Summary

In this episode, Nick and Co-Host, Dan Cherry, chat with Dan Marks, Senior Vice President of Gaming at Aristocrat Gaming. Learn about the day-to-day at one of industry's most successful game design studios, Gimmie Games, and the strategies, processes, and philosophies behind some of the industry's most iconic products. Also in this episode, elective Responsible Gaming programs.

Transcript

Nick Hogan:

Good morning, Dan. How are things in Vegas this morning?

Dan Cherry:

Wonderful, Nick. Good morning. It is F1 week in Las Vegas this week. So that’s all the excitement.

Nick Hogan:

And as I understand from where we started today, raining cats and dogs for the fifth day in a row. Is that right?

Dan Cherry:

Yes, sir.

Nick Hogan:

Okay. Something is wrong with the universe when this is happening in Vegas. Did you have much of a monsoon season there this summer?

Dan Cherry:

No, it was dry. I don’t mind it. I love the rain, so it’s all good.

Nick Hogan:

Yeah. Okay. Well, if you’d like, come to-

Dan Cherry:

Maybe not for the race, but …

Nick Hogan:

Okay. Well, you can come to Holland if you want to get sick of rain. I would recommend that very strongly. So Dan, we have a guest today for whom we have a lot of questions. So in the interest of time here, I’m going to skip the news segment today and just go straight into the listener questions. Before I do, let me say that we’d love to tackle any questions that anybody listening may have. So if you have a question about what we’re presenting or something you’d like us to present, please drop us an email at reelcast@realmetrics.com. Again, that’s R-E-E-L-C-A-S-T at realmetrics.com. Our policy is to keep all questions anonymous, so please speak directly and don’t worry about us revealing your identity. This is not something we do. Okay. So this comes from an Eastern European operator who asks, “Hello, Mr. Hogan and Mr. Cherry. I know that you’re focused mainly on improving operational results, but I would like to know your position on responsible gaming programs. Do you feel casinos should have them, even if not required by law? Thank you for the many interesting podcasts.”

So big thanks to the listener for that question. I can’t claim that it’s one I’m often asked. But Dan, I guess my answer on this is generally I think these programs are good for business, it’s good corporate citizenry. And I feel a transparent acknowledgement that gaming is a pastime that carries some inherent risks and that this casino accepts its so-called duty of care obligations relative to customers. Additionally, and selfishly, I guess, from an operator perspective, they provide pretty solid political capital when looking at things like expansion. So to a large extent, I really think it’s kind of a sustainability question and that such programs really serve operators well over the long haul. Now, with that said, I also feel there’s a spectrum here. In some jurisdictions, I feel these programs have become, for the most part, unmoored from reality.

So in Europe, a few programs are structured so that anyone who wagers over a certain level is just assumed to be a problem gambler. And then the operators must take these people aside and then ask them to substantiate, through the production of bank statements or tax documents, things like this, that they have the financial wherewithal to gamble at that level. And if they can’t substantiate this or they simply refuse to supply the docs, that player gets banned nationwide.

And does it stop gambling? Of course not, right? So they just jump in the car, drive an hour across the border, and they’re all set. And until January of this year, this was the core business model in Liechtenstein’s casinos. They just sat there and took the action of the players who were banned in Switzerland. And in Sweden, cockeyed responsible gaming regs contributed massively to what was just the wholesale destruction of the land-based industry. There are no more casinos in Sweden. So design and execution are huge factors here. I guess I’m generally a supporter of these programs, but here’s an important detail. I’m not an operator, so let’s get the operator view, Dan, so your thoughts on these things.

Dan Cherry:

Yeah. Absolutely. Well, well said and great question. I love this question. Obviously, not just an operator, but I’ll come at it from the kind of USA perspective in terms of most of the land-based environment here. Those of us who came into the business prior to sports betting approval on the land-based side, I think for most of us, over the years, you hear certain negative perceptions of casino gaming for whatever reason, right? So I think a lot of us, it’s been really important in our careers and instilled in our careers that there has to be some kind of community aspect and social aspect to this, right? So whether it’s contributing taxable revenue to the community, whether it’s establishing a job base, or providing economic value to the community, and also just responsible gaming, not just problem gaming, but underage gaming. So for those of us who grew up on the land side and regulated environments, I think wanting to make sure that we’re being as responsible as possible and providing social value in addition to just the financial aspect, it’s been crucial, right?

We all understand that we get our licenses as a privilege granted to us by the regulators. And we want to be responsible to us. So I think for most of us, it’s front of mind, right? We have a responsibility for our communities and our customer base. Beyond that, we talked last time a little bit about the NBA betting scandal and the illegal poker games. Hot button this week has been what’s going on in the prediction markets, right? So when you hear news of DraftKings and FanDuel, and then yesterday Michael Rubin at Fanatics announcing that Fanatics is going to be getting the next two weeks into the prediction market, it’s really front of mind. And I think for a lot of folks that grew up in regulated gaming, we’re looking at it.

And some of us are asking the question, hey,