Topic: Transparency of nationally licenced casinos (Read 491 times)

It never ensures security for the players, but at least we know they have accountability and a person in contact in case a scam happens. In fact, that is what we want, as we trust them, and it was their obligation to show transparency. Having a license is a ticket that can be used to gain trust and maintain the good reputation of the whole gambling industry. That is why gamblers look at the legitimacy of the site before making deposits. Because even if we lose, at least we are certain that it was fair.

its not that they do not think these casinos are incapable of scamming them but rather if they indeed do scam them since these casinos are licensed, it will be easier to report and make sure that the victims are compensated. If you get scammed from a non licensed casino, you have no one to run to and you can blame no one else but yourself.

I don't think a legit casino would do such practice even in online casinos. Because the word of mouth is very fast. So if there is casino which is doing such practice, it will spread like fire and gamblers will avoid that casino. And it is not good for their reputation. Hence, they will be out of business if they will continue to have that kind of reputation.

Depends on where you live, in Europe. Then you're in luck!
If your country has a gambling agency that is on par with the UK, you are able to fill a complaint and provide the data, there are organizations that would help you file a case against them in court and if you indeed are being wronged by the casino they will try to reach a settlement rather than risking their license. A gone license means blocking the whole country so loss of money and a red flag for other countries too.

Now for playing in a casino that is unlicensed, you risk the same happening with no help and on top of that you might experience other problems when h the IRS equivalent asks you how you got money from someone who is not supposed to operate there.

But the most important thing is thinking why this casino is not getting a license or has one rejected, that should be the first thought when accessing it.

Wow, now isn't that just hilarious that crypto gets such a bad rap (or used too- feel like the tides are changing!) and they hold themselves to even stricter standards than that of land based casinos. This just baffles me. On the other side of the coin though they also probably have way more legit KYC and Anti Money Laundering for governments that are much more stringent simply because they deal primarily in crypto transactions & are much more subject to audit probably for that reason. So bacially playing in that field has forced them to hold higher standards because crypto is much more strickly regulated (or one day soon will be).

When online gambling gets a license from the government the users of the gambling site pay more attention to the site and feel comfortable using the gambling site as according to the users it is safe for them. I think they feel safe as they think these gambling sites can't scam as they are regulated.

In my opinion, in any type of activity, you need to focus on the most important things. At the same time, unimportant things can be safely ignored.

In the activities of online casinos, licensing is far from the most important thing for a player. What is more important is the honesty of the founders of the online casino, the ability to withdraw funds at any time without problems. In my country, it is not customary to trust the government.

Therefore, I do not really understand what benefit online casino licensing can bring to me (as a player). Personally, I do not see a direct connection between casino licensing and my comfortable gambling. These things, in my opinion, are not connected in any way.

Therefore, all other things being equal, I will choose an online casino without a license if all other conditions that I apply to an online casino meet my expectations.

The gambling industry is mainly about gambling, crypto is just a medium of transferring the money from the players to the bookies and so on.

If crypto gambling were more like crypto in general you would firstly have no centralized casino and bookie, then you would not have custodial wallets, no kyc, and of course no central authority. But gambling is a business, the website is run by a company so it must adhere to the laws of the country it operates just like normal gambling casinos do.
Imagine I would run a pharmacy in a country and just because I deal only with crypto I would not let any government rule how I run my business, to whom I sell medicine and never disclose my accounts to the IRS, would that be normal? 


 

I disagree with you about this point, from my experience national casinos are way less intrusive than crypto casinos asking KYC, at least in my country. For example the exact same picture of my passport has been accepted without difficulty by the national online casino I'm currently using while an offshore casino has asked me to send a selfie of me holding it with a paper showing my username and the today's date after I sent it for finally rejecting it saying it's too blurry. And for the proof of residence they offer to freely send a mail to the customer's physical address containing a one-time code, if you don't want to send them private documents. I've never seen such option from an offshore casino up to now.

 The goal of these transparency practices is to protect players, maintain the integrity of the industry, and promote trust between the casino, its customers, and the regulatory bodies that oversee their operations.

The logic is you can easily file a complaint because of the location and the decision is faster and you will not spend a lot of money than when you're going to complain offshore.
Its always been on the requirement place by your license issuer, and besides the license, its always on the preferences of the casinos to keep up with a highly competitive industry like gambling; players will always go for transparent casinos.

The most interest of gamblers that attracts them to play on the licensed casinos of their governments could be basically reason that their governments has always been concerned of it citizens by which they implements casino policies that considers transparencies within the accordance parties in the casinos.
Most especially if the regulatory policies focuses on justifications Incase of comprise between the cainsos and the gamblers. So, gamblers would have that insights of such licensed casinos to be legitimate and reliable to their best interests of playing with them without panicks.

number one reason i can think of is because it is the safest in terms of not having to worry about getting in trouble with the government
i think this is only a generalization because some casinos that are not licensed do not operate that honestly either maybe some that are very well deep in within their community but we can not deny that there are really some questionable and suspicious ones

we just need to find good and reliable ones no matter what kind of casino we want to go for

To be honest, getting national or other licenses often does not make the casino work better, although in theory it should. I look at the casinos and bookmakers in my country and I see a lot of abuse from bookmakers, for example. What upsets me most is the blocking of the accounts of those players who are successful. If you make a profit from a sports betting site in the long term, then in 99% of cases you will be blocked. Unfortunately, this is the situation with gambling in our country. And the regulator just turns a blind eye to it. So what is the point of these licenses?

Somehow these gamblers seem to find more confidence in been able to gamble at the government approved or licensed casino because they believe accountability will come with such casinos as they have the government to contend with if they at some point get involved in any form of malpractice but like you said they actually get smart with their odds and the crypto casinos may not get involved in such because adding crypto to their casinos alone gives them an edge to generate some extra funds and so it becomes absolutely unnecessary to get involved in odds manipulations.

Curacao gambling license is one of the most popular business licenses for operators. It is more affordable than other licenses such as the MGA and UKGC and allows the casino to offer a wide range of services. While there are some requirements to obtain, there is less bureaucracy involved. Note that operators do not have to deal directly with the Curacao government.

Today, a Curacao gambling license is still one of the quickest to obtain, as long as the operator meets the licensing requirements. In other countries, most regulators will require operators to complete lengthy and expensive procedures to be eligible for a license, and will give priority to local casinos.

Curacao accepts licenses for online casinos and most casinos get the licenses from Curacao. And gambler trusts those gambling sites that have licenses from Curacao. Also, the sites that have taken licenses from gambling sites are restricted from obeying the rules of Curacao and from providing their service in any country.

Yea, I know but just as OP's opinion, I think it would have been better if the government set out an organization or body that will also censor the casino to detect any act of unfair behavior, they should not only seek transparency for their own benefits, at least they should also look out to protect gamblers interest because they are taking tax from those casino and currently they want to start taking tax from gamblers winning.

The withdrawal fee is a matter that goes on in different casinos, rare are the ones who pay their fees for people who withdraw their money from such casinos. I remember there were some but I forgot the names and I agree with such choice in order to attract more people to play, you know when we deposit we pay high fees if we use Bitcoin and also to pay such fees when withdrawing which is like over 3 dollars with nowadays price of a Bitcoin at Stake is not a good option. When people are winning they expect the casino to pay their fees as they most likely during the long run sustain heavy losses and even when they win they have to pay such fee. As for transparency of local casinos they can be better but they can also be worse as they may happen to live in a corrupted government.

Since most casinos are licensed in Curacao, they must abide by the laws of Curacao. If they want to provide their services in any country, they must abide by the gambling laws or rules related to gambling in that country or they will be restricted there.

Activity licenses mean to users that the casino is subject to certain laws in which it has met several conditions, and through which it can be held accountable in case of any problems.

By the way, I am interested to know two things. First, whether other entities besides Caracao accept to grant licenses for online casinos. Second, what are the conditions for obtaining licenses from Caracao and why it seems so easy.

Yes, the casino usually list the restricted countries and some of them might be partially restricted but not always they restrict the access to the site by default so the user has to obey the rules of their own government and try not to break the laws because the problem usually occurs at the time of verification which commonly happens at the time of first withdrawal. And when the casino found the user is from restricted country they hold all the funds including the deposits because they mention it in their TOS itself.

For the government, the interests of players or gamblers are the umpteenth because the main priority is to generate tax money and also provide prevention for illegal things that harm the country, but there are also some people who doubt the transparency of licensed casinos and they consider all of this does not provide any guarantee.
They should not only consider the transparency of the casino but also see the reputation and trust rating because all of this can be very helpful in getting confidence that the casino is indeed worthy and right to use.

This would be true in the past when online crypto casinos were not popular. Most people had no other option that to use them even though there were risk involved such a being waylaid if you had won the jackpot. For example of a security issue that happpend on Aug. 2, 2024 A man and a woman were followed home, robbed and shot after winning a casino jackpot at the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel & Casino in Tampa.


Correct. In where I live the land based casinos are not for the commoners. They cannot afford it. The "commoners" would rather gamble on online casinos that waste their time and money trying to go to a physical casino.

I agree with you. Anyone who wants to experience fast withdrawals should try Livecasino.io.

Licensed is simply just a compliance or merely for tax purposes of the casino to operate legally on different country. I doubt the government itself will moderate scam and other fraud unless it was reported to them which is a hassle thing to do as players that playing online casino.

Even on our country which considered as developed still has a very lousy regulation when it comes to gambling despite having multiple huge casino here that operated by foreign businesses.

Maybe on US and UK license works the way it was intended but for 3rd world country I doubt if the license really serves its purpose.

As they usually take licenses from Curacao they must have to obey the rules of Curacao and to operate gambling in any country they must have obey the rules of gambling if the government of the country has any rules regarding gambling in that country. Otherwise, they would be restricted there.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.


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.

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.

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 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.

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?
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.

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.
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.

As far as I know, if crypto casinos offer only in-house games and don't have slots and live casino providers, they can operate without KYC demand. This was the reality years ago because governments were saying that Bitcoin is not money, it's a virtual thing and doesn't carry monetary value but recently things have changed and they admit that Bitcoin is a currency, so the requirements for casinos became different.
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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

Most of those reasons are  lying in the plane of taxation. Government in the most countries regard casinos as the source for pumping up the budget and if it wasn't for this factor they would touch them tough and probably nuke many of them. Nevertheless I would prefer to cope with licensed  casinos rather than those ones that are relevant to illegal activities and fly-by-night business. Everything may happen with my money and licensed rules to given casino ^{should they be violated}  might come in handy one day.

Frankly, regulation is collectively weak in the gambling industry, if I should be pointing out faults, I might just be starting even at the 10th point. This is also applicable in the top-world countries where other countries are looking as role models, it's not until they change the narrative before we experience changes that will be balanced and not the present ones that are bookies partial.

I believe the government are engrossed with only two things; Taxation and Security, but neglects the protection of the masses which they govern upon. Bookies' offerings should be visited and anomalies should be cancelled. Proper monitoring of the services is also necessary.

Besides of don't have money to go to physical casinos, they also think the acceptance of gambling in their country. That makes them use online casino to gambling so they don't have to go to physical casino to gamble. But if in their country, gambling is prohibit, the only way they can play gambling is by using the online casino.

With the popularity of crypto, people can use crypto casino to gambling and they can withdraw the money faster than transfer their wins money to their bank account. Not to mention what their bank or government will do if they withdraw a lot of money from casino to their bank account. That will sound the alarms of the bank and the government so they will check and investigates the account. If their country prohibits gambling, surely those people will gets a warning from their bank and the government. But if they use crypto casino, they can transfer their win money to their private wallet which is more safe to keeps the money.

I think the idea of casino income statements, may be based on a lot of assumptions that casinos are often the target of money laundering because of the large volume of cash transactions, so that with the existence of profit and loss statements and suspicious transaction reporting, of course corruption authorities can monitor casino financial activity and detect patterns that may indicate money laundering, although it may seem more relevant to do.  But I think that actually it is also not effective to prevent money laundering.
I personally very rarely hear of casinos or officials who are involved  has arrested in casinos, because they are considered to money laundering actions, I think those who supervise corruption also commit corruption, so that cats and mice only take care of each other for their own safety.

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?

You are right in what you are saying dude, before there were many people who did not have the capability to go to physical casinos even if they wanted to go but they still could not because usually physical casinos have membership card requirements so often the only ones who can go are those in the middle class gamblers.

But it is different these days, because casino owners themselves have approached everyone through online casinos, and it really started during the pandemic because all physical casinos were shut down. Now, in crypto gambling the usual things happen is that some do not require kyc although others do. Even until now many people still gamble via online.

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. I think that playing in a physical casino is very good compared to playing in an online casino, even if they say that the RTP of physical casinos is more disadvantageous compared to that of online casinos, still the fact that people can play while interacting with other people is a good thing that would make them not change physical casinos. But not everyone has the money to go to physical casinos, that's why they use online casinos.

KYC goes against everything that crypto was supposed to stand for, but now we see the adapt or die mentality when it comes to casinos because it basically is comply with the government or be shut down. Sure they could operate for a few months and get away with it, but eventually will be pressured by their license provider and the government.

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.

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.