Swedish gamblers reveal they use unlicensed sites for the bonus offers
Author:
Jacob McKenzie
Results of a survey conducted by Swedish Gambling Authority, Spelinspektionen, have revealed that the main reason Swedish gamers use unlicensed websites is because of the prevalence of better bonus offers than their licensed counterparts. Better odds and other such winning opportunities are also listed as key reasons.
The survey also found that 55 percent of the respondents preferred licensed operators for “safety, security and control”. ?Ryan Faulkner-Hogg/Unsplash
Spelinspektionen conducted a survey in May in collaboration with SKOP, which involved interviews with over 4,4000 who were of gambling age (18 and above). One of the key takeaways from the survey was that every third Swede plays online at least once in a quarter.
Of this one-third number, it was found that about 8 percent of them play on a website that isn’t licensed in Sweden. That number is not considered as telling the full story as the surveyors found that several of the regular gamers didn’t name the unlicensed sites on which they played.
A third of those who played on unlicensed websites said they did so intentionally, while 15 percent of those who were regular gamers said they had “not done it intentionally but do not know if they have done it unintentionally.”
All in all, at least a third of the people surveyed said that they chose sites without Swedish gaming licenses because of the more lucrative bonus offers available on such destinations. About 26 percent of them said they used these sites because they were blocked on spelpause.se, which is the Swedish Gambling Authority manded gambling self-exclusion program.
Why players chose licensed sites
It is pertinent to state that 10 percent of Swedes did not know how to differentiate between a licensed and an unlicensed operator. The vast majority did, however, and the survey also sought to find out why those who play only on licensed websites choose to do so.
For 55 percent of them, it was about “safety, security and control” – which can be understood as relating to finances, privacy, and protections from law. Reputation and perception also plays an understandably major part in the decision, as suggested by the 53 percent of players who said that they considered companies with Swedish licenses as “serious actors”, and the 40 percent who simply played on licensed operators because they were controlled by Swedish authorities.
A rapidly growing betting and gaming market
Earlier this year, the Swedish Gambling Authority had noted that the betting and gaming market in Sweden had grown 5 percent in comparison to 2020, to a total revenue of SEK 26 billion, which was north of ￡2 billion.
This year’s survey showed that a vast majority – about 61 percent – of those who engage in real-money gaming online preferred lotteries or number games. Next in line in terms of popularity was trotting, a form of horse racing, which was the game of choice for a surprising 34 percent of the respondents. Sweden reopened land-based casinos during the period, and the survey found that one in five regular players had played in a casino – with bingo and poker being the favorites.
Swedish Gambling Authority acts on poor operator practises
A similar survey conducted in May last year had found that the proportion of players who use unlicensed websites was 21%, which has grown significantly at the time when this year’s survey was conducted. In context of the Swedish Gambling Authority’s recent moves to ban unlicensed operators, the news of this particular rise adds up.
In September this year, the Swedish Gambling Authority had released a list of 28 operators who had been banned from offering their services in the country for multiple reasons. It is also a matter of fact that the Swedish Gambling Authority is among the strictest regulators in Europe, and take self-exclusion or opting out of gambling particularly seriously, as evidenced by the €187,500 (SEK 2 million) fine they had handed out to licensed horse racing operator ATG in August for a brief failure of the opt-out system on their platform.
