Bajela was promoted from her previous position of sales director, having taken on this role towards the end of last year, shortly after joining the developer’s sales team in September.
In her new role, Bajela will support Stakelogic’s plans to expand its presence in regulated markets, as well as strengthen its position in the game development space.
“It has been such a great experience being part of the Stakelogic team, and I’m looking forward to the new challenges this role will bring.
“I can’t thank the management team enough for putting their trust in me to help continue in driving this company forward,” Bajela said.
Stakelogic chief executive Stephan van den Oetelaar added: “Olga has impressed us since day one. She has been instrumental to our success including the delivery of key partner integrations and territory launches such as Romania and Spain.
“We fully believe Olga will excel in her new role as CCO and all of us at Stakelogic wish her the utmost congratulations.”
Investment banking firm Moelis and Company has been hired to help facilitate any potential sale.
Oddschecker has changed ownership several times since it formation in 1999, having formerly been the affiliate arm of current Flutter brand Sky Betting and Gaming.
In 2019, Oddschecker acquired football statistics portal WhoScored.com.
In January this year the French government submitted a range of player protection regulations to the European Commission for approval. As part of these regulations, every licensee was required to submit a plan of action to ensure players could gamble sustainably.
The regulator, which was established last year to oversee all gambling in France, examined action plans from all operators active in the country, including the two former monopolies, La Française des Jeux (FDJ) and Pari-Mutuel Urbain (PMU).
As well as approving 96 plans, the ANJ said it may make decisions later on some land-based casinos which may only open at a later date because of restrictions related to the novel coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic.
There was no indication that any plan was rejected outright.
The ANJ said it prioritised four main issues: prohibiting minors from gambling, allowing for self-exclusion and other checks, identifying and supporting potential problem gamblers and having a general policy that focused on protecting these groups.
Examining the plan of FDJ, the regulator approved the plan with no further conditions. It said the lottery operator “reflects the operator’s desire to meet” the French government’s objectives regarding protecting minors and problem players.
“It is distinguished in particular by the setting up of an ambitious program aimed at guaranteeing the ban on gambling by minors on all game types, innovative prevention initiatives, diversified and adapted to the profiles of players, and the existence of an advanced player identification and support system for pathological gamblers,” the regulator said.
For PMU, however, it raised some concerns and thus added further conditions.
“Further progress is expected from the operator to fully achieve the objective of preventing excessive or pathological gambling,” the ANJ said.
In particular, it said tools and resources for problem gamblers were not easily available, while identification of problem gamblers and training of employees were also not up to standard.
While the ANJ approved this plan, it told the operator it must improve these areas. This included providing technical specifications of its system to recognise problem gamblers, taking effort to strengthen its training system and ensuring the accessibility of RG tools.
Turning to private operators, online betting market leader Betclic was also approved with conditions following some concerns. The ANJ said the operator had “a vigorous action program aimed at preventing minors from accessing its gambling offerings, an identification and support system for excessive or pathological gambler that the operator intends to further improve during the current exercise and, finally, a proactive and structured company policy for the prevention of excessive gambling marked by ambitious objectives”.
However, it also raised questions about the availability of responsible gambling tools and said Betclic must ensure that these are accessible.
For Unibet operator Kindred, the operator’s indemnification systems for problem gambling were praised, but the ANJ said communications needed to make clearer that minors are prohibited from gambling.
With Winamax, meanwhile, clear signposting of the prohibition on minors gambling, availability of responsible gambling tools and a system for recognising problem gamblers were all recognised as areas the operator must improve to have an adequate plan.
The ANJ conducted a similar review of operators’ marketing strategies in January. In this review, it said it had “serious concerns” about the marketing strategies of FDJ and PMU, which it said appeared to target young people.
The deal will see SharpLink’s common stock holders own an estimated 86% of the merged company, which includes a stock option of 10% of the fully-diluted outstanding share capital belonging to the new company.
Founded in 2019, SharpLink provides sports betting technology solutions. It currently has contractual relationships with league operators, including PGA Tour and NASCAR.
Total market revenue for the month amounted to $359.3m (£258.9m/€298.9m), up from $163.5m in March of last year, though the 2020 figures were impacted heavily by land-based casino closures and a lack of sports betting options due to events being cancelled – both in line with novel coronavirus (Covid-19) restrictions.
The sports betting segment saw the most growth, with revenue here jumping 360.9% year-on-year to $60.8m. Players wagered a total of $859.6m on sports during the month, with this split between $780.1m online and $79.5m at retail sportsbooks.
FanDuel and PointsBet at Meadowlands were again the market leaders in February, posting $31.3m in revenue, up 125.4% on the previous year, ahead of Resorts Digital and DraftKings on $14.1m, then the Borgata on $6.3m.
Looking at online gaming for the month and revenue here reached $113.7m, an increase of 75.4% from $64.8m in March 2020. Online slots accounted for $111.0m of this total, with the remaining $2.7m attributed to peer-to-peer poker.
“Planning is bringing the future into the present so you can do something about it now.”
Allen Lakein, Best Selling Author
It is no secret that regulatory bodies are working with finite resources that can be challenged to keep up with industry demands. This is true in most gaming jurisdictions and is especially true for those undergoing gaming expansion. The reality makes communication between the regulator and the regulated even more important.
As licensing director, I am one of the first people to engage in conversation with a company when it considers entering the jurisdiction. The question I am always asked is how long will it take before we can go live with our technology, game or product. And the answer is that it almost always will take longer than the company desires.
Susan Hensel
Why? It is not that the regulator is purposely moving slowly or is uninterested in seeing a product launched. It is that the regulator must go through its statutory and regulatory required processes and those processes can take time, particularly if what the industry is working to introduce is a matter of first impression.
Sometimes a company or multiple companies with a significant role in a new offering need to first get licensed and that means applications have to be completed and submitted and deficiencies cured. The company and its associated entities and individuals must next go through some level of background investigation and be considered for licensure by the jurisdiction’s decision-maker.
For a company new to a jurisdiction, licensing alone can take six to twelve months or longer depending on the licensing classification, complexity of the entity and the workload already in the regulator’s queue. In some jurisdictions, transactional waivers, conditional licensure, or some form of temporary authorization are available, but even those require lead time.
It is also possible that in order for the technology to be allowed, new regulations or policies need to be written or existing ones amended. No matter where you do business, the regulatory drafting and adoption procedure is not known for its speed. Frequently, this step begins with a product demonstration for the regulator followed by questions so that the regulatory team can fully understand the scope and ramifications of the new idea.
It is not unusual for the regulator to then conduct internal discussions among its staff to ensure each division of specialty has an opportunity to raise concerns and weigh in on how its area of expertise is impacted.
Does the new idea have problem gambling ramifications, is the technology allowed under the law, what added controls or reporting are justified by the proposal, how could the idea be improved for the jurisdiction?
There can be more back and forth with the company to address any issues which could include requiring modifications to the product.
At this point, regulations or policy documents can be prepared.
In some cases, these can be approved on a temporary basis. In other cases, the regulations are put into what can be a time-consuming review workflow that may involve parties outside the regulatory agency itself.
In addition, the proposed idea may require testing. Testing in most jurisdictions is accomplished either in-house by the regulator, through an independent test lab, or through a hybrid of the two. There is again a feedback loop as the testing entity analyzes if what is being proposed meets the jurisdiction’s requirements.
Determinations that must be made can be basic or complex. For instance, in Pennsylvania, it matters whether a new online game meets the definition of a slot or table game because the tax levied on each is substantially different. If the manufacturer is arguing a game should be classified as a lesser taxed table game when it appears to the regulator it is a more highly taxed slot game, time must be invested for the issue to be resolved.
Further, new ideas may trigger the need for internal controls along with the inevitable review and revision required by that process. This can involve coordination between the operator, the manufacturer, the property or platform provider and anyone else in the mix to determine how and where the product fits, how it intertwines with what already exists and what needs to be done to offer the product securely and in a manner that provides sufficient accountability should something go wrong.
The regulatory process is not fast by design as the regulator seeks to implement a well-reasoned, sustainable scheme.
And when you factor in that there are limited staff working to resolve the most immediate matters facing them, you can hopefully better appreciate that new ideas are not ending up in some kind of regulatory black hole. They are being lined up and addressed as efficiently as possible by a regulator facing multiple competing priorities, be it the latest merger, casino opening, enforcement matter or other emerging issue in what is a rapidly and ever-evolving industry.
The point is, gaining authorization to introduce a new product – no matter its merits – usually cannot occur overnight. Despite this, the regulator is sometimes called upon for product approval with little notice and often with an appeal that the “something” is needed right away because the World Cup or NCAA March Madness tournament or The Grand National is about to start.
What is amazing about this phenomenon is that the product idea has clearly been percolating in board rooms and development for months. The regulator it seems can be the last to know. And, once brought into the loop, the regulator can then be characterized as holding things up and being the key impediment to going live. Why is the regulator an afterthought?
Imagine instead, if early on in their product development, more companies communicated with the regulator about what is in their pipeline.
Regulatory feedback on the proposal could be provided with guidance on what would or would not be allowed and what it would take from a regulatory standpoint for the offering to be made available in the jurisdiction. This could occur prior to any coding so that the regulator’s concerns could be accommodated in product design rather than in after-the-fact product modification. Companies that provide significant portions of the technology could begin the licensing process, regulations could be prepared and put into their workflow, and internal control considerations could be contemplated.
All of this could occur simultaneous with product production. Such up-front communication could be beneficial to the entity’s pipeline prioritizations as it understands what may move the quickest while at the same time these conversations could lead to stronger professional relationships with the regulator.
Risk mitigation is a well-worn corporate path. The best way to mitigate the risk of either less than immediate regulatory approval or even potential rejection at a time critical juncture is to get out in front of the issue. Factoring communication with the regulator into the project plan is preferable to seeking relief when it comes to the company’s attention that, with launch imminent, no one has yet sought regulatory approval. Smart companies avoid this problem.
Some products do develop rapidly to meet market needs. Some ideas truly are not on the industry’s radar until an issue arises that requires development. The regulator appreciates this and does what it can to move exceptional cases through its processes as fast as possible with the caveat that regulatory constraints mean the regulator can only move so fast. But for longer term innovation, a pipeline exists. Communicating with the regulator about what is in it, smooths the regulatory process for all parties.
To the extent possible, it is in businesses’ best interest to ensure that when it comes to dealing with the regulator, there are no surprises.
Susan Hensel was named one of the ten most influential women in gaming by iGB in 2020. She is the Director of licensing for the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board and is former two-term president of the International Association of Gaming Regulators. Susan, who is an attorney, has spoken around the world on gaming law and regulation. All opinions expressed are hers alone.
By snapping up Big Time Gaming, Evolution have now secured both top spots in our slots chart, plus a share of all Megaways titles beyond – not to mention their leading position in live games.
The slots chart looks set then to be dominated by three players – Evolution, Microgaming and Pragmatic – with a bit of room left for studio launches by SG, Gauselmann, Playtech or Novomatic and the odd independent, such as Play’n GO, whose Book Of Dead still performs well.
Top 20 games by distribution
There were four new games that launched in March and which also secured top 10 positions: Stormcraft’s Fire Forge, Netent’s Hell’s Kitchen plus Amazing Link Zeus and Solar Wilds, both by Microgaming. Gordon Ramsay’s game is the first branded title to hit the charts in 2021.
No big Easter titles were launched this year so it needed the resurrection of a dozen older games to compete for the seasonal top spots. Lucky Easter (Red Tiger), Easter Eggs (Play’n GO) and Eggomatic (NetEnt) cracked open a few sites but didn’t come close to the top 20.
Clover Rollover 2 was Eyecon’s top performer this month and Pragmatic Play had a good month with 6 of their titles in the top 20, Big Bass Bonanza being one of their more recent launches to reel us in.
SoftSwiss announced a trio of studio deals in March (Eyecon, EA Gaming and Five Men Games) which was enough to secure top aggregator dealmaker spot over the six-month rolling period.
Biggest aggregator dealmakers
On the studio side, ESA Gaming announced a couple of deals but Booongo maintains its position as top studio dealmaker.
* Please note these are live charts which update every month so please ensure the month of March is selected in the drop-downs to match the analysis
**Data on deals by month was collected from April 2020 onwards. Deal relationships between companies from all time are available on other charts. Note that only deals reported on company websites or in the gaming press are collated.
***The games chart here excludes live games and table games. Game rankings are determined by the number of game appearances on the casino homepages of more than 1,000 casino sites. To access many other charts including game rankings, live and table games, positions on subpages or to filter by operator type and size, see our partner’s site, egamingmonitor.com which covers 30,000 games, 1,100 suppliers and 1,000 operators.
The governing Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and Social Democratic Party (SPD) voted for the bill, as did Die Linke, while Alternativ für Deutschland (AfD) abstained.
The implementation of GlüNeuRStv was dependent on ratification from 13 states, in accordance with article 3 of the legislation.
After being cleared within Saarland, attention turns to the two remaining states yet to go through the process: Nordrhein-Westfalen and Sachsen Anhalt, the latter of which will host the new regulator.
The agreement also extends to sports betting, although the state will still retain control of the lottery markets.
As opposed to the previous Schleswig-Holstein model, GlüNeuRStv will be much more restrictive when it comes to online casnios.
Slots will be capped at €1 per spin, with a five-second average spin speed in place.
Table games will be required to be offered separately, and individual states will retain the option to grant lotteries a monopoly for the product.
Online slots and poker will also see a steep 5.3% turnover tax.
Total revenue for the three months through to 31 March amounted to €537.6m (£466.7m/$644.3m), up 5.2% from €511.2m in the same period last year.
Gross gaming revenue was up by 5.1% year-on-year to €525.9m, while revenue from other activities jumped 10.7% from €10.6m to €11.8m.
FDJ said the rise in revenue was driven by an increase in stakes, with players spending a total of €4.6bn, up 11.8% from €4.11bn in Q1 of last year, despite the operator facing longer restrictions related to the pandemic than the same period in 2020.
France did not introduce Covid-19 measures on retail until mid-March 2020, though sports betting was limited from early March due to the cancellation of almost all sports events.
This year, the operator said approximately 10% of its points-of-sale – mainly bars – were closed for the entire quarter, while customers were also restricted by a 7pm curfew and travel restrictions.
However, despite these limitations, player spending was up across all areas of the group, most notably in sports betting, where stakes hiked 46.1% to €1.1bn, helped by the return of the traditional sports calendar after disruption in the latter part of Q1 2020.
Lottery remained FDJ’s main source of income with stakes here rising 3.8% to €3.46bn, or 10.0% when excluding the Amigo game, which is offered in bars. FDJ said the closure of bars and other Covid-19 measures had a significant impact on Amigo, with stakes down 50%.
Draw-based game stakes were up 2.6% year-on-year to €1.3bn, while instant games stakes also increase 4.6% to €2.1bn
In terms of where customers were gambling, land-based operations remained the most popular source, with stakes here rising 5.7% to €4.0bn, despite the restrictions. Digital stakes jumped 64.7% to €1.4bn as more player turned to online during the quarter.
Players won a total of €3.20bn gambling with FDJ during the quarter, up 13.7% from €2.81bn in the same period last year. This left €1.40bn in gross gaming revenue, and after paying €915.7m in public levies, revenue stood at €537.6m.
“Despite the enduring impact of the health situation on the environment, the first quarter confirmed the good trends in our business, with stakes exceeding the levels recorded before the crisis,” FDJ chairwoman and chief executive Stéphane Pallez said.
“After reaching almost 10% of our global stakes in 2020, digital stakes continue to grow at a strong rate whereas our network activity is maintained. The events program for lottery and a busy sporting calendar, including Euro 2021 in football, should allow this momentum to continue in the months to come.”
GambleAware will fund each programme with £250,000.
“In Great Britain, there is limited research available on gambling and the lived experience of minority communities and women.” said GambleAware in a statement.
“However, existing evidence suggests the burdens of gambling harms are higher amongst minority ethnic communities and that these communities are less likely to access specialist gambling services compared with white communities.”
“However, existing evidence suggests the burdens of gambling harms are higher amongst minority ethnic communities and that these communities are less likely to access specialist gambling services compared with white communities.” “There is also evidence that indicates participation in gambling and the rate of women who experience gambling disorder is increasing more quickly than amongst men, but reasons for this are unclear.”
Last year, the first edition of the Treatment Needs and Gap Analysis report revealed that women were three times more likely than men to cite practical barriers as reasons for not accessing treatment or support.
The same report found that people from Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities were less likely to gamble, but had a higher rate of problem gambling classification.
In response to the results of this report, GambleAware called for UK authorities to increase the help offered to problem gamblers and identified women, young people, people from BAME communities and people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds as needing particular attention.
GambleAware are seeking bids from multidisciplinary teams, including academic institutions and research agencies, to form the research programmes. The results generated from the programmes will influence GambleAware’s commissioning practices.
