search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
GLI INTERVIEW


role in the US revolution


of geolocation features, because one of the important things to state regulators is verifying that people wagering on the event products are within the boundaries of their state. We also evaluate the integration of age and identity verification products to ensure there is no under-age wagering happening. We will evaluate the interface of the payment system providers to make sure that payments are functioning and going in and out of the system correctly. One of the things that has come under the sports and event wagering umbrella is racing and pari-mutuel systems; we have been testing those for many decades.


CI: You’ve been able to cherry pick from countries that have mature sports betting regulation – does that mean GLI-33 and all the legislation that is based on it is perfect? SA: We try! You’re right, when we put GLI-33 together we took into account not just the standards that were best practises that were employed in Europe but also places like Australia, Latin America, and Nevada. If you’re an existing operator or supplier, you don’t want to completely re-engineer your policies, procedures, and policies because a new sports- wagering jurisdiction’s regulations are so vastly different from any other existing jurisdiction. That’s why with GLI-33 we kept many of the main concepts of fairness and security consistent to ensure that sports and event wagering are audited as close as possible to best practises around the world. The reason for this was if you are an


existing operator or software supplier, the last thing you want to do is have any new jurisdiction find out they are so vastly different from any existing jurisdiction that you have to completely re-engineer your policies, procedures, software… We had that in mind, to try and keep a lot of the main concepts, to


ensure things are as fair and secure and that there is auditable event wagering and sports wagering happening in the jurisdiction that is as close as possible to best practises around the world. It makes it easier to import products that way to new jurisdictions in the U.S. That said, each state will not


necessarily offer right out of the gate all delivery mechanisms. So, for example, some states may say they only want to offer mobile wagering to start with; some might say they only want physical kiosks and down the road they may offer online sports wagering. That’s another consideration we have had to contend with. We’re not there to help jurisdictions launch sports wagering with whatever regulatory setup they choose; rather, we want to ensure that their plans and standards are scalable to allow for future new technologies and delivery channels.


CI: So you’ve been busy… SA: Oh yes – and not just work-wise! In December, we saw Michigan join the


ranks of the 20-ish states that have legalised sports wagering. Trying to keep up with legislation and all of the emerging jurisdictions is a full-time job for our compliance department, our legal, and government affairs teams. It’s similar to when gaming jurisdictions first started popping up one by one. We first started working with the Isle of Man, Alderney, Malta, Gibraltar… It’s like that now in the U.S. where each state is emerging, slowly but surely, with regulated sports betting and event wagering. We are extremely busy but in a very good and happy way – we’re really pleased with the way this has gone forward.


One thing I should say is that we are also hoping that this will lead to more regulated interactive internet-based gaming. If regulators, lotteries, or tribes start to see that this form of gaming, sports wagering or event wagering can happen in a manner with high integrity and security, we’re keeping out under- age play, making sure people are within our jurisdictions by geolocation…


FEBRUARY 2020 75


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