The following article presents an analysis of a survey conducted by YouGov on behalf of OLBG regarding affordability checks in the betting industry. The survey interviewed 1,007 bettors, providing valuable insights into their perspectives and behaviors regarding these checks. It is important to note that the survey sample size is relatively small.
Willingness to Provide Documentation:
Out of the bettors surveyed, 21.8% had been asked to submit documentation to at least one bookmaker. Among this group, an encouraging 74.3% had complied with the requests, which often involved providing bank statements or payslips. This demonstrates that a majority of bettors are willing to cooperate with affordability checks.
Responses to Affordability Checks:
Interestingly, the survey revealed that 17.9% of bettors who were asked to undergo affordability checks had chosen to switch to a different operator instead of complying. This shift could be attributed to concerns over privacy, convenience, or other factors not explicitly mentioned in the survey. Furthermore, 4.1% of respondents admitted to turning to unlicensed operators, which poses potential risks in terms of consumer protection and fair play.
Impact on Betting Activity:
While the intention behind affordability checks is to promote responsible gambling, it is crucial to assess their impact on actual betting activity. The survey found that 3.7% of respondents had stopped their betting activity entirely as a result of these checks. This suggests that there is a segment of the betting population for whom affordability checks act as a deterrent rather than a means of encouraging responsible behavior.
Differential Willingness to Comply:
The survey highlights a significant disparity between the attitudes of those who have undergone affordability checks and those who have not. Among the 78.2% of respondents who had not yet been asked to complete these checks, only 23.5% expressed willingness to provide the requested documents. This indicates a considerable reluctance among this group, potentially due to concerns similar to those expressed by the switchers.
Alternative Responses to Affordability Checks:
Notably, the survey revealed that 35% of respondents who had not undergone affordability checks would opt to switch to a different operator if asked to comply. This finding implies that the introduction of these checks may result in bettors seeking alternatives to avoid the perceived inconvenience or intrusion. Additionally, 4.1% of respondents stated they would turn to unlicensed operators if faced with affordability checks, highlighting the risks associated with driving customers toward the unregulated gambling market.
Discontinuation of Betting Activity:
Perhaps the most concerning revelation from the survey is that 37.3% of respondents who had not yet experienced affordability checks claimed that such checks would cause them to cease betting altogether. This finding underscores the potential unintended consequence of affordability checks, where a significant portion of the betting population may disengage from the industry entirely. It is crucial for regulators and operators to strike a balance between responsible gambling measures and avoiding alienation of customers.
The YouGov survey conducted on behalf of OLBG provides valuable insights into the attitudes and behaviors of bettors regarding affordability checks. While a majority of those asked to provide documentation complied, a notable percentage switched operators or turned to unlicensed platforms. Moreover, the survey highlights a significant reluctance among bettors who have not yet been subject to affordability checks, with many expressing a preference for switching operators or even quitting gambling altogether. These findings emphasize the importance of carefully considering the impact and effectiveness of such checks, balancing the objectives of responsible gambling with customer satisfaction and retention.