Interactive


CASINOBEATS MALTA MARCH 22-24, 2020


have more of the RTP in the base game whilst others are centred around the feature round. I don’t think the majority of our players would feel a half a per cent change – the challenge would be for the game producers and mathematicians to make it unnoticeable.


Do players always know when RTP is in their favour? Do players understand volatility?


It is important for players to know that RTP is never really in their favour. Players should understand that they shouldn’t gamble to try and make money. We have a responsibility to make sure players understand that RTP is sub 100. In the long run, for every €100 you spend, you will get around €96 back. Tere will always be an element of that gambler fallacy ‘I’m due a win, just one more spin’, but we have a duty to educate. Gambling is entertainment and you pay a small percentage for that pleasure.


We haven’t been good as an industry explaining volatility and what it can mean. I would like to pursue a standard volatility measure across our brands, or even the industry, possibly by assimilating spins across the board and informing our players of the results. At the moment, a 10/10 volatility for some game suppliers can be a 5/10 for others.


The online sector is hugely competitive. Is there a concern that tightening RTP would simply lead to players looking to play elsewhere?


I would never argue for doing it on an individual level – it should be on an industry- wide scale. I don’t like being able to pick and choose RTPs. Some game suppliers offer the


We haven’t been good as an industry explaining volatility and what it can mean. I would like to pursue a standard volatility measure across our brands, or even the industry, possibly by assimilating spins across the board and informing our players of the results. At the moment, a 10/10 volatility for some game suppliers can be a 5/10 for others.


choice but it can be very confusing for players. I would lobby for a small decrease across the board – it is not a good idea to do it by operator. Some suppliers allow you to choose between three RTPs – I think that is dangerous as we have a duty to players. Players play on five or six sites in more developed markets and could be unaware they are getting a different experience playing the same game. I think self- regulation by operators to enforce a slightly moderate reduction in RTP is the best way forward.


Would a change of RTP impact player retentions?


We would need to assess if a change in RTP negatively impacts retention. Do players burn out quicker? Are the games as enjoyable? I believe for the most part retention wouldn’t drop, we already have some games at around 95% that are very popular with players so it’s about making more and monitoring things. As a relatively large operator, we have an endless supply of data to measure player retention.


Game producers also don’t have to change their whole portfolio, they would just need to bring the RTP down slightly on a few of their games so we can understand the full impact and adapt based on data to make sure we find a solution


NEWSWIRE / INTERACTIVE / MARKET DATA P141


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170