Hey, and welcome. I think part of the problem is that every country wants to have its own gambling rules and collect taxes from locally licensed casinos.
But what players actually want can get a bit lost in all of this.
For example, if you only have a few local casinos with a limited choice of games, you might start looking elsewhere. You probably won’t think too much about which license they have if they offer the games you enjoy. I think that’s one reason offshore casinos still attract players. My colleague made an article about this 👈 and his point makes sense to me too.
Getting a separate license in every country costs money, and from an operator’s point of view, it may not always make sense for the business. Each market comes with different rules and limits, which can make the offshore route more attractive. It's no secret, I guess.
The sad part is what this situation means for people who struggle with gambling. Someone can block themselves from local casinos and still find an offshore casino that lets them play. They’ve asked for help to stop, but that protection only goes so far.
That’s why my colleague Simon has been working on a global self-exclusion solution. https://casino.guru/global-self-exclusion-initiative
I’d say this issue is one of the biggest gaps in having separate systems: each country has its own rules, but players can still move from one site to another. That's why I agree, and I know many will disagree, that from a safer gambling perspective, this overregulation does not work very well in the end.
Automatisk oversættelse: