Cookies on the Gambling Commission website

The Gambling Commission website uses cookies to make the site work better for you. Some of these cookies are essential to how the site functions and others are optional. Optional cookies help us remember your settings, measure your use of the site and personalise how we communicate with you. Any data collected is anonymised and we do not set optional cookies unless you consent.

Set cookie preferences

You've accepted all cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Skip to main content

Report

Exploring consumer journeys using gambling promotional offers and incentives

The Gambling Commission’s report on consumer interactions with online promotional offers and incentives.

  1. Contents
  2. 6 - Impact of promotional offers and potential for gambling related harm

6 - Impact of promotional offers and potential for gambling related harm

Consumers strongly contested the view that promotional offers negatively impact their wider gambling behaviour. Gamblers, by nature, are accepting of financial risks associated with betting or playing, and the prospect of winning big from a small stake is the primary driver for regular gambling, with promotional offers capitalising on this concept.

Despite consumers' view, we observed some potential for gambling related harm when taking a broader view of their gambling behaviour resulting from using promotional offers, however respondents themselves rarely recognised promotional offers as being the cause for these behaviours.

Promotional offers seemed to be driving consumer engagement with a wider range of gambling activities, outside of what they would normally participate in. Operators advertise promotional offers that are unrelated to the consumers’ main type of gambling. Initially, consumers justified their engagement with newer, secondary types of gambling as a way to fund their primary type of gambling.

However, we observed that these secondary types of gambling still represented a relatively large portion of their total gambling routine and were being engaged with, even without using a promotional offer. This could suggest that promotional offers act as a gateway to secondary types of gambling. This was most prevalent amongst sports gamblers becoming involved in casino-based games, but did also occur the reverse way.

“I once won a free holiday off a free spin. I find that if you log on at night, like 3AM the offers seem to win.”
Female (age 58), Problem Gambling Severity Index score (PGSI) Score: 9

Consumers recognised these different types of gambling (that is, sports and casino products) have vastly different user experiences, with online casinos’ gameplay having less of a social aspect (in that they are typically played alone) and faster speed of play as game outcomes are realised instantly. The gamified nature of online casinos means the gambling experience is entertaining and appealing in itself. In contrast, consumers reported that the enjoyment from sports betting comes from the sporting fixture, with gambling being used to enhance this experience. The potential for financial return with online casinos is understood to be built on luck rather than expertise.

Consumers rarely associated themselves with their secondary type of gambling, especially if participating in it was misaligned with their primary reasons for gambling in the first place. Secondary types of gambling were being engaged with, despite respondents lacking:

  • full comprehension of the offer or game
  • previous experience with this form of gambling
  • personal enjoyment in the type of gambling.

“I started using free spins because Paddy Power advertise them. I wouldn’t say I enjoy it, but you might as well if it’s free.”
Male (age 24), PGSI Score: 1

Engagement with online casinos that is being driven by promotional offers has a greater potential for risk, as our consumers’ experience developing responsible gambling practices and familiarity with sports betting had less relevance in this new space. There is potential for consumers to gamble more in isolation, betting on automated games where winning is built on luck, and where they will need to show restraint in playing high frequency casino games, as the act of playing is entertaining by itself.

Engaging in multiple gambling streams may also heighten tolerance to loss. Consumers rarely adapted their cumulative gambling budget to cater for the greater quantity of gambling activities they engaged with. Instead, they typically allocated a separate budget for the new form of gambling on top of their original gambling budget, effectively increasing the amount they were willing to lose.

More broadly, engagement with promotional offers seemed to make tracking losses more complicated. Losses from bets that did not require staking their own money were better tolerated, as consumers saw themselves as ‘no worse off’ than they were before. However, they admitted confusion over accounting for how much of their own money had been staked (that is, their ‘real money’ balance) vs. ‘free’ money as part of the offer (that is, their ‘bonus’ balance). Also, money staked to fulfil an offer’s wagering requirement did not appear to always be factored into their mental accounting of losses.

Promotional offers, particularly free bets and boosted odds, may compromise a consumers’ typical rationality and judgement when analysing the quality of an offer, and whether it will yield a positive return. Consumers felt a degree of safety when placing riskier bets using a promotional offer, and likened it to a ‘free hit’ to earn greater financial return, despite acknowledging that the advertised bet was unlikely to win. Generally, engagement with promotional offers appeared to be driving more speculative and riskier betting, where potential for loss is judged to be lesser.

Despite consumers’ strong advocacy for promotional offers and their perceived value to their gambling experience, realised winnings from gambling using promotional offers was generally considered insignificant. As a result, winnings were rarely cashed out by our sample and instead were ‘reinvested’ into placing future bets (often without the use of a promotional offer), where the potential for significant return is greater.

“I’ve noticed offers are a lot worse than they used to be 10 to 15 years ago. If you do win anything, It’s hardly worth cashing out, so you just place it on other bets.”
Male (age 38), PGSI Score: 0

Some consumers had developed irregular routines around when they decide to engage with promotional offers. Some were suspicious about the mechanics behind the offers they engage with, and believed their chances of winning are improved at specific time periods. Online casino games are perceived to ‘cash out’ when less people are gambling (for instance, late at night or in early hours of the morning) and in extreme cases, consumers reported setting alarms to start their gambling routine around these times. This was more common within the online casino space.

In some cases, promotional offers were only being used when consumers had depleted their regular gambling budget for the month, allowing them to continue gambling beyond the point they would usually stop. There is potential for this to accelerate consumers’ cumulative gambling activity, should they attempt to fulfil wagering requirements of the promotional offers that they had started to use the previous month, effectively increasing their monthly total gambling activity.

Previous section
Consumer understanding and engagement - Exploring consumer journeys using gambling promotional offers and incentives
Next section
Conclusion - Consumer understanding of online gambling promotional offers and marketing
Is this page useful?
Back to top