Gambling Commission releases new data on impact of VIP gaming rules
The British regulator noted the higher prevalence of VIP schemes at land-based casinos.
UK.- Back in 2020, the Gambling Commission introduced new rules on incentivisation via VIP gaming schemes and High Value Customer (HVC) schemes amid concerns about gambling related harm and money laundering risk. They included a ban on promoting VIP schemes to under 25s and a requirement for operators to appoint a senior executive to monitor and audit HVC schemes.
A new impact report published today highlights the ongoing results of those measures four years after an intial report was released in 2021. Based on 2024 data, the headline findings are that these schemes are no more commonplace now than they were in 2021.
The regulator found that the number of consumers in VIP schemes has remained consistent and that the data collected from operators indicates every HVC scheme now has a senior executive appointed to oversee and be held accountable for how the scheme is operated. It also found that HVC schemes were less often assessed as being a contributory factor in issues under investigation within Commission casework.
The Gambling Commission calculated that the proportion of Gross Gambling Yield (GGY) generated by HVC schemes within the sample was approximately 3 per cent, although there was considerable variation between different operators and different sectors. One sector in this exercise which seems to have a greater reliance on scheme members as a proportion of GGY is land-based casinos.
This was not unexpected as the majority of customers in high-end casinos are high net worth individuals based overseas. This factor may have led to the difference in GGY proportions compared to other sectors. The regulator noted that the finding isn’t accompanied with any allegations of consumer harm.
“Whilst we remain mindful that this exercise is reasonably modest in scope, the findings indicate that the intended impact is being achieved,” the Gambling Commission concluded. “Limitations are detailed in the report and include details about the sample of operators and how this is intended to provide a relatively high-level overview of the policy’s effectiveness.
“It’s also worth noting that the impact of this policy is also influenced by other changes to regulatory requirements on topics such as customer interaction, for example. Although evaluation exercises like this will never be able to give total assurance, it does provide an indication that the regulatory objectives have been delivered and further changes are not currently required. Where operators fail to meet requirements, we will continue to take action.”
