Figures show: impact of GlüStV (State Gambling Act) 2021 is questionable!
Since the introduction of the State Gambling Act 2021, the regions as the social and legal core idea, should take it upon them to drastically contain illegal online gambling and offer a higher player protection. Could the GlüStV (State Gambling Act) 2021 reach these aims? The results of the recent GambleJoe-Survey “Effect analysis of the new regulations according to the GlüStV 2021“ raise this question.
In 2020 the politics and other organs of the regions announced an amendment of the Gambling Act. One spoke of a “revolution in online gambling”, “major breakthroughs” and “disrupting market changes”. We all remember statements as “laying to rest all illegal casinos” or “player protection comes first”. A good approach so far. Especially when most of us have had enough of gambling in a legally grey zone.
There have long been doubts smouldering in whether the GlüStV 2021 is meaningful
In Summer 2023 the State Gambling Act will have been in force for 2 years. It is mostly carrying out its work (just recently we had reported about the dragging authorisation procedures in NRW). However, among the GambleJoe-Community there are doubts about whether the rules are meaningful: “the drastic restrictions are motivate the casino customers to use illegal platforms more and are not keeping them away from them”, this is the most frequent opinion.
GambleJoe-survey for real, unfiltered survey to see whether it is meaningful
We took the opportunity of this frequent criticism to question the current legal situation of the online casino games in Germany. We did not want to use any scientific thesis and public (i.e., country-led) statistics. It was important for us to receive an authentic perspective. And how could we get it better than asking you and several other GambleJoe members directly?! Many very interesting insights came out from this exercise: Some of them confirmed the long-standing impression, others are completely in favour of the new features of the State Gambling Act 2021. To the GambleJoe survey.
In short about the survey
The aim of the survey “Wirkungsanalyse der Neuregelung nach GlüStV 2021“ (Effect Analysis of the New Regulations of the State Gambling Act 2021), was to get an objective opinion of the community about the effects of the changes in regulations. In this regard – as usual- it was important for us to consider all the parties.
We were especially interested to see whether the games on offer according to the State Gambling Act 2021 were an attractive alternative to non-licensed casinos from abroad and in what way the gambling behaviour has eventually been affected by the new regulations.
Space was also given to the possible advantages of the GlüStV 2021. In no way should one get the impression that this is the start of a rash attack on the new regulations.
The results are very clear, however should definitely be viewed in a holistic manner
Finally, we now come to the results of the survey. Actually, your replies substantiate the opinion which is shared by many in the community: The GlüStV (State Gambling Act) 2021 seems to be missing its aim. On the other hand, there seem to be positive influences, which are in line with the objectives of the new regulations.
Mostly no change in gambling behaviour
Many of the participants admitted that they did not see any significant change in their gambling behaviour after the GlüStV 2021(59 per cent). 33 per cent are however sure that they are gambling less, and they feel better protected.
Worrying trend of gambling problems
The number of players who are seeing a connection between the new regulations and a deterioration in their gambling behaviour is quite worrying (21 %). As a comparison these are the least. However, on an overall basis this is a large number. The lawmakers should think about the social background of this.
5-second rule often misses the target
The results of the so-called 5-second rule are in line with the above-mentioned problem. Most community members find this rule especially disturbing (25 per cent). However, their gambling behaviour is not influenced by this rule (53 per cent). Just 26 per cent of the respondents have reduced their stake because of the pause. One cannot say that there is a strong protection function which aims to have a more conscious game with debt reduction.
Even more: Unfortunately, even as regards the 5-second rule there is a completely contrary trend of a remarkable extent. 21 per cent of the community members admit – as in all the general negative effects of the regulations on gambling behaviour – that the game pause very often leads them to bet more. This is definitely not the aim of those who created this, i.e. the gambling supervisory authority.
Rather low gradient between effect and ineffectiveness
The percentual gradient which measures if the intentions of the GlüStv were a success or a “failure” has till now been clear, but it is still not as large as we have expected.
By comparison, the regulation and the changes in the online casinos which resulted from it have had the effect on players as planned by the gambling supervisory authority.
Around half of those who do not see any effect in the measures plummet on those who (in compliance with the law) are positively influenced by them. Rund die prozentuale Hälfte derjenigen, die keine Wirkung in den Maßnahmen sehen, fällt auf diejenigen ab, die davon (im Sinne des Gesetzes) positiv beeinflusst werden.
Online casinos licensed in Germany unattractive
There is a greater weighting in the opinion about the attractiveness of casinos which are regulated in Germany. 71 per cent of the participants here state that they find such platforms hardly attractive. This does not immediately mean that these players prefer to place bets in online casinos with a foreign license.
There was a relatively consistent combination to the answers to our question “Do you also play with providers which are not licensed in Germany?” 59 per cent stated they still gamble regularly with other providers. Another 27 per cent state that they still gamble internationally from time to time.
Conclusion
The data shows that the State Gambling Act can fulfil its targets. Unfortunately these are only partial successes. The regulations and their intended effects hardly reach most players.
Regretfully the issue becomes really critical when it comes to the information about the gambling behaviour which has worsened after the new regulations came into force and also that higher stakes are being made by the 5-second rule. Probably there is also a connection between the limited offers of casinos with a German licence and the ever increase in the use of international licensed platforms.
I ask myself: can the targets of the gambling supervisory authority be reached by this type of prohibition policy? In my opinion, the regulations should me more flexible and individual. To play in a German casino one must still give the details about oneself – it should therefore be also possible that the conditions are adjusted more to the own requirements.
Did you find your opinion amongst the end results? In which areas do you disagree from the majority? In your opinion, what could be done to make the GlüStV 2021 more effective?
Image source: https://www.pexels.com/de-de/foto/lupe-oben-auf-dem-dokument-6801648/
0 Comments to: Figures show: impact of GlüStV (State Gambling Act) 2021 is questionable!
write a commentOur community thrives on your feedback - so let us know what you think!
Would you like to write comments on GambleJoe yourself? Then just create a GambleJoe User Account.