CASINO NEWS
OfferCraft working wonders at Foxwoods
O
fferCraft, a software company that uses artificial intelligence and gamification to help companies increase customer
revenue and employee engagement, has partnered with Foxwoods Resort Casino and FoxwoodsONLINE in Connecticut to launch interactive promotional games to draw in new customers, reward existing ones and engage team members. More than 80 gamified promotions
powered by OfferCraft have been launched to date, including trivia quizzes, guessing games, digital scratch cards, wheel spins, basketball shootouts, gamified surveys and others. “OfferCraft has become core to our efforts
to recruit, retain and reward our players,” said Jennifer Johnson, Vice President of Loyalty Marketing at Foxwoods Resort Casino. “We use the platform to better understand and serve our guests, to give away prizes at community events, to encourage concert goers to stay for a cocktail, to drive additional visits and to re- engage guests. More than one third of new member acquisition is attributed to OfferCraft promotions. OfferCraft has been a wonderful partner and we look forward building on the success we have already had with gamified promotions.” The OfferCraft games for FoxwoodsONLINE, Foxwoods’ free online social casino, have captured more than 50,000 email addresses. A single Facebook post drove more than 4,000 new customer registrations and cut customer acquisition costs in half. “Foxwoods has been extraordinarily creative in their use of our platform to engage patrons and staff,” said OfferCraft CEO Aron Ezra. “We’re very proud of the great work we’ve done together.”
6 NOVEMBER 2017
NCF and operators rue ‘missed opportunity’ by UK DCMS
T
he National Casino Forum (NCF), which represents all the UK’s land-based casinos, provided a detailed response to the DCMS Call for Evidence last December, putting forward a series of proposals to modernise the casino sector. None have been accepted in the consultation paper.
The NCF identified five main priorities for the land-based casino sector in its response to the DCMS call for evidence, all to allow healthy evolution, not revolution, of the casino industry: • Allow Small 05 Act casinos a 3:1 machine to table ratio capped at 80 machines (an increase from the current 2:1 ratio). • Allow converted casinos licensed under the 1968 Gaming Act a 3:1 ratio with a minimum allowance of 20 machines & maximum 80, regardless of number of tables. • Increase the maximum machine allowance for Large 2005 Act casinos to 500, from the current limit of 150, maintaining the 5:1 ratio. • Increase the prize value of Progressive Linked Jackpots (PLJ) to £100,000 – equivalent to 10 machines – while retaining the maximum £5 stake. Amend regulations to extend this across a wide area casino network (WAN).
• Allow casinos to give customers access to online products via dedicated tablets.
It put forward two secondary proposals: • Allow a maximum of £100 per to be staked on B1 machines through contactless cards, provided the player is using a loyalty card.
• Allow players to transfer £50 (currently £20) at a time on B1 machines from the bank to the play meter.
A final, less urgent, proposal, was to seek further discussion on increasing stakes for B1 machines at high-end casinos to £50 maximum with a £100,000 maximum prize and to consider creating a B1 sub-category (B1H) for high-end casinos. The NCF issued a statement in response to the
DCMS review into gaming machines and social responsibility measures, published on October 31. We don’t have the space to publish the whole statement in this issue. so in summary: ‘We are disappointed and frustrated by the DCMS gambling review. It welcomes the progress made by the casino sector in protecting its customers while at the same time stifling modernisation and innovation. This was an opportunity to modernise the casino
industry, giving our customers greater choice and recognising that machine gambling is best suited to safe, well-regulated and well-staffed venues – sadly, it has not been taken.
Casino operators have been discussing the
regulatory situation with DCMS for many years and we were progressing well with what we thought was an agreed roadmap. …We are extremely disappointed that the DCMS appears to be ruling out any change to machine numbers at present when the casino sector has, in fact, been pioneering the very research it calls for in this review.’
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
