Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
A daily podcast delving into the biggest stories of the day throughout the sports betting and igaming sector.
podcasts (00:00.206)
Hi everyone, welcome to iGaming Daily. I'm Ted Orme Clay, Insider Sport and Payment Expert Editor. I'm joined by Martin Litchker from Entain who's just hosted the Safe Bet Show on the first day of this summit, along with also appearing on a panel beforehand. And I'm also joined by SPC America's editor Jess Wellman, where we're just going to give you a round up of some of the events of today.
Obviously it's been quite an interesting day so far, so I'll, actually before we get into it as well, we should have our usual message from our sponsor OptiMove. OptiMove, the number one CRM marketing solution for the iGaming market. 56 % of the EGR Power 50 customize player experiences with OptiMove. And that first free month is still on the table, optimove .com forward slash SBC. Thank you Jess, expertly done. Thank you very much. That's all I'm here for. They flew me out just for that.
So, obviously we've just started, I'll start with a safe bet show I guess. We've just had a really interesting discussion with Luke Gazzdick from the NHL. Obviously quite a prominent player, a record -breaking player of course. Martin, you had the pleasure of speaking to him for the past half hour or so. How did you find the discussion? First of all, thanks for having me. I should also say that Optimo should really consider...
Offering Jessica Bellman a gig, the number one editor, not only at SBC, because this has been out of this world. It's great to be here in Toronto, one of my favorite cities, despite being a Brins fan, of course. And yeah, I believe we had a lot of fun on the Save Bad show, and that's what I really try to do with the show. It's not only meant to be about our own planet, i .e. the world of
sports betting and gambling. You know, Luke Gustick is indeed a former NHL player, so he's got a very relevant experience to ponder and consider what else might need to be done so that we can further enhance the standards that we apply when protecting the likes of the athletes. And he also happens to be a very successful sportscaster. So he's provided insights into
podcasts (02:16.398)
for the record, we're filming on the 18th of July, 2024. So he's provided quite some insights, very interesting insights into tonight's game five of the Stanley Cup final. And he also bravely told the audience about the jitters that he's still suffering when he's coming on any stage, especially TV screens.
So I have to ask, you're such a sports fan. Is it just your favorite part of the job getting to talk with these athletes about betting and their experiences with it? absolutely. I still kind of got to pinch myself. I still can't believe that the show when your dear leader, Mr. Seymour, suggested that I could be doing a podcast for SBC. So I was pleased by talking about Jitters. I was trying to figure out how to go about it and whether I would be any good at it.
So not for a split second I would have thought that one day I would have had the likes of Luke Gustick, Amani, Thuma, Glenn Healy, Charles Oakley. That's one of my favorites. And few other sports stars on it. So yes, it's absolutely amazing to have these guys because they, I will sound like a broken record, but they do provide a different perspective. At the same time, we mustn't be disrespectful to my other.
great guests, you know, the industry folks, because then it's the perspective they provide goes also goes beyond the pure industry perspective. They might not have some of them have even played in their younger days, but they have sports, especially sports watching and sports fandom experience of their own. So I always do my best to bake all this in. Yeah, I think it's like I say, it's.
It's not very often we get the opportunity to sit in the same room as some of these quite prominent sports people who've played in these really high profile leagues and just sort of hear quite a candid and honest summary I guess from them in their own words about their careers and what they've done, what they've been through. I mean, it was, I found it interesting with him just talking about his initial experience of getting drafted and moving all over.
podcasts (04:32.334)
not just the country, all over North America, wasn't it? He was down in Texas and then moved right up to Edmonton. But he obviously also did some, his opinions on the development of the sports betting market here in Ontario. I think one of the things he said was he thinks it's made some significant progress over the past couple of years. I'd just be interested, Martin, what's your perspective on that regarding...
play protection, sort of marketing initiatives, how far do you think Ontario has come over the past couple of years since market launch? Suppose if I may, coming back to your first point, I believe stories like Look, they do feature relatively prominently, but they probably don't get as much spotlight or even limelight as they should, because he's had a decent career. It's fair to say that he's never been a superstar of Conor McDavid, Sidney Crosby, or Bobby Orr's. Calipa,
What I appreciated the most about the interview was him talking about the practical aspects. To your point, traveling up and down this continent to build his career and then his dream came true. He got drafted to the best hockey league in the world. Took him a while, but then he got his first game and...
The rest was literally history, 147 games in the big league and even more games in the minor leagues. And some of those guys, as I said on stage, they literally live with their backs packed because it may be the time of the year when they may get traded. And imagine how stressful and painful, even unpredictable it may be, especially, I suppose, throughout the latter stages of their careers.
They already have families, so it's like, honey, we're packing up and we're, in Luke's case, we're moving from Austin, Texas up to Edmonton, Alberta. It's like two different planets, both in a very good way, don't get me wrong. About Ontario, I think Ontario is and will be one of the leading lights when it comes to online gambling regulation. In terms of their approach, that will sound like a broken record, but they keep, I mean, the regulator, the other authorities,
podcasts (06:50.542)
They keep honoring their promise to have an open door policy. I've had some wonderful and even more importantly efficient and productive discussions with all these guys about all sorts of issues and every now and then we got to agree to disagree. Now, c 'est la vie, as they say in Quebec. That's the starting point. Let's try to work together on a product that to a large extent will be to everyone's liking.
And then that lays a very strong foundation. That's the fundamental any jurisdiction should have and should need to be successful in terms of attracting operators into the market. Of course, it's all back in progress. Let's see what the next twist in that evolutionary process here in Ontario is. But and that's the key message I'd like to convey. The other Canadian provinces, at least in my book, should
be looking with an even keener and closer eye on what Ontario has achieved and what Ontario will have done and consider of course at the right time, especially on their political agenda, to do something similar. You mentioned kind of latest twist. I'm curious with the ad restrictions, they kind of went back and tweaked them a little bit to make them a little narrower, but still almost. I.
I'm going to say problematically broad in the sense of not so much the athlete piece, but the people who could feasibly appeal to children piece. Like the example I think I used on the podcast was like Paul Newman voiced a car in cars. Are we going to say using Paul Newman in an advertisement is appealing to children? With that open door policy, you know,
Has there been kind of an ability for operators to come in and be like, you know, this person's a little bit on the edge. They were in High School Musical, but the people who like High School Musical are 30 now. Is that OK? It's a very valid point. Where do you draw the proverbial line in the sand? I suppose for starters, I would argue that the fact that ambassadors, for want of better expression, are no longer permitted to promote.
podcasts (09:13.102)
online gambling or iGaming in the province of Ontario. Had long discussions with the regulator and other authorities. I'm not entirely convinced that it would be an absolute step in the right direction, but it's a way of addressing an issue that the Ontario authorities have perceived has been, or had been, bubbling under the surface for some time and then cropped.
cropped up. I mean, and that's even in the Senate, right? You know, they had that hearing last week. So it is something that even outside of Ontario, people are top of mind. Absolutely. So that's why I'm saying that there's been it's been felt that it needs to be addressed. At the same time, what I'm trying to say, perhaps clumsily is that throughout my career, I've never been the biggest fan of blanket bands, which I suppose goes back to your point.
Where do we draw the line on the sand? It's always preferable to have absolute clarity. Is that achievable in this particular instance? Who is appealing to children? Could you argue that even some of the real... Like Luke Gustick, let's go back to him. He's a young looking man. He's, I believe, 34, 35. Could he be appealing to kids?
would kids argue, well, you know, the guy retired some time ago and I don't even know who he is. So that's the practical, these are the practical considerations that I believe come into play here. So that very long story short. As I've said, I wouldn't have gone as far as banning this practice, but as usual would rather have considered whether there could be milder forms of.
restrictions that could have been imposed so that the industry can continue offering a world -class product that's entertaining while enhancing levels of consumer protection. Can I ask about Luke? If he's a sportscaster, certainly there are media deals with sports betting operators. So like half of sportscasters are retired athletes. So you're just creating a very complicated situation where it's just like,
podcasts (11:34.03)
Yeah, he's a retired athlete, but like everybody does these kinds of reads on air and stuff that... Is he limited in that respect? As you can imagine, there have been countless discussions at all sorts of levels about this particular point. I suppose, and this is my personal view, I see where anybody would be coming from when it comes to active athletes. At the very least, it's just a bit awkward. You got a guy...
or a girl who's in that league and they promote gambling. Different jurisdictions have different tastes, different cultural idiosyncrasies, but it would have been part of the solution here, I believe, had that ban been restricted to active players. Retired players, there's that economic argument that you have alluded to, plus, I will sound like a broken record, but I also believe that...
Lots of folks out there, especially younger folks, my all -time favourite hockey player Bobby Orr. Everybody should know Bobby, but I suppose if I grabbed 10 young people on the street, how many of them would know who great Bobby is? Even here in Toronto, Ontario, even here in Canada. So I believe you are absolutely right that it has given Royce the redder...
Complex issues that would have required a complex a bit more complex response than just a blanket ban And it's hard to put that onus on the operator and the broadcaster for them to figure it out. So thank goodness AGCO does have an ability for people to kind of come to them and be like is this okay? I suppose in AGCO's defense to the extent it's required. I will go back to the open door policy now this
These requirements are now set in stone. But you know, we can still do some more carving to that particular stone and chisel it a little bit to gain even more clarity and perhaps going forward as usual, it would need to be a data driven, pragmatic decision, but there might be some room for maneuver. And for the record, I'm by no means suggesting that tomorrow I'd be knocking on Dr. Schnar's office and making any requests. What I'm trying to say is...
podcasts (13:56.334)
going to yet another point we have already made. It's about evolution. So if it turns out that the public policy concern that we've been trying to address by means of these restrictions is both valid but at the same time we could make the policy a bit milder, that would be my approach. I think the... I'm interested in what you brought up here because like...
Back in the UK, the Advertising Standards Authority does draw a line between active players and retired players. I think there's been quite a few cases where operators who've, I think, I can't remember who they were now, but there was an operator that had several Barcelona players featured in some online marketing. They were told they need to remove that because these active players would have appeal to younger people. Then in other cases, they've had former players like Michael Richards and Peter Crouch appear in advertising, and that's been greenlit because the argument is...
they're now retired, they're working as pundits and more in the sports casting sort of area like Luke Gazdick is. So then they're of less appeal. So I think there's quite an interest, I find it interesting that there's this debate and these circumstances are happening on both sides of the Atlantic, both sort of in Canada and the US and in the UK. Meanwhile in the US, we've got LeBron who they're parading out and caveating it by saying,
Well, he's not talking about betting on basketball. He's talking about betting on football. So now it's OK that you've got very three. You've got all forms of the polls and in the middle as well. And I believe that is the answer. And I would hate to be giving you a lawyer's answer. every podcast. I'm not a lawyer. Every jurisdiction is different. The culture idiosyncrasies are different. The sensitivities are different now.
We no longer live in the UK, so far for me to judge on what's been happening there, because at the same time the euros are in full swing. So there will be Alan, Shearer, Gary Lineker and Dead Gang, they will be out on the TV screens all the time. So how would you classify them? And they might not be, at least to my knowledge, they're not promoting any gambling products, but you know, there would be...
podcasts (16:17.838)
retired or former players of a higher level of prominence than some of the others, who would have been great in the day, but then they might have opted for a quieter life, but if all of a sudden they sprang into action and started promoting betting, and again, it applies across the world. To what extent they are well known and so on and so forth. So I don't think that that would necessarily be a straightforward.
answer in terms of who should be allowed to do what, I believe the generic answer that might go for LeBron as well, or my advice, but who am I to give any advice to LeBron James, would be try to do everything in moderation and within reason, because you are a genuine superstar, one of the very few people out there that everybody has heard of, even on the streets of Toronto.
So that gives you a huge responsibility. In other words, they need to behave. But I'm sure they've got a big team of people. They've been advising them on this. The active athlete piece too is interesting because I think Shea Weber came up in your Safe Bet show. We're seeing a lot of athletes not able to follow some of these policies. And while some like the NFL, their gambling policy was a little complicated, I would say, you know, it's OK to do it.
in your car when you're at home, but not in your car when you're on your way to work or whatever it is. But like the MLB, it's pretty clear. Don't bet on baseball, not just MLB, just any type of baseball that, I mean, to kind of take a step back to Luke and the players themselves, why do you think we're seeing all of these incidents? Like, are these policies really that, maybe I'm not understanding the athletes enough. Is it really that difficult to follow? Don't bet on your sport.
Shouldn't be should it?
podcasts (18:20.334)
I believe that, couple of points, the recent occurrences and the league's reaction show to me that A, regulation is working. So I believe without regulation there would have been a risk that these slip -ups would not have been even detected.
So anybody saying, wow, now we've regulated sports betting in the States and iGaming in Canada, we've exposed everybody to a higher level of risk and it's been conducive to these negative behavioural patterns. No, it's the other way around. Which is also borne out by the league's reaction. All of the leagues that have faced these unfortunate issues have come out.
very strongly against them. Sitting out half a season, Shane Pinto's game. Folks are getting lifelong bets. So this to me demonstrates that the system is working. At the same time, the system is not watertight. So to your point, and to finally answer your question, no. Court martial offence to bet on your own sport, let alone on your or against.
your team. So I believe it's a matter of further education. Keep telling the players find even more efficient ways of doing it. If some of them unfortunately are not prepared to learn that lesson then just like some of them lately they will have to.
go leave the sport because they would no longer be welcome. I believe that's what it is coming down to and the leagues have shown themselves very sensitive to this issue and have stepped up as they should. Agreed completely.
podcasts (20:26.798)
Yeah, I was hoping to talk a bit more on this and some of the implications this could have for sort of marketing the sports and like the betting industry's public image. But yeah, I think we're running a bit short of time. But Martin, thanks so much for taking time to speak to us. Jess as well. Some great contributions. And yeah, to all the listeners, please keep an eye on any other content coming out of the Canadian game. And the Safe Bet Show. Don't forget that will be coming out. You can hear it too. I've waffled too much. My apologies. Thanks again for having me. It's been a great pleasure as always.