Zynga’s Real-Money Online Casino Is Now Live In The UK
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
The UK gambling industry has done a really good job of self regulating, they know that if they are too exploitative and do dirty tricks to get more money from customers, the government would step in and regulate them.
We spent a lot of time building features to give customers some control. For example, users could set hard limits to stop themselves playing too much, or they could ban themselves from the site. If users were playing for too long, we'd also ban them from the site temporarily. We also implemented a lot of features which would stop them banning themselves and then rejoining using their spouses account.
It'll be really interesting to see if Zynga plays by the same rules.
You yourself say the only reason that they don't exploit their customers more and 'do dirty tricks' is because of the threat of regulation.
How can we trust entities that make important decisions like these not based on actual care for the end user, but based on the threat of government regulation? (Which might actually be a good thing!)
What you've told me doesn't fill me with any confidence at all. You've described to me what sounds like a delicate and potentially quite volatile situation.
http://www.racingpost.com/news/horse-racing/barney-curley-be...
It took legal action to get them to eventually pay out; the circumstances were murky and did not reflect well on the Gibraltar authorities. This is why I said they weren't customer friendly!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandcon...
The fact they've done a good job of regulating (assumption) up to this point shouldn't be a consideration when deciding if they should be regulated in the future because we inherently can't trust them, and there is no guarantee whatsoever that it will continue that way (and I believe inevitable that at some point one of them will step over the line if they haven't already)
This shows no creativity, initiative, grace or innovation. It's not addressing any lacking market demands, they are just shoulder barging their way in and taking their slice. To me this is just a cash grab. An unapologetic cash grab in the middle of a recession.
Zynga releasing a skinned online casino doesn't check any of HN's boxes of values in my opinion.
Sure gambling is a tricky moral issue but it's legal. Entire communities and even states depend on it. Why shouldn't Zynga get a cut?
Office raising their prices mainly exploits businesses. These businesses are not buying Office based strongly off impulse and irrationality, and I'm sure a lot of these companies would not weep regrettably into their pillows after purchasing it. Their buying process is rational, and based on need. Online gambling can be entirely irrational, out of control and is never based on addressing a need.
I think from a utilitarian point of view it would be quite easy to argue that online gambling causes net misery.
I don't blame Zynga for taking this route, I'm not surprised. But it doesn't mean I can express my distaste for something I think is ethically questionable.
Screenshot here:
http://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/screen-s...
I'm genuinely shocked.
It's exploitative; the graphics appeal to small children. Encouraging those that aren't capable of understanding gambling is generally frowned upon, in the UK at least.
You think making something illegal stops it from ever occurring?
Secondly, have you ever seen slot machines?
Honestly, no, although I've seen fruit machines in pubs, which I presume operate on the same principle; lots of flashing lights and characterization.
I would be extremely surprised to see something branded like the FarmVille page.
UK being a nanny state is not a good thing. It is the job of the parent to give and take access to things. Let's ban all graphics because they could appeal to some kid out there whose parents are irresponsible.
I shouldn't have to say this, but you know it's not the same thing.
UK being a nanny state is not a good thing.
I agree, and it is all too easy to say "BUT WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE KIDS!"
It is the job of the parent to give and take access to things.
But how far do you go with this? Should parents keep their children in a virtual home prison? Basically, where do you draw the line between "Parents, stop your children doing X!" and "Parents, your surveillance is evil!"
It's not easy. One thing we should be able to agree on, though, is that using childrens-book cartoon characters in gambling products does no-one any favours.
FarmVille was never made for kids or to appeal to kids. Children are not the only ones who like cartoon characters. None of this is marketed to kids. If they marketed on the same channels or sites kids go to then I'd agree with you but as is aesthetics alone is not enough.
Just because it does not appeal to you does not mean it doesn't appeal to other adults. It does not mean it automatically appeals to kids either.
>Should parents keep their children in a virtual home prison?
I'm not about to tell parents what to do, but if I were a parent I would want my kids to be as wordly as possible and to understand the way things work as soon as possible. Understanding that gambling is not a way to make money (unless you own the machines) is a good thing to know. It's not about being a hawk and watching every action, and banning things so there is no chance of anyone being exposed. It's about building up key knowledge, allowing them to make mistakes, and having a positive enough environment where they can safely learn from their mistakes.
Most people who do gamble with slots do it for entertainment only: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1705333...
Yes, but the Gambling Commission is quite-straight forward about not encouraging children to gamble:
To protect children these should include, for example... not deliberately providing facilities for gambling in such a way as to appeal particularly to children and young people
http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/frequently_asked_questi...
Gambling has been legal for a long time.
Yes, but only kinda-sorta. Until quite recently (2005? 2006?), there was no way to walk into a casino and start gambling straight away - you had to join as a member, and wait 24 hours.
And betting shops have been legal since the 60's I can walk in place a bet on any high street since the 60's
The casino membership is a bit ott typical British "elf and safty mate" over the top regulation. I don't drive and don't have a passport so i have difficulty in becoming a member.
Its the proliferation of fixed ods machines in bookies that needs looking at
What they do have, however, is a very captive network audience. Assuming they have the right targeting, they should be able to run interstitials driving players from their free games (especially Zynga Poker, Zynga Slots, Zynga Slingo) over to these sites at a low cost. You don't have to agree with their creativity to see that this is a no-brainer for them.
Who is surprised by this move? Zynga was always an unoriginal and uncreative company. This seems the smartest greedy execution in this context.
Online gambling in the US is a much tougher nut from what I've read.
Seriously now: ZNGA is ~10% up now and although the stock price of Zynga implicitly has this information, since it is a risky stock (not Apple launching the iPhone I) there is an opportunity for buying it, even later.
Research on slot machine players: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1705333...
Utilitarian gamblers, in essence, are looking for something to do. Many are seniors, who are looking to kill time, reduce boredom, or simply get out of the house – and they are less motivated by financial rewards or excitement. Some enjoy people-watching as much as the actual slot play.
Excitement gamblers are looking for a buzz – the thrill of winning a jackpot, relaxing and having a good time. This group doesn’t like progressive machines with bigger payouts because they don’t pay off frequently enough to provide the excitement.
Multipurpose gamblers tend to be younger, less educated, have lower household income, and are less likely to be married and own a home. Their motivation is to have fun and win money, and they are attracted to themed games and other machines they consider “lucky” or fun to play.
Relaxation gamblers were the most educated and well-to-do, and played slot machines for the socialization and fun. However, they also like to stay within their denomination – usually 25-cent machines or $1 machines, and often look at slot play as a way to relieve day-to-day stress.
Given that Zynga has hired skinnerian behaviorists, and that they optimize their games by the effect on their bottom line (not entertainment value), I expect more than a few single mothers to spend their money on empty facebook thrills to the detriment of family life and the UK in general.