Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
A daily podcast delving into the biggest stories of the day throughout the sports betting and igaming sector.
Fernando Noodt (00:06.159)
Premier League clubs are facing growing scrutiny over partnerships with gambling operators that are not licensed to operate in the UK. Entain has now directly called on 10 clubs to reconsider such relationships, arguing that some of the world's biggest football brands are lending their credibility to operators outside the UK regulatory framework. With the government also considering whether these sponsorships should be permitted.
The debate raises broader questions about Greek geographical restrictions, club responsibility, reputation, and the future of international betting partnerships in British sport. Welcome to iGaming Daily, where we will examine where the line should be drawn and whether the UK is approaching a turning point for gambling sponsorship in football. I'm Fernando Nott, Media Manager for SBC and your host for today, and to discuss
The Premier League. I'm joined by Christian Leed. Chris, how are you today?
Christian Lee (01:02.714)
I'm good, Frankie Viranda. I was good to talk about football, so I'm glad to be here.
Fernando Noodt (01:06.531)
Yeah, absolutely. It's like a a little a little cheat we do with this with this sponsorship talk and all to just just an excuse to to talk about football. And also with us is Patrick Killeen. Pat, how are you?
Patrick Killeen (01:22.23)
I'm good, thanks, mate. Yeah, as as I was saying to you before, it feels like we've not done a podcast together in ages and then we get to in two days. So yeah, good to be back on.
Fernando Noodt (01:30.659)
Yeah, absolutely, absolutely. I I could get used to it. so so yeah, I'm really looking forward to more more rotation going forward with iGaming Daily. But right now, let's jump straight to the news. But before that, actually, let me thank Optimove, the creator of positionless marketing and number one player engagement solution for iGaming and sports betting operators, proud partner of iGaming Daily. Thank you very much, Optimove.
but right now we have to go into the Premier League. and not to discuss that Valentin Barco has scored his first goal with Chelsea, but actually to talk about NTN, which has once again called on Premier League clubs to cut ties with gambling operators that are not licensed with the UK. In the UK, sorry. So why has this issue become such a significant point of contention? Which i it has already been in the in the in the headlines for some time, but
why has it become so significant and how significant is it that Entain has reached out to these clubs?
Christian Lee (02:32.762)
think there's two parts to this in terms of regulated operators, they're continuing to be squeezed by things like tax tax rates that went up in April to remote gambling. There's talk of more tax rises to machine game duty in the future. at the same time there's also regulatory changes. We're still going to find out what's happening with affordability checks. So you've got all these different pressure on the regulated market and I feel like operators just feel like the block market isn't getting that although unlicensed market should I say isn't getting that type of scrutiny.
And then they turn on like executives from these companies turn on the Premier League at the weekend and they see some of the brands we'll talk about, Czech Spet, Fun eighty eight, AX Bet. They see these being advertised by by clubs like Nottingham Forest, by Newcastle, et cetera. And they just feel like they're getting a bit of a rough go at it because these unlicensed brands aren't being are being forced to pay these taxes, don't follow the same regulatory standard that they have to do, but can still be in a way endorsed by
some of the biggest clubs in the world.
Fernando Noodt (03:36.431)
And of course there's a variety of of things that both Antain and the critics of offshore companies dealing with Premier League clubs. there's there's a variety of arguments against them. but the central one from Antain right now is that clubs are effectively lending the credibility of the Premier League to operators that cannot legally offer
gambling to UK consumers. So how strong is that argument from Entain, especially considering the international reach of the Premier League? Of course, one of the top leagues in the in in the whole world, arguably the number one or or it's it's it's pretty pretty it's up there, right? It's one, two.
Not I don't I don't think it's it's three, but there it has massive reach, it has an an inter a considerable international reach. So how strong is Santain's argument that that they are lending credibility?
Patrick Killeen (04:26.786)
Yeah, yeah.
Patrick Killeen (04:39.756)
It is strong because as you say for the the Premier League says that nearly two billion people engage with its media every week. it's got a potential audience of a reported four and a half billion. but in the UK, where their entertain argument is based around, the two years ago the Premier League had a reported UK TV audience of thirty four million. Now that's fifty five percent of the amount of people that watch T V in the UK. So
Th that's why the argument's credible. it's it's also credible because it's the location in which the league's played. It's credible enough to result in the DCMS consultation on the complete ban of unlicensed sponsorships in sport. You know, if over half of the UK TV audience is exposed to to companies that are not licensed to operate here, then why should that not be something that Entain, a licensed operator, should raise with with the relevant parties?
You know, they've gone through the the process and expense of like gaining a licence as as have many others. And the as we say quite often, the licence industry's you know, it's taken its missteps, but it's there for everyone to see, it's there for us to report on. It's there on the gambling commission's website, you know, we see when they pay off settlements, we see when a company's suspended. That's not the case for for unlicensed operators. Th you know, th it's kind of unenforceable. So
for you know to to be competing in the world's biggest league or the world's most viewed league with with operators that are just not held or or refuse to be held to the the same account as as you are, then why should that not irk? You now Antain doesn't really have a Premier League presence. You know, it's moved it's made its first front of shirt deal with with Birmingham last season, this season, sorry, in the championship. But it's kind of fighting the fight for
For the licensed industry and it's something that should, you know, with the I mean the consultation which we're kind of yet to hear the results of as it stands. you know, it closed yesterday, but that's kind of a a step in the right direction for the licensed industry. But you know, Entain has has done a lot to to to make that happen and it's fighting the fight for the licensed industry. you know, it did this last year with the front of shirt sponsors that Premier League clubs had, and it's done a lot of research into to
Patrick Killeen (07:03.97)
to writing these letters again to the clubs that have any sort of affiliation with with the unlicensed industry. And it's something that that should be hurt by and it's something that that does seem unfair to to regulated operators.
Fernando Noodt (07:20.654)
And of course there's the eight X bet case in specific, which raise some some some questions as UK users can still bet on it through different tools. let's call it a BPM, for example. One Andy Burnham.
play some bets from the UK, but that was of course not Andy Burnham himself, but an endtain figure that claims to have been able to to use a PPN located in Vietnam to to actually play on eight X bet from the UK. So what does that tell us, this specific case tell us about the effectiveness of geographical restrictions? But
Patrick Killeen (08:00.423)
it's kind of that's the question when it comes to tackling illegal markets, isn't it? It's illegal markets, legal operators, it's it's the effectiveness of of blocking, of geofencing, and those sort of questions. But it it it tells you that the that the weak and the they're potentially weak for a purpose. I mean, stake was kind of forced out of the UK last year, and since then they've they've reported that they've implemented kind of strict geofencing, geo blocking measures with
kind of regulations to restrict, say, me or Christian from accessing their site because they don't have a license here, so even with a VPN then then it's more more tricky than it than it would be to a access an an A Expert which which this NTAME figure told us that he did. It's in the UK there, if you type in X eight Expet, then it redirects to GamCare, but with a VPN, you know, as you just said for the the the figure
managed to sign up as Andy Burnham no less and deposit within five minutes. So there's i the the the kind of the case study with stake and what they've done shows that that these things are possible to even with your VPNs, it shows that it is possible to kind of restrict these platforms or make it at least g you know give potential consumers another hurdle to access. But
These obviously haven't been implemented by a sponsor of five Premier League clubs.
Fernando Noodt (09:32.748)
And d there's actually a broader discussion which is about responsibility. What do we think or what do you guys think should the responsibility of a Premier League club be when it partners with an operator that d does not hold a UK license but at the same time claims to target customers in other markets?
Christian Lee (09:57.179)
think if you look at the gambling commission rules, all they require is that football clubs ensure that UK customers can't access these sites. But as Patrick's already touched on, as we know, with the use of VPNs it you can place yourself anywhere in the world realistically. so there's a very easy workaround to access most gambling sites in most countries if you really want to. so I think I personally think that football teams should have a lot
higher responsibility than they currently do in terms of being able to protect their fans from from these house sites. Because if you think from a fans point of view, when a when your football team signs a sponsorship deal with a with a company, any company in any sector, you are assuming that they're a they're a trusted company that your club is happy to enter into a business agreement with. But as we know some of these operate these operators are targeting UK consumers in a way that
They shouldn't be. So that kind of again calls into question the the ethics of the football club of of choosing the money over how this impacts UK consumers. I think I wrote in my piece off the back of the entrance letters that if a football fan can't access, can't legally access a company while sat in their seat at the stadium watching the game, then should that football club really be entering into an agreement?
And a sponsorship given that the Premier League is a UK based league or an English based league, sorry, that is primarily for English fans.
Fernando Noodt (11:30.935)
Yeah, you you'd presume that Premier League clubs are are doing their due due diligence before signing these contracts. But then when you see some of these companies that that are that are actually sponsoring the the the clubs it it definitely raises some eyebrows and and makes you think if they actually do or if they and if they are doing it, if they actually care about like the
Market protection, let alone consumer protection. But there's more to be discussed on this matter because of course a lot has been a lot of this discussion has has sparked from from multiple situations between offshore operators and Premier League clubs. But we are going to do a very short break, but we'll be right back with more iGaming Daily.
Fernando Noodt (12:23.918)
And we're back with more iGaming Daily to continue discussing Premier League clubs and their relationships with offshore gambling operators, of course. NTN addressed 10 football clubs to reconsider their relationships with some companies. So it has sparked once again the debate between about the the relationship between football clubs and offshore.
gambling companies. So do you guys think that mm maybe could clubs and the Premier League itself face increasing pressure from fans, regulators, policymakers, over these partnerships and and how would this impact this whole situation, impact their their reputation in the long run?
Patrick Killeen (13:14.414)
I think when you talk about fans, I think there's a there's a difference that that consumers are kind of unaware of or the majority of consumers are unaware of. You know, your enthaines, your flutters, you bet three six five, they I think that they should be able to advertise within the Premier League if they're doing it responsibly and if they don't then they will have the gambling commission, the ASA to answer to. But what as I say, I think that that many consumers are not aware that they just see gambling brands. Like th there's
If you look at I think Steak Steak signed on with Everton again and Everton made a post on X to announce that they were continuing just as a sleeve sponsor. And the comments on that, yes, there is a few that that kind of say, you know, an offshore gambling company, but the majority of fans are just kind of annoyed that they're partnered with a gambling company. There's no kind of distinction that th that they know. and why would they be? Because there's there's
a lack of UK consumers that would probably be o unaware of how to identify an unlicensed operator. I mean, if you ask the amount of people that have used a betting site how often they've scrolled down to the bottom of a platform to check if they've got the UK G C licensing on there, then I highly doubt that it would be many, you know. and I think that that kind of going off on a little bit of a tangent here, that's kind of on mainstream media a little bit more to to make that distinction because it's it
the the consumer awareness is so low. but in terms of clubs they're, you know, they're already facing pressure, as I said, from fans. not just regulators and policy makers are also pressurising them, you know, with the the D C AMS consultation. also, you know, the license market with Entain, you know, th there's kind of been a this has been ramped up over the past couple of seasons or at least since the
The ban was announced, the voluntary ban on on front of shirt gambling sponsors, this this kind of push to to make sure that un unlicensed firms are are out of any sort of sponsorship deals, not just within the Premier League but within UK sport has really kind of kind of ramped up Entain being the the the main kind of flag bearers for that, as we've already discussed. But you know, the BGC. A lot of
Patrick Killeen (15:30.935)
operators who are UK facing or have somewhat of a focus in the UK and they're, you know, in their interim results they're constantly talking about the effects of the black market. So I th there is th there is pressure, but I cannot see anything happening. It's you know, it's the D CMS have already said that anything's unlikely to change that any sort of change is unlikely to happen until next season and in you can't really see that that that being implemented until you know, we've already started this season and this this kind of push has been going on for a long time now. So
So with the consultation you can't imagine that any results from that will come until as they say, at least next season.
Fernando Noodt (16:09.366)
Yeah, you can restrict as much as you want, but as long as you don't embark on a on a heavy education campaign, these platforms are going to still be accessible by by by by UK natives, like like b or by people in the UK I mean. like you said, I I highly doubt that people even know that if they scroll down to the bottom of a page they can check.
whether a a c a li a site is licensed or not. So I think it's not only a matter of
Doing a a mass media campaign, but I think that the industry definitely needs to look into this and and and seriously conduct campaigns of educating the consumers so they are not exposed to to to unlicensed websites with all that that means. but you mentioned the DCMS pat, and we talked about the consultation briefly before. So this consultation is considering whether these kinds of sponsorships should be permitted at all in the UK. So, what would a ban?
actually change both for clubs and operators.
Christian Lee (17:18.734)
I think it would be a huge a huge change and to be honest, I think it's the only thing that would actually stop this sort of thing happening because if a DCMS does decide to outlaw partnerships with with brands out licensed in the UK, given there's government legislation, this will actually effectively stop football clubs and other sports teams and organisations in the UK being able to do this. And until some sort of legislation comes into place, I don't think that anything else
that Entertain does, that the Gambling Commission does, that the fans do, would ever stop teams agreeing to sponsorship because when it at the end of the day, especially the Premier League, it's all about money and the figures that these companies can offer will outweigh in many cases any s sense of pressure from from stakeholders. So unless there's something specific that prohibiting it from happening, like the DCMS deciding to bring in new legislation.
nothing will change.
Fernando Noodt (18:20.619)
And we're running out of time here, so I'm gonna jump straight to the end and ask you guys with this mm in relation to this DCMS consultation with the decision expected to come soon, what should the gambling industry and the Premier League and its clubs of course be watching for and of course if this could be the turning point for how international betting sponsorships operate in in British sport altogether?
Patrick Killeen (18:48.984)
I think as Christian says the they they would they'll be rooting for a complete ban. How this impacts Premier League clubs in in terms of finances, I can't imagine. It's it's massive because there's always the the the the opportunity for for companies in other un industries to come in, you know, you've seen that after the front of shirt ban and some of the fees that have been reported with those new front of shirt sponsors are fairly lucrative too. I think in terms of other sports, they might be the ones to suffer who kind of rely on this
sponsorship money a little bit more for you know to continue operating in a stable financial manner. But in terms you know, these licensed firms need this this this complete ban because we you can't see anything changing unless something like that happens. I think if that does come into place, which we kind of expect
you may see more of a a push towards the the you know, a social media strategy or social media based marketing strategies from from unlicensed companies which we've seen be fairly prevalent already. But, you know, that would be the next stage. You know, there's always kind of it's a it's a never ending battle really at the moment for for the UK and for for many jurisdictions and regulated markets and their their relevant operators. So it
You'd expect that this ban comes into place and and with that then there's always other means of of sponsorship avenues for for these unlicensed firms. So it's not like i if it comes into place then then th these companies just disappear is you know, it's far from that. I think with with social media and with the way that these guys kind of th these sites kind of the the respawnability of them and also the the way in which they they attract customers, you know, their their their sensationalism on
on social media you would you you'll see a lot more of that. That will continue to to be a something that's fairly prevalent on social media until big tech kinda gets involved. But I think that it's a it's a step in the right direction at least for the UK industry if if the DCMS consultation results in in a win for for the regulated market.
Christian Lee (21:03.94)
Yeah, I agree completely and think the government, DCMS, the Gamma Commission, they have to be quite careful of ensuring there's no loopholes that these operators can find because I think we we know we've seen already that th if there is anything they can do to exploit the situation they will do. I think as Patrick said, if if the band come to place there'll be a lot more guerrilla marketing or quote unquote guerrilla marketing from these firms.
Maybe they start paying influencers to go to games which are then watched by international audiences or something that. But I don't think there will ever be will ever be completely rid of these unlicensed operators in terms of marketing, but closing down a loophole like as big as a Premier League club can carry them on their shirts is definitely the right side a direction to begin with.
Fernando Noodt (21:55.171)
Yeah, absolutely. I think that the Premier League Premier League clubs have been moving in this direction in the for for for some time now. but there's still some work to be done. And I think that that they are looking into it and will eventually get to the point where they enforce or or or they establish rules that are best or hopefully best.
For both the the gaming market in the UK and the consumers as well. But that has been all for today. We'll have to hashtag wait and see what happens in the UK with sponsorships in the Premier League. But if you want to keep up to date with that and all the global gaming industry news, make sure you subscribe to all SBC media newsletters and of course follow iGaming Daily on social media and subscribe on your preferred podcasting platform.
Christian Lee, Patrick Killing, thank you very much. Thank you very much, Nay McDonald, for producing this episode. I'm Fernando Nott and to our listeners out there, we'll see you in the next one.