Maria, Uplatform: “The philosophy behind Zoom In is: don’t rely on one source or one headline number”

Maria, Head of Marketing at Uplatform, spoke to Focus Gaming News about the company’s Zoom In series and how it uses detailed player insights to help operators understand market-specific behaviour, payments and acquisition triggers beyond traditional market data.

Exclusive interview.- Market entry decisions are often built around headline figures such as regulation, market size and GGR forecasts, but understanding how players behave can reveal the details that determine whether an operator can compete successfully.

Uplatform is taking a more granular approach with its Zoom In series, combining first-hand research, player surveys, public and third-party data and industry insights to examine the motivations, payment preferences, acquisition triggers and behaviours shaping individual markets. The first reports cover Turkey, Argentina, and Malaysia, highlighting how assumptions about players can change when the analysis moves beyond traditional market indicators.

In this exclusive interview with Focus Gaming News, Maria, head of marketing at Uplatform, explains the thinking behind Zoom In and how its three report formats are designed to support operators at different stages of market development. She also discusses what the research reveals about payments, trust and player behaviour in Argentina, Turkey, and Malaysia, the risks of applying a single strategy across Latin America and how Uplatform is selecting the markets it will explore next.

Most market reports describe countries at a surface level: demographics, GGR projections, regulatory status. What made Uplatform decide to go deeper, and what does “zoom in” actually mean in practice for an operator making a real entry decision?

The concept is quite literally in the name: we want to zoom past the surface level. Demographics, market size, and regulation are important starting points, but they don’t tell an operator enough about what it actually takes to build a competitive product in that market.

So we go deeper into the details that directly affect an operator’s business: what triggers players and what holds them back, what motivates them, how and when they engage, what builds trust, which payment methods they prefer, how they discover brands, what influences retention, and how their betting and gaming behaviour differs.

We built the series around a simple belief: the profits are in the details. A market may look attractive from a distance, but the real opportunities only become visible when you zoom in and understand the people behind the numbers.

For an operator, that means moving from “Is this an interesting market?” to much more practical questions such as: “Do we understand these players? Does our product match their expectations? And “Where are the opportunities we can actually build around?”

The playbooks come in three versions: entering a new market, expanding within a region, and already operating in the market. How different are those three reports for the same country, and what’s the most common mistake operators make when they use the wrong version?

The three versions are built around one simple idea: the information you need depends heavily on where you are starting from.

If you are completely new to a region, you need context before anything else. You need a proper PESTL analysis, a deeper understanding of regulation, market development, and forecasts, and a clear view of the opportunities and challenges. At that stage, the main question is still: “Is this market attractive for my business, and are we ready to enter it?”

And if you are already operating in the country, another long PESTL analysis probably won’t tell you much you don’t know. You need a quick overview of important changes, but much more depth around acquisition, engagement, and retention: player motivations, triggers and blockers, behaviour patterns, preferences, and practical insights that might reveal something you are currently missing.

So the underlying research is connected, but the focus and level of detail change depending on the operator’s starting point.

“The concept [behind Zoom In] is quite literally in the name: we want to zoom past the surface level.”

Maria, head of marketing at Uplatform.

That’s why we created three versions. The goal isn’t to give everyone more information. It’s to give each operator the information that is actually useful for the decision they are making.

You’ve launched with Turkey, Argentina, and Malaysia first. These are three very different regulatory, cultural, and payment environments. What’s the single most counterintuitive finding from each of those three markets that most operators wouldn’t expect?

That’s actually one of my favourite parts of the research, because every market gave me something that challenged my own assumptions. And you know marketing people, my mind immediately went to all the ways these insights could be used, testing new acquisition campaigns, experimenting with different triggers and scenarios in the customer journey, exploring new features, and so on. We had to fight to stop ourselves from writing them all down as part of insights 😀

In Turkey, I’d highlight when and how people play. Home and evening are still the core context, which is kind of expected. But we also saw surprisingly strong engagement during social moments – around 28 per cent reported playing while hanging out with friends. It opened a really interesting conversation within our team around social engagement, shared experiences, new CRM scenarios, and new marketing concepts.

Argentina surprised me with how much trust can outweigh promotion. A recommendation from a friend was the strongest individual trigger for players to start. So, despite Argentina being a highly promotional and competitive market, bigger bonuses are not necessarily the strongest answer 😉

Malaysia challenged the stereotype of who the player actually is. Women represent 39 per cent of the online casino audience, making it a much more gender-balanced audience than many operators might assume.

And I think that is exactly why we created Zoom In. Once you start looking closely at actual player behaviour, some of the assumptions you would normally build your product or marketing around can change quite dramatically.

And I’m really grateful to the team behind the data and research. They’ve done a gigantic amount of work to help us challenge those stereotypes and assumptions, including quite a few of my own.

The data behind these reports comes from Uplatform’s own platform and first-hand research, not public stats. What can proprietary platform data tell you about a market that a third-party research report simply can’t?

I’d slightly correct the premise here, because Zoom In isn’t based only on Uplatform’s own platform data. The methodology is broader than that.

We combine first-hand research with public data, third-party studies, player surveys, and, where relevant and applicable, our own internal insights. Each source gives us a different piece of the picture.

Public and third-party data is extremely valuable for understanding the bigger picture and broader consumer trends. First-hand research brings us much closer to players, their motivations, and triggers. And then platform data and expert insights can add another layer – what actually happens with the product. There is always a difference between what people say they do and what they actually do.

For me, the most interesting part is what happens when you put all those layers together. You can validate assumptions, spot contradictions, and identify patterns that would be easy to miss if you relied on a single dataset or a traditional market overview.

That’s also very much the philosophy behind Zoom In: don’t rely on one source or one headline number. Keep zooming in until you understand what is actually happening in the market.

Player payment behaviour is one of the areas covered in depth. How much does getting payments wrong actually cost operators in terms of conversion and retention, and what does the data show across these three markets?

I wouldn’t put one universal percentage on the cost of getting payments wrong. Our research doesn’t support that, and the impact will obviously differ by market and operator. But what the data shows very clearly is that payments are not just a transaction at the end of the funnel. They influence acquisition, conversion, trust, and retention.

Argentina is probably the strongest example. Convenient payment methods are the number-one factor players consider when choosing an operator, ahead of brand reputation, withdrawal speed, and even promotions. The market is heavily built around digital wallets and bank transfers rather than cards, with Mercado Pago playing a particularly important role. In an inflation-sensitive environment, fast and transparent access to your money becomes part of whether you trust the brand at all.

And that’s the bigger takeaway across the research: localisation of payments isn’t simply about adding more methods. It’s about understanding which methods people already trust, how quickly they expect to move their money, and where financial friction can become a reason not to deposit, or not to come back.

From a platform perspective, that’s why we treat payments as part of localisation rather than just infrastructure. You can spend a lot of money bringing the right player to the product, but if they reach the payment stage and don’t see an experience they recognise and trust, you’ve created a very expensive leak in your own funnel.

“We combine first-hand research with public data, third-party studies, player surveys, and, where relevant and applicable, our own internal insights. Each source gives us a different piece of the picture.”

Maria, head of marketing at Uplatform.

There’s a section on why players start and why they choose one operator over another. What drives that first bet decision in these markets, and is it more about product, brand, promotion, or something else entirely?

I’m going to be slightly annoying here and not give away all the findings 🙂 This is one of the sections I’d really recommend operators explore in the reports themselves.

What I can say is that there isn’t one universal answer, and that was one of the interesting findings for us. We looked separately at what initially triggers someone to start playing and what makes them choose one operator over another, because these are not necessarily the same thing.

Depending on the market, the decision can be influenced by recommendations from friends, curiosity and entertainment, promotions, trust in the brand, payment convenience, the available games or sports, and the overall product experience. But the weight of those factors changes quite significantly from country to country.

Argentina is a good example. As I mentioned, a recommendation from a friend was the strongest individual trigger to start, while convenient payment methods came first when choosing an operator. So, even within one market, acquisition isn’t one single decision – different things are working at different stages.

I could give you the top three factors for every country now, but then I’d be doing a terrible job of marketing our own e-books. So I’ll leave Turkey and Malaysia for the readers to discover for themselves 😀

Operators often assume that what works in one LatAm market works in neighbouring ones. How different is Argentina from its neighbours in terms of player behaviour and what it takes to retain them?

I think the first mistake is the assumption that there is one “LatAm player.” There isn’t. I mean, have you seen how huge LatAm is? Countries may share a language or some cultural similarities, but once you zoom in, player behaviour, payments, acquisition channels, regulation, and even device preferences can be quite different.

And we saw those differences at almost every level of the research. Take device behaviour, for example. Argentina shows a stronger desktop tendency, particularly among higher-value players, compared with markets like Brazil and Mexico. Yes, Argentina is still a mobile-first market overall, but this tendency is there. And it sounds like a small detail until you think about what it actually affects – your landing pages, creatives, acquisition funnel, and product experience.

That’s why I’m always a little cautious when someone talks about a single “LatAm strategy. You can absolutely have a regional strategy, but execution needs to happen country by country. What works brilliantly in Brazil may need quite serious adjustment rather than a simple copy-paste into Argentina.

And this is exactly what we mean by Zoom In: sometimes the differences that look small from a regional perspective become quite significant when you translate them into actual business decisions.

More markets are coming. What are the selection criteria, which markets does Uplatform prioritise next, and what does that say about where the platform sees the most operator demand right now? (three questions in only one)

Three questions in one? I like it. 🙂

The selection criteria are actually quite practical. Where we can get enough data 😀 I’m joking, of course.

We look at a combination of several factors. For example, where we see interest from operators, what our clients and partners are asking about, and where we see potential for expansion.

We don’t want to create another library of generic country overviews just to get more downloads. The whole point of the series is depth, so we prioritise markets where we believe there is enough complexity, and enough to uncover, to make a Zoom In report genuinely useful for understanding the market.

The next reports will continue to reflect that demand, although I won’t spoil the full list just yet. What I can say is that we want to keep expanding geographically and exploring very different market environments rather than concentrating the series in one region.

But you can influence that list. Tell us on social media which countries you’d like us to Zoom In on next, and maybe you’ll see one of them in the next edition.

And as you can probably tell from the depth of the research, this is a long-term project 🙂 We’d rather take the time to really understand a market than publish something you could find with ChatGPT in 10 minutes.

By Focus Gaming News Editorial Team