Topic: Transparency of nationally licenced casinos (Read 183 times)
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 538
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
The main reason they (government) licence and regulate is because of tax and also in cases of money laundering. They are not doing so because of the interest of the players, I don't think there's any government licensing body in my country that is in control of whether the casino is actually being fair enough to player or cheating the players. This is a problem and I don't know if it's so in other developed country.
Most of the crypto casino I know from the forum have Curacao license which doesn't mean they can't operate in other regions unless the government explicitly put restrictions. And having license is not really a protection against anything even the provable fairness, it lies in the hands of the casino itself who decides how they are going to operate their games which will attract users as long as they are operating fairly.
It's true, but at least in original casino games or a provider that gives a way for the gamblers to verify our bets is more transparent than a regulated casino backed by government. They only sell their reputation since they're regulated and backed by government, but they didn't show if we can verify our bets or check the transparency.The thing is that to operate physical casinos we require a license from regulatory authorities.
To get a license from them, we need to comply with their policies and that requires to be transparent upto certain extent.
This is why we usually see physcial casinos have a higher transparency than online sites.
But I feel that, both physical casinos and online casinos find a loophole in the policies anyhow and exploit to harvest black money.
Do you verify the transparency of the physical casinos you played in your country? or you just believing in so called certificate, or something like trust me bro?To get a license from them, we need to comply with their policies and that requires to be transparent upto certain extent.
This is why we usually see physcial casinos have a higher transparency than online sites.
But I feel that, both physical casinos and online casinos find a loophole in the policies anyhow and exploit to harvest black money.
The problem of build a physical casinos isn't the transparency of the games, but they need to pay fees, tax or bribe the government in order to make their business survive.
For instance, government licensing bodies may be focusing on income statements for "protection" or taxation.
This is a very stark contrast to what standards the crypto gambling industry holds itself up to.
The players are mostly on board, but I think a high % disagree with the process. A lot would prefer the anonymous factor to come back into play.
A lot of people who are not heavy gamblers prefer the anonymous way but people who withdraw like 500.000 dollars winnings I am sure they need another level of operation and KYC should be done for such people who is taking such a big amount out of the casino. I am of course totally against it because as you say it is totally against what crypto is really created for but that is the way it is so far. I personally think that many persons who play in a casino licensed by their government only like to play there in very well established and developed countries while I am sure many including me prefer to play in a casino licensed in such a country rather than in the national government when this government is not strong enough and cannot guarantee me that everything will be going well in difficult situations.
...
Statistically speaking, most gamblers these days play on casinos licensed by their country's government for many reasons.
But in terms of transparency, crypto casinos that usually are licensed under more permissive offshore licenses (or maybe not even licensed at all) have standards of transparency that are much higher.
Statistically speaking, most gamblers these days play on casinos licensed by their country's government for many reasons.
But in terms of transparency, crypto casinos that usually are licensed under more permissive offshore licenses (or maybe not even licensed at all) have standards of transparency that are much higher.
I think it depends on a couple of factors whether a casino is more transparent or not, not only whether they are centralized or decentralized. There are countries which could have more scrutiny on the transparency of the casino they license and others which are only focused on taxation and keeping the industry going for the sake of collecting money for the government, in the latter case the license issuer do not care whether it is the casino who wins a lot of money or there are gambler who get lucky and get money off the casino, they will tax either anyways.
Perhaps crypto casinos (legitimate ones and those with big liquidity) wish to give a vibe of transparency to counter the back image and stigma Bitcoin and cryptocurrency in general has had during so many years, by giving RTP and being open on their edge statistics. It is a good way to attract gamblers who otherwise, would not trust casinos which deal with crypto.
The thing is that to operate physical casinos we require a license from regulatory authorities.
To get a license from them, we need to comply with their policies and that requires to be transparent upto certain extent.
This is why we usually see physcial casinos have a higher transparency than online sites.
But I feel that, both physical casinos and online casinos find a loophole in the policies anyhow and exploit to harvest black money.
I think they could be similar in some ways. For example, in money laundering, it’s easier to do it in physical casinos since the money is already in cash, leaving no digital trail. In contrast, online casinos have a traceable history, even on the blockchain, and governments are hiring experts to track these activities.To get a license from them, we need to comply with their policies and that requires to be transparent upto certain extent.
This is why we usually see physcial casinos have a higher transparency than online sites.
But I feel that, both physical casinos and online casinos find a loophole in the policies anyhow and exploit to harvest black money.
That said, governments are working hard to regulate properly, but offline and online casinos might face different approaches when it comes to enforcement and treatment.
National licensing bodies for gambling games seem to be focused on certain aspects of gambling that might seem very peculiar to a regular gambler that has gotten accustomed to gambling online with crypto over the past few years.
For instance, government licensing bodies may be focusing on income statements for "protection" or taxation.
This is a very stark contrast to what standards the crypto gambling industry holds itself up to.
It's interesting to observe that while crypto casinos avoid placing any limits on gambling such as requiring income statements or taxing profits... They are holding themselves to very high standards by implementing provable fairness on their original games and many even going as far as to publish the RTP of their slots games.
Bricks and mortar casinos these days are featuring e-slots and many e-games versions such as blackjack, roulette etc. but almost never are transparent with the odds. And the same goes with many nationally licensed online casinos too. The only provably fair game online casinos will have is Crash, and that's even IF they are running it under the proper license and not just stealing the concept without authorization.
Statistically speaking, most gamblers these days play on casinos licensed by their country's government for many reasons.
But in terms of transparency, crypto casinos that usually are licensed under more permissive offshore licenses (or maybe not even licensed at all) have standards of transparency that are much higher.
For instance, government licensing bodies may be focusing on income statements for "protection" or taxation.
This is a very stark contrast to what standards the crypto gambling industry holds itself up to.
It's interesting to observe that while crypto casinos avoid placing any limits on gambling such as requiring income statements or taxing profits... They are holding themselves to very high standards by implementing provable fairness on their original games and many even going as far as to publish the RTP of their slots games.
Bricks and mortar casinos these days are featuring e-slots and many e-games versions such as blackjack, roulette etc. but almost never are transparent with the odds. And the same goes with many nationally licensed online casinos too. The only provably fair game online casinos will have is Crash, and that's even IF they are running it under the proper license and not just stealing the concept without authorization.
Statistically speaking, most gamblers these days play on casinos licensed by their country's government for many reasons.
But in terms of transparency, crypto casinos that usually are licensed under more permissive offshore licenses (or maybe not even licensed at all) have standards of transparency that are much higher.
The thing is that to operate physical casinos we require a license from regulatory authorities.
To get a license from them, we need to comply with their policies and that requires to be transparent upto certain extent.
This is why we usually see physcial casinos have a higher transparency than online sites.
But I feel that, both physical casinos and online casinos find a loophole in the policies anyhow and exploit to harvest black money.
Don't worry a new virus is out from China and again we might experience the same shit that we did when COVID was in the air. The days for offline casinos are limited and in future looking at the way the world has become a lot of these offline casino users will shift to online casinos.
Damn, it feels like we’re back to the old days again, where our freedom of movement is limited.But honestly, these offline casinos you’re talking about can easily transition to online casinos since they’ve got the capital for it. For all we know, they might already be running online casinos too. They’re in this industry, they see the potential, and they’re making sure to stay competitive.
Obviously, online casinos attract more gamblers than land-based ones, but both are profitable and offer different experiences. It really comes down to the gambler's preference. High rollers often prefer physical casinos, especially when they also offer sports betting. Having a physical presence gives bettors more confidence that they'll get paid if they win, unlike some online casinos where issues like delayed payouts or KYC-related problems can arise. I've seen plenty of complaints about online casinos using KYC policies as an excuse to withhold winnings.
Don't worry a new virus is out from China and again we might experience the same shit that we did when COVID was in the air. The days for offline casinos are limited and in future looking at the way the world has become a lot of these offline casino users will shift to online casinos.
Its one of the most reputable exchange, and they already turn to full KYC compliant, so that adds more legitimacy to their operation which we can relate to the security OP is talking.
I don't like KYC as it doesn't solve the purpose of using crypto casinos. The more they extent KYC procedure the more they complicate it. It is okay for anyone going to a offline casino being asked for details. When an online casino is asking those papers the problem arises on the point when the players thinks that they might get hack and my documents will be for sell to the highest bidder in dark internet.
The reason why everyone shifted to crypto casinos was to avoid KYC. If Stake has implemented it then they are now similar to Bet365. Which is bad for a cryptocurrency based casino. I am certain they will lose customers and they will move to some new casino that are not that strict with KYC norms.
I agree with your point here in both situations. The number of players going to land casinos has significantly reduced when COVID lockdown started. As a matter of fact online casinos are available 24/7 at the players leisure. Depending on the choice of crypto for withdrawal, it has become very fast, which is somewhat similar to fiat.
Obviously, online casinos attract more gamblers than land-based ones, but both are profitable and offer different experiences. It really comes down to the gambler's preference. High rollers often prefer physical casinos, especially when they also offer sports betting. Having a physical presence gives bettors more confidence that they'll get paid if they win, unlike some online casinos where issues like delayed payouts or KYC-related problems can arise. I've seen plenty of complaints about online casinos using KYC policies as an excuse to withhold winnings. I have used Stake.com for Bitcoin withdrawals the only issue I face was high transaction fee as they want the withdrawal to be instant.
Its one of the most reputable exchange, and they already turn to full KYC compliant, so that adds more legitimacy to their operation which we can relate to the security OP is talking. snip..
I do not also agree that people gamble most on land based casinos. People gamble most on online casinos. I do not also agree with the withdrawal. There are online casinos that withdrawal is very fast. Withdrawal on Livecasino.io and Stake.com are very fast.
I agree with your point here in both situations. The number of players going to land casinos has significantly reduced since the COVID lockdown started. Online casinos are available 24/7 at the player's leisure. Depending on the choice of crypto for withdrawal, it has become very fast, which is somewhat similar to fiat. I have used Stake.com for Bitcoin withdrawals the only issue I faced was a high transaction fee as they want the withdrawal to be instant.
Laws are there, and they’re usually up to standard, but it ultimately depends on the regulators to enforce them effectively and protect gamblers. One of their key priorities should be ensuring that casinos don’t scam players by making sure they comply with all the requirements before being granted a license to operate.
However, in practice, this protection often isn’t strictly implemented. There are plenty of licensed casinos, yet we still hear numerous complaints against them. If regulators were truly doing their job, they should have already penalized or at least warned these casinos. Instead, many of these casinos remain "compliant" while freely scamming players, often hiding behind their TOS as an excuse.
However, in practice, this protection often isn’t strictly implemented. There are plenty of licensed casinos, yet we still hear numerous complaints against them. If regulators were truly doing their job, they should have already penalized or at least warned these casinos. Instead, many of these casinos remain "compliant" while freely scamming players, often hiding behind their TOS as an excuse.
~
I rarely play on land-based casinos but is there any proof that land-based casinos (or government-licensed ones) don't implement fairness in their games? While I know the govt is corrupt as hell aren't these casinos run by businesses and not them? Not sure how other countries work but winnings from casinos are usually reported by you yourself in your annual ITR so, casinos don't really get any cut whatsoever from taxes so I don't see how they'd want to work with the gov't in stuff like this.And to point out, I know casinos are required to submit the information to the government for KYC stuff (like big, sudden transactions), but it's not necessarily everything no? Nor is it usually tied to a user immediately. Since they only really need the amount to check afaik and see if it maches with anything stolen or something no?
Statistically speaking, most gamblers these days play on casinos licensed by their country's government for many reasons.
But in terms of transparency, crypto casinos that usually are licensed under more permissive offshore licenses (or maybe not even licensed at all) have standards of transparency that are much higher.
I reckon it's just a tradeoff between security and privacy/transparency. Like it or not a LOT of people think being "Government backed" means it's 100% safe. But in terms of transparency, crypto casinos that usually are licensed under more permissive offshore licenses (or maybe not even licensed at all) have standards of transparency that are much higher.
Bricks and mortar casinos these days are featuring e-slots and many e-games versions such as blackjack, roulette etc. but almost never are transparent with the odds. And the same goes with many nationally licensed online casinos too. The only provably fair game online casinos will have is Crash, and that's even IF they are running it under the proper license and not just stealing the concept without authorization.
Statistically speaking, most gamblers these days play on casinos licensed by their country's government for many reasons.
But in terms of transparency, crypto casinos that usually are licensed under more permissive offshore licenses (or maybe not even licensed at all) have standards of transparency that are much higher.
In my country, local online casinos are regulated by the government. They don't use a Provably Fair system like crypto casinos do but the government inspects their equipment and tests their Random Number Generators to ensure that users experience fair gambling. Statistically speaking, most gamblers these days play on casinos licensed by their country's government for many reasons.
But in terms of transparency, crypto casinos that usually are licensed under more permissive offshore licenses (or maybe not even licensed at all) have standards of transparency that are much higher.
One benefit of using a local online casino is that you can deposit money from your bank account with a single click and then withdraw instantly.
For instance, government licensing bodies may be focusing on income statements for "protection" or taxation.
This is a very stark contrast to what standards the crypto gambling industry holds itself up to.
The players are mostly on board, but I think a high % disagree with the process. A lot would prefer the anonymous factor to come back into play.
Btw casinos like Freebitco and Bustabit, Bustadice and Moneypot don't or rarely ask people to submit KYC, at least we haven't heard about that as far as I remember.
I agree. Local online casinos seem to be hiding all of that fairness rule because it doesn't really exist but that's just my speculation and I hope I am wrong. Also, because of the taxation that is glued to them, they must make money or else they will go to bankruptcy. So, how else will they make money? Make gamblers lose most of the time, nothing more.
I have been playing in one of the popular local online casinos here in our country and I have not even made a good multiplier that I could say is a legitimate fairness. Most of the time it's either I lose all my balance or I win a small amount that won't reach the minimum withdrawal amount so you will have to keep on playing until you lose it all.
Another thing that I noticed is that there's no winning streak after you lose a big amount unlike how it goes with international crypto casinos where you could really feel the RTP after losing a big amount.
I have been playing in one of the popular local online casinos here in our country and I have not even made a good multiplier that I could say is a legitimate fairness. Most of the time it's either I lose all my balance or I win a small amount that won't reach the minimum withdrawal amount so you will have to keep on playing until you lose it all.
Another thing that I noticed is that there's no winning streak after you lose a big amount unlike how it goes with international crypto casinos where you could really feel the RTP after losing a big amount.
There are just differences when it comes to regulatory purposes. Crypto gambling is more prone to money laundering, so there are stricter regulations and KYC in place to know who the player is.
Since traditional casinos are governed by their local government or issuing body, I think it is easier to trust that they are doing the correct RTP. Some factors would be derived from traditional casinos implemented in crypto gaming casinos, and parts of crypto casinos, like transparency and privacy, could be implemented in conventional casinos.
It’s better to know where you are playing and see how the players are doing while playing in that specific casino.
Since traditional casinos are governed by their local government or issuing body, I think it is easier to trust that they are doing the correct RTP. Some factors would be derived from traditional casinos implemented in crypto gaming casinos, and parts of crypto casinos, like transparency and privacy, could be implemented in conventional casinos.
It’s better to know where you are playing and see how the players are doing while playing in that specific casino.
Statistically speaking, most gamblers these days play on casinos licensed by their country's government for many reasons.
But in terms of transparency, crypto casinos that usually are licensed under more permissive offshore licenses (or maybe not even licensed at all) have standards of transparency that are much higher.
The OP didn't attach a research or study which affirms that national licensing agencies don't pay much attention to the fairness and transparency of games. This might be true in developing nations because they are more interested in means to increase government revenues. In my country, I have never heard of a casino being sanctioned for unfairness but they have been fined for tax evasion and other financial crime. This is because my country is developing. But in terms of transparency, crypto casinos that usually are licensed under more permissive offshore licenses (or maybe not even licensed at all) have standards of transparency that are much higher.
But in advanced nations, I think they will have a more professional and comprehensive outlook on gambling games to ascertain if they are in line with regulations. Some of the heads of these regulatory bodies might be former gambling platform operators or owners will vast knowledge of the industry.
We cannot certainly say that offshore licenses or national bodies are more transparent because there are both good and bad actors in the industry.
Most of the crypto casino I know from the forum have Curacao license which doesn't mean they can't operate in other regions unless the government explicitly put restrictions. And having license is not really a protection against anything even the provable fairness, it lies in the hands of the casino itself who decides how they are going to operate their games which will attract users as long as they are operating fairly.
To be honest, I don't understand the purpose of the income statement requirement. In order to prevent money laundering, such a measure will not help in any way. In addition, for money laundering, the casino must be "pocket" or affiliated. The income statement is a measure to control expenses. However, the principle of cost control, primarily applies to government officials, and not to the first person you meet who enters the casino. Because cost control is an anti-corruption measure. Therefore, the connection of the casino with the control of expenses of an ordinary person is unclear to me. Or maybe I got something wrong?
Income statements are a measure of protection against compulsive and pathological gambling. If your income is x amount of money per month, it's reasonable based on your income statement to not let you gamble let's say more than 20% of X in any given month.
In the UK it's quite a prevalent preventative measure that most gamblers have to endure because the government mandates operators to enforce it in order to keep their license.
But really I'm trying to highlight this point as the start difference between what the government considers "transparency" and what the player wants.
The government wants income statements of the players and detailed record keeping of how much everyone gambled so they can tax them.
But players want to know the RTP and the house edge. As well as know that they can bet with provable fairness. Governments have never cared to implement provable fairness. They only care to profit for themselves through players losing money. Whereas players want to know they're not being cheated. It's interesting to observe these antithetical interests here.
I believe that most people have used physical casinos because of the issue of security and speed when withdrawing winnings if they manage to win a lot of money and also because they can play while interacting with other people physically.
What kind of security? Have you seen someone that won in a land based casino and being followed by people that attacked him and almost killed him. I read such news in 2024. Also if you are gambling, online casino is private than land based casinos.I do not also agree that people gamble most on land based casinos. People gamble most on online casinos.
I do not also agree with the withdrawal. There are online casinos that withdrawal is very fast. Withdrawal on Livecasino.io and Stake.com are very fast.
The regulator’s role in monitoring casinos is vital because weak monitoring leads to weak protection for gamblers. However, based on what I know, particularly about the gambling industry in the Philippines, it’s clear that there are gaps in oversight. Take POGOas an example, they are government-regulated, yet many crimes have occurred within their operations that the regulators failed to catch.
When regulators were called into the Senate, they admitted that their oversight functions are very limited. This makes me think that regulators often aren’t proactive. Their security measures might only be activated in during legal processes, where they already have evidence to penalize casinos for violations like cheating gamblers or failing to follow rules and guidelines.
But honestly, it seems like the primary purpose of regulation isn’t really about protecting gamblers but it’s more about ensuring taxes are collected.
When regulators were called into the Senate, they admitted that their oversight functions are very limited. This makes me think that regulators often aren’t proactive. Their security measures might only be activated in during legal processes, where they already have evidence to penalize casinos for violations like cheating gamblers or failing to follow rules and guidelines.
But honestly, it seems like the primary purpose of regulation isn’t really about protecting gamblers but it’s more about ensuring taxes are collected.
Jump to: