Feature: what lies behind Italy's egaming law changes?
The Italian regulator is to allow operators to offer poker cash games and casino games, but as was to be expected, other issues are simmering beneath the surface.
THE ITALIAN MODEL OF regulating online gaming has managed that rarest of feats, especially in the egaming sector, of seemingly keeping most parties involved happy.
While that is the official line from the majority of the companies licensed and working in Italy, scratch the surface just a little and discord and criticism of the Italian regulatory system comes up as quickly as molten lava from an erupting volcano.
From the low payout levels allowed to the limited prizes punters can win to the much publicised failure of the ISP blocking system, most industry players have some sort of bug bear or another.
The recent news that the Italian regulator Amministrazione Autonoma dei Monopoli di Stato (AAMS) would be allowing operators to offer poker cash games, casino games and new forms of betting by the end of the year is welcomed by the egaming industry, but doesn’t tell the whole story.
Legal changes to be expected
Carlo Gualandri, pictured, the chief executive of Italian poker site Gioco Digitale, wrote in last month’s Right to Reply that the legal introduction of the new games was in fact no surprise.
“The decision to regulate poker cash games and to legalise casino games was not really a question of if, but rather of when and how,” Gualandri said, “because the strategic goal is to provide a complete portfolio of online products defined in a legal and regulated form.”
The new games had been a long time coming and were not being implemented because the
(in)famous ISP blocking setup by the Italian government wasn’t working effectively, or because of the need to finance the reconstruction of the Abruzzo region devastated by the earthquake in April, as AAMS head of remote gaming Francesco Rodano had told eGaming Review originally. The earthquake merely gave political justification to the introduction of new gaming formats while industry lobbying also played its part, Gualandri said.
Interestingly, the consensus on the ISP blocking system is that most Italian punters are attentive enough to the state’s warning messages not to play on unlicensed dotcom sites when they come across them on the web that they go and open accounts on licensed sites. Although the fact that those punters come across those unauthorised sites so readily is a clear illustration of the failure of the blocking system.
Talking to sources involved in the Italian market who did not want to be named, the introduction of new cash games is down to industry lobbying and the fact that the current system only allowing tournament games for poker doesn’t generate enough revenues for operators.
But these Italy-related issues also bring into play the two poker elephants in the room, Full Tilt Poker and PokerStars. Indeed, the fact that PokerStars got licensed by the Italian regulator rankles with numerous operators, some of which used to operate in the US prior to the internet gaming ban there and others being purely Italian operators who are concerned at their inability to compete with the US-facing sites.
One source says: “Not only has Stars got more marketing funds than most thanks to its off-limits US activity, it also has the liquidity to attract the whales (see cover feature on page 32) who then go on to play on its dotcom site, making a mockery of the government’s regulation.”
The moral of this egaming ‘commedia dell’Arte’ is that the unlicensed sites were taking Italian bets even long before and while the likes of Bwin or Sportingbet were getting licensed. More importantly, the ‘ring-fencing’ regulation set up by Italy, and soon-to-be-copied by France, simply does not work when it comes to effectively regulating egaming in individual European markets.
This article first appeared in the August edition of eGaming Review.