: Be interesting if that happens though, because you think about, I know we've kind of said before that maybe the tax from sports betting isn't quite what people said it was going to be. And that really that tax will come when I casino is regulated. However, a lot of these states are still making quite a lot of tax money from these companies.
[00:07:30] Speaker B: Yeah, they are. But I mean, I don't know, I don't know what the, the owners of these businesses are going to do. You know what, to kind of have some prediction markets in Florida and California which could get shut down at some point in the future anyway. You're really going to jeopardize being in the biggest legalized sports market, which is the only thing that's made your company like no to be idiotic.
So it's just a case of just doing what Nevada's done and just going right.
We don't agree with it. And also look, these, these, these regulators don't want prediction yet New York does not want predictions. Markets like surely it doesn't want FanDuel offering prediction markets in New York where they're not paying 51% tax. Instead they're just paying no tax. So then they could go, well as long as they don't do it in our market, then it's fine.
[00:08:16] Speaker A: It's like, well, I mean there's kind of an irony is after so long fighting for a state by state regulation, this almost feels like they're saying, yeah.
[00:08:25] Speaker B: We'Re open to federal, just open to open to shortcuts that clearly go against what the law is. Maybe not the letter of the law potentially. And that's what they're talking about, exact wording, but goes against everything that they, they know. Like they all know the only reason PASPA got overturned is because betting gambling is a state's rights issue. So now they're saying this isn't gambling, like effectively that's the kind of argument it's a contracts and event. It's just at its. If you take away like the wording and I know this isn't how law cases work, but like all the minutiae of what they're talking about and what they're arguing about, which is what's going to take a long time. And this is why I feel quite confidently that this just won't last. Because if you take a step back at some point, just common sense, I mean in the world at the moment, sometimes it doesn't feel that way, but common sense rules. And they're not just going to be able to get around all of this with a weak argument in my view about it's a contract. I, I just, I just don't get it. I don't buy it. I actually think the fangirl draftings are Making a huge mistake.
[00:09:28] Speaker A: I would say as well, you think about the closest equivalent in the industry, exchange betting, which is largely the same.
[00:09:36] Speaker B: Thing, just regulated by sports betting.
[00:09:39] Speaker A: Exactly.
[00:09:40] Speaker B: It's a sports betting regulation.
[00:09:41] Speaker A: Exactly. So it does feel like there's an element of bad faith to that argument because of that and because Betfair for the exchange, it didn't work, but it was licensed in New Jersey.
[00:09:53] Speaker B: And so when I say if FanDuel and DraftKings make a big mistake, they're probably not, because all that will happen is they will compete and make money while they can and then if it all collapses, they'll just be like, oh, well, and then nothing will happen. Whereas actually, you know what, you try and get around stuff, there's not enough consequences in my view, in terms of things happening.
[00:10:10] Speaker A: It's quite interesting, this growth treadmill, because.
[00:10:13] Speaker B: Essentially it's a bit like YOLO as we go back on before, you just praise them for pivoting into, into white markets using all the money they've made by operating in grey markets, semi legal.
[00:10:25] Speaker A: Gray markets, but equally you look at fanduel once again and Rafkings with daily fantasy sports.
[00:10:32] Speaker B: Yeah, but that was legal in the markets they're in and they pulled out the markets where they weren't allowed to.
[00:10:36] Speaker A: Well, yeah, but there was also, there was an element of the pushback was starting and that coincided with sports betting coming along and then being able to.
[00:10:46] Speaker B: Pivot, like, but something pivot. They've just made a shitload of money doing stuff where they're not licensed. And according to the local legislation, national legislation, it's illegal to do.
And you're like, oh, we're pivoting and now doing that and there's no consequences for doing anything bad for operating without local license. And you've got people like you actually praising them like there should be consequences when you do things. You who keep saying, oh, it's great that they're showing this leadership by pivoting into the white market.
[00:11:19] Speaker A: Yeah. But that's, that's mainly to annoy you.
[00:11:21] Speaker B: Well, it still has annoyed me like a month on after you mentioned it. Yes, it's very effective. It's worked really well done. You.
Yeah, I just think, and I think, you know, if people, you know, like leaving the AGA and you know, which to be honest, the AGA probably doesn't really do much for them and is very much land based. But you know, Nevada, you know, I think other people should be, other states should stand together, quite frankly. Another thing on a similar topic that I found interesting this week is which could dramatically change the landscape in the US is how Hard Rock are getting around the lack of eye casino regulation by producing a I casino slot game. But based on historic racing results. And if that kind of gets allowed then does that open up I casino effectively slots in every single state.
They're like historical horse racing machines.
[00:12:14] Speaker A: Yeah.
It's an interesting point. And I think that sort of hybrid sports casino game, like a truly hybrid kind of like amalgamation of the two verticals hybrid is.
[00:12:26] Speaker B: It's not.
[00:12:26] Speaker A: I know.
[00:12:27] Speaker B: It's not at all. It's just a backend fudge of the mechanics for what appears to the player to be a slot game.
[00:12:33] Speaker A: I know. But a truly hybrid sports casino amalgamation. I don't think there isn't really one out there. I'm not even sure what it would look like. But that sort of.
[00:12:45] Speaker B: Yeah, but then they're not doing that. They're effectively saying. And it goes around states.
[00:12:48] Speaker A: I know they're not. I'm getting more broadly than that. Stop being so bloody literal.
[00:12:52] Speaker B: No, I'm not. But states under. But okay. I want to talk literally because this is what this issue.
[00:12:57] Speaker A: Okay.
[00:12:58] Speaker B: Hugely. So if you have a state like Indiana.
[00:13:01] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:13:01] Speaker B: Or New York that says we don't do not want I casino and then they get around it by doing what Hard Rock are doing and.
And just having what is effectively a slot game, you know, a bit like you go to Empire City Resorts World in New York and they're technically VLTs, but they look exactly the same. The game's exactly the same as slots. It's just different. Backend to everyone else would be exactly the same. Look like a slot just like it does in Pennsylvania. Except New York have said we don't want this. You can say, well, again, you're doing a workaround to get around legislation the states don't want. If the states don't want igaming as much as I think it makes sense to have it, then you're not allowed igaming there. And to do a workaround like South Africa, etc. Again, you're opening this up. The US has just been this maze of people trying to work around legislation, whether it's dfs, sweepstakes, predictions, now this.
[00:13:50] Speaker A: So you see this as on the same track as predictions.
[00:13:54] Speaker B: I think it's different. I think predictions is a worse thing. You're trying to completely skirt everything.
And if states don't want gambling and it's getting. That goes against tribal sovereignty and all of that. But if a. If a State decides for whatever reason they don't want, they're happy with sports, but not iGaming, then I think you've got to kind of respect that rather than just kind of trying to do igaming on a back doorway by saying, well, it's the results of a previous sports thing. They can, from my limited understanding, they can change things. So for instance, you know, can you have bet event betting based on past sports events results? And I think if you can't do that, then you can't use that for the slot. So they probably could get around it and outlaw it in ways of the specific wording of the regulation.
I just thought it was an interesting way because if suddenly Hard Rock have monopoly in Florida on sports and de facto I gaming, it's a lot of money. And then, and then Californian tribes suddenly think, hang on, do we regulate sports betting? And then like, I suppose they could regulate our gaming now if they really wanted to open some more options, doesn't it? I think people in other states will try it.
[00:14:58] Speaker A: Yeah, it's an interesting point. It is an interesting point. But I think the thing is, for me, it's indicative of this overarching sort of growth treadmill that the industry is on. And really it's just, it's almost kind of the industry is a shark and if it stops, it dies. And yeah, I can get that to some extent, but because everyone is largely listed but boldened shareholders, there is this just real push to try and do everything and make money in whatever way possible. If you think about, you know, the fact that all these companies have become listed entities, people are coming in from, you know, banking and all these kind of, I suppose, let's face it, traditionally respectable sectors compared to, you know, gambling, which is always going to piss off, you know, a significant chunk of the population. On one level, it's becoming more legitimized and clean and white collar. On the other level, some of these tactics in this kind of relentless pursuit for growth are ultimately to the detriment of the industry.
[00:16:02] Speaker B: Yeah, 100% like they're being allowed. I'm here just being naive, but you know, you're being allowed to, you know, do stuff in certain markets. Now some people say what, what's happening is, you know, prediction sweepstakes. This new. I say new, but at least new in the US I casino on based on effectively sports results, you know, oh, it's innovation, progress. No, it's just trying to get around the regulations to squeeze more money out where you're not really allowed to and then hoping that you can do it for long enough that you know, with, with loads of legal cases.
[00:16:33] Speaker A: Yeah. I mean cash out. Is innovation in play? Is innovation, yeah. It's not, it's not circumventing legislation.
It's a new element to an existing product that enhances that experience. That's what innovation is to me.
[00:16:49] Speaker B: Yeah. And they wonder why the industry is a bad name. Like as I've said before, which is kind of isolating a few listeners and probably most of my subscribers and therefore business. A lot of the gambling industry brings on itself and there should be consequences for it is. And as much as I. We're against, not against, but I think a lot of regulators don't do as good a job as they should. And governments, some of the fines, they give 100% for it. Like if you, if you are making those basic errors and being greedy and not doing the checks, you mentioned all of that, that's fine. And if you're trying to get around legislation and it doesn't work out for you, you should have consequences rather than be like, oh well, it was a bit of a failed experiment, nevermind, we'll go back to how it was before.
[00:17:30] Speaker A: No, no, I can't disagree with that. I mean, I think, yeah, it's a funny old time for the industry because I think the new New World order is going to be one of higher taxes and tougher regulation. We can see it happening around the world. You know, we're going to talk about Argentina, which we promised to talk about last week and then true to formal rush through it at the end, they're raising taxes. You know, we've got the budget next week. UK is going to raise taxes. Like Netherlands. I mean we talk about the Netherlands too much but look what's happening there.
It's a higher taxed, higher controlled market now.
[00:18:08] Speaker B: Okay.
[00:18:08] Speaker A: And that's what we're living in, let's be honest. That is what. And that's what the next phase of the gambling industry is going to be. Yeah. And what's happening is partially as a result of that. Yes. Is the rise of gray and black competition. That's very visible now. That's, you know, very open. But I see jobs, you know, advertise, kind of offshore experience, 100%.
[00:18:31] Speaker B: Okay, so let's look at this then, Argentina, let's talk about it. So you have provincial regulation and so some provinces have one operator, maybe two. Like they're very small. You know, you've got the city of Buenos Aires and the autonomous region of Buenos Aires. Which are different and they have a reasonable amount of operators. Okay. On our Numbers we have bet365 as the biggest operator, Betson and B play. Okay, so let's say you are a bet365, which we will take. Well, let's say Betson because you know, they're listed and say that. Or we can talk about bet365, whichever they are.
Okay, let's have a look. So in Buenos aires you have bet365 in the city. No. So in the autonomous region, in the city of Buenos Aires, I mean actually you have a. I mean you have 84 operators. But let's say Cordoba, the not in Corrientes. So let's say you are an operator and you are operating with a license in the city of Buenos Aires. You are also operating with a license in Entre Rios and there's probably some others if I really want that. Okay. And then you have a one like San Luis and which is probably pronounced wrong. Okay, you don't have a license. Now I'd imagine that these and I don't know, I'd imagine these companies are operating in the states where they've chosen to get a license because they think it's is this worthwhile and they're big enough and the regulations good enough. And in the other states they're just operating dot com. Do you think that is right?
[00:20:03] Speaker A: But it's on the Canada, isn't it?
[00:20:04] Speaker B: Stop needling me. We can discuss why that's not the case. Okay, no, actually in that respect it is, but you can argue in Canada. Okay, fine, let's go. Example, we know that the leader in sports in H2 know they're the leader in sports if you subscribe to our data. So would you mark leader with the leader in sports in Ontario now? I'm sure they would argue or one could argue, not putting words in their mouth, that the reason they great in other ones without a license is that they that a license is not available for them in other in other provinces. And again, you can argue whether they should or shouldn't. However, on Argentina a license is available. You're just choosing not to get one. And therefore should you actually have some solidarity as well between provinces to say if you accept people from any other province without a license, then you're not getting one here. Now I imagine that means that most people go offshore and it would make licensing even harder and more of a gray market. You know, if people are complaining about black market or gray market, you know, whatever you want to call it.
But then doing it themselves anyway. How can, and I'm not saying they are, but how can a company such as a.
Let's call it a fictitious one, if you had a license in, you know, Buenos Aires and you'd, you were like, well, it's unfair because we're competing against gray market operators. But then you're a gray market operator in the next province where there are. There is a one licensed operator.
How can you even justify that? Like, that's just completely hypocritical. Yeah, it's.
[00:21:34] Speaker A: So this is where the term gray, I think becomes very interesting because I think if we're honest as an industry, we. Or, you know, I'm not, I'm not naming companies and I'm not creating a weird amalgamation of a company name because that's just, that's just creating a world of hurt. There is the white regulated market markets. Then there is the, the black markets, which I think is easy, is. Is easy enough to define as this is a market with some form of regulation as they're facilitating or prohibiting gambling and you've decided not to get a license or to ignore the prohibition, let's call that a black market. And then a gray market in theory is. There is no. It's almost like Schrodinger's. Schrodinger's regulation. There is no regulation specifically for or against online gambling, and therefore licensing is impossible.
[00:22:35] Speaker B: Okay.
[00:22:35] Speaker A: That's what gray market should be.
[00:22:37] Speaker B: Okay, so Argentina is not a gray market.
[00:22:41] Speaker A: Yeah, that's my point. That's my point. If we look at the definition of gray, white, black. I think the definition of gray is stretched like almost to breaking point.
[00:22:53] Speaker B: Like there is hardly any gray market out there. People keep talking about gray markets. Makes me feel better. It's not 99% of what people talk about doing. Gray market is just illegal. It's black. So most, most gray operations are not gray, as you say, it's stretched. It's. It's black. In Argentina, in almost every province. I'd have to check this. Every. But almost every province there is a license available. Whether it's one person's got a license or they only allow a couple of licenses or, or you can have loads, such as in Buenos Aires, there are licenses available in almost every province. So operating in those because you choose not to or because you're not one of the people chosen to get a license. Is Finland gray?
[00:23:31] Speaker A: I would not call Finland a gray market. No. Based on the definition of what constitutes a gray market in my head, it could be wrong. Please Tell me if I am or if you have an alternative viewpoint. But I would argue that Finland has a system that expressly says what is legal and what is not. Now one of the things to bring in here is the European Union. Now I know that they have said gambling is a state right issue. I know that certain jurisdictions take a slightly different view. But I would also argue in that jurisdiction's defense, I don't think there has been a clear and unambiguous precedent setting ruling on what is permitted and what is not.
[00:24:17] Speaker B: I mean I think you license to operate across Europe is such a weak argument. Now that has been largely 99% of people. 90% of people would agree that that doesn't work. It's only the last few.
[00:24:31] Speaker A: No, no. And I fully agree with that. However, do think with a close reading there is some ambiguity there. Whether or not I agree with that is, you know, it's a different matter. I mean personally to be honest, I don't.
[00:24:44] Speaker B: However those where you just keep asking enough lawyers until you get one that says what you want to hear.
[00:24:50] Speaker A: I don't think I've ever done that.
[00:24:52] Speaker B: No, not you but like if you're an operator and you say am I allowed to operate in this market with my Malta license? And 9 out of 10 first nine say no and the 10th one goes, you could read it like that and that could potentially allow. And you're like okay, I've got legal opinion that says it's okay.
[00:25:06] Speaker A: Well this is why I think the Bill 55 case is so interesting because that essentially becomes the precedent setter because yeah, in theory if Malta can't protect its licenses from enforcement activity, but that activity is legal in Malta and when the European markets it stands to reason that, that those local laws apply. I mean I would say I do feel that Malta has one eye on this. I think it was very much operators there. I think there's, there's definitely more technology in supply side businesses. There is a push to divers.
[00:25:47] Speaker B: We always end up talking about black market.
Gray is just.
[00:25:52] Speaker A: Yeah, I think, I think the definition of gray has been increasingly stretched. You know, is, and I mean no judgment on either side unless people are doing something really shady. But I do feel, and I think.
[00:26:05] Speaker B: Why do you say no judgment on either side? Like we can't be critical of like the black market and then say no judgment.
[00:26:11] Speaker A: I'm not being critical.
[00:26:12] Speaker B: I believe the black market is a bad thing and you know, we should be promoting the regulated, more responsible, you know, white market.
[00:26:21] Speaker A: Well that's what I'm saying with something really shady. I think black market activity is really shady.
[00:26:26] Speaker B: Which is 95% of all non white market activity effectively.
[00:26:30] Speaker A: I mean that's bold to put that percentage on it.
[00:26:33] Speaker B: Well, we just said the amount of gray is now very small. There are very, very few markets in the world where there's no legislation about.
[00:26:41] Speaker A: I mean this is the issue. It comes back to the fact that gray is still not really defined or there isn't an accepted definition of what constitutes.
[00:26:52] Speaker B: Well, I thought you gave a very, very good one. It's just that most people choose not to ignore that because then exactly is. Is no longer, you know, they would probably most again, I think people who target Argentina would say, you know, it's gray mark activity. I always get it described to me as gray market activity and I just don't think it is. Even though someone who is licensed in, you know, a lot of the operators there who are operating from offshore.
[00:27:16] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:27:16] Speaker B: You know, will are licensed in other local locally licensed markets. So not like Curacao, Malta, but local licensed and probably have some pretty high levels of consumer protection and everything you need. They're just choosing not to, not to get licensed. And maybe the licensing conditions are onerous, etc but you know, you can't have these same operators complain about in Sweden or the Netherlands, you know, we're having to compete, you know, or Germany, they have to do more to combat black market operators. When you're operating without a license in other markets where you could get a license or where they say you can't get a license because we don't think it's legal, I just think that's disingenuous and you know, you just want, you want cake and eat it.
[00:27:58] Speaker A: There is definitely a bit of cake ism about this. But look, we've rambled on for over 30 minutes.
So quick fire in Argentina slightly. Let's get some data. How big is that market? How does it break down? What's the offshore percentage?
[00:28:13] Speaker B: I thought you're going to ask me something, something easy like the, the currency.
[00:28:19] Speaker A: Argentine peso. Yeah, we'll say national dish.
[00:28:23] Speaker B: I mean when I went there it was some good steak and a bit of malbec. I'm pretty sure that's not their actual.
[00:28:29] Speaker A: National dish though I would say okay, Argentine barbecue. So, so probably a bit of steak, a bit of Malbec.
[00:28:38] Speaker B: Yep.
Right. So the size of the market, 20257 trillion peso for the online betting game should we do in Euros where people will actually understand. So I have the online betting game market 2.4 billion euros of which 40% is onshore. A billion and one and one and a half. Just under a billion and 1.43 is offsh.
So a big offshore market potentially gray, potentially black depending on your definition.
[00:29:13] Speaker A: And how does that break down between land based and online?
[00:29:17] Speaker B: So that is just online. So land based is another 2.2 billion. So Argentina has a big.
Let me just check my thing. Big gaming machine market.
How do you think it used to be?
Was it Argentina or Mexico?
I think could have been Argentina. Most gaming machines in the world maybe outside the U.S. but yeah, big gaming.
[00:29:42] Speaker A: Machine because I think it was Finland was most gaming machines per member of the population. I think that was right.
[00:29:50] Speaker B: No I've looked up but it's well okay Japan but they're pachinko.
[00:29:55] Speaker A: Yeah well now it gets into how you define gaming machines.
[00:30:01] Speaker B: Yes.
[00:30:02] Speaker A: Because yeah we're not talking about Virtua Cop.
[00:30:05] Speaker B: No and Pachinko which does get around something because you can change. I mean that's just going down a whole nother thing.
[00:30:12] Speaker A: Yeah patchy slots. Do you remember Virtua Cop?
[00:30:17] Speaker B: Is that like Robocop?
[00:30:19] Speaker A: No, you had the big plastic kind of guns and then you'd shoot at the screen as you.
[00:30:24] Speaker B: Oh yeah, yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah. I mean I can't see anything in a quick look which backs up my view on Argentina having the most machines. So yeah let's just, let's just say past that that's a fact to be confirmed market leader. We have bet365 in the onshore market Betsun B play but as I said is fragmented across the different.
Different provinces also lottery led. So one thing that could be interesting if you were. I think I've mentioned this on here before but if you were a smaller province in Argentina if you were to align your legislation don't have to tax rate but align your legislation, all the technical requirements etc with one of the bigger provinces then I think there are operators there who would happily get licensed even at a different tax rate in that province. I think it's when you're having to do all the technical requirements etc for something that's what puts a lot of people off. So in that respect although each province has the right to do whatever licensing they want being pragmatic, assuming these licensing requirements are you know the city of Buenos Aires isn't. Hasn't got a free fall is decent licensing if you just kind of copied those a bit like the rumouries Alberta is kind of doing with.
With Ontario and regulatory harmonization yes.
[00:31:38] Speaker A: Well, that sounds nice.
[00:31:39] Speaker B: That sounds like. Then, you know, if you want people to get a license, make it easier for them. Just with the right constraints still in place for player protection, etc. So I think sometimes they don't necessarily help themselves.
[00:31:51] Speaker A: No, no, I think that. I think that's fair to say. And what are you giving us more data or are we going.
[00:31:56] Speaker B: Do we have more data? So reason that Argentinians use unlicensed site.
I mean, unsurprisingly, better odds and bonuses are most of them, but higher than any other. This is from our H2's proprietary player surveys. Higher than any other country was crypto.9%, which isn't entirely surprising given the high levels of inflation in the market in recent years and therefore higher crypto adoption.
[00:32:24] Speaker A: Makes sense.
[00:32:24] Speaker B: Percent of deposits and withdrawals, 29% online wallets, 28% bank transfers, 22% debit cards, and then 12% crypto. Again, much higher than any other country in Latin America.
[00:32:38] Speaker A: Note. What are we going to talk about next week?
[00:32:41] Speaker B: Probably prediction markets, black markets, Netherlands. Or we could try and move away and talk about something new.
[00:32:47] Speaker A: Let's commit now to not mentioning the black market the Netherlands.
[00:32:53] Speaker B: Why would we commit to do something we're going to fail?
[00:32:56] Speaker A: I'm going to give it a good try.
[00:32:59] Speaker B: Random country generator.
[00:33:01] Speaker A: Company generator. This week we did a country. This week.
Yeah, we're going to alternate.
[00:33:07] Speaker B: Well, the country, FYI, was came up with Rwanda, but that's fine. At my own website while I'm padding. What is the national dish of Rwanda?
[00:33:19] Speaker A: I don't know.
[00:33:20] Speaker B: Actually Rwandan goat. Brushette. Which is skewers.
[00:33:24] Speaker A: Yeah, like brushette. French.
[00:33:27] Speaker B: Yes, it is indeed.
Right. Country. Sorry, company. Okay, so can I please speak into the mic?
Can I please have a random company generator? Can I have 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Operator. Supplier.
[00:33:48] Speaker A: Operator.
[00:33:49] Speaker B: 1, 2, 3, 11, 1 to 11, please.
[00:33:53] Speaker A: A 7.
[00:33:54] Speaker B: 1 to 6. Good. Pretty.
Pretty niche, I'm not gonna lie. Monarch Casino.
[00:34:01] Speaker A: Oh, no, that's an interesting one. Yes. Let's talk about them.
[00:34:04] Speaker B: Okay, go on, tell me about Monarch Casino.
[00:34:06] Speaker A: A smaller regional operator, doing quite well. A lot of cash in the bank. Okay.
[00:34:11] Speaker B: Two casinos, Atlantis Casino Resort Spa, Nevada. And Monarch Casino Resort Spa in Colorado.
[00:34:17] Speaker A: Yeah. So next week we will talk about Monarch Casino and whatever else comes up, but hopefully not predictions. Markets, The Netherlands or the black market.
[00:34:29] Speaker B: How many slot machines do you reckon they have across their two properties?
[00:34:32] Speaker A: I don't know.
[00:34:33] Speaker B: Great guess. Two and a half thousand.
[00:34:34] Speaker A: Two and a half thousand slots.
[00:34:36] Speaker B: A lot of like people place slots a lot, don't they?
[00:34:39] Speaker A: They do, yeah.
[00:34:40] Speaker B: I don't. I don't really get it.
[00:34:41] Speaker A: No.
[00:34:41] Speaker B: Well, I understand the thing, but, like, I just don't get the excitement of it.
[00:34:47] Speaker A: I can increasingly. I can see it like when you see some of these games series and the fact that they've got all these little nuances and tweaks, I don't know.
I always find that slots producers, developers, are some of the most passionate people in the industry. They really love what they do. And I get kind of caught up in that, talking to them.
[00:35:10] Speaker B: We need to end this because you're going to have a lot of editing today because I've said probably quite a few things I shouldn't. And it's also gone on for a long time, given how little we've probably covered. So that'll be fun for you.
[00:35:21] Speaker A: Great. And we'll get this out in about a month's time then. So, everyone, thank you very much for listening to the latest episode of Right to the Source. Next week we will be back to talk about Monarch Casino. So until then, have a great week. See you in the next one.
