A new study launched by the International Betting Integrity Association (IBIA) has found a “strong correlation” between the wide availability of legal sports betting products and the proportion of consumers who place bets with onshore regulated sports betting operators.
It also reveals that restricting consumers from betting on products such as “in-play” betting and “side” or “exotic” markets significantly increases the chances of them using unlicensed offshore operators.
Titled The Availability of Sports Betting Products: An Economic and Integrity Analysis, the study has been prepared by market data and intelligence firm H2 Gambling Capital in partnership with Instituto Brasileiro de Jogo Responsável, Canadian Gaming Association, Netherlands Online Gambling Association, and Responsible Wagering Australia.
Drawing on sports betting operator data, IBIA alert data and H2’s own market data to draw its conclusions, the study analyzes the comparative impact of restrictive and liberal market regulation of sports betting products on consumer protection, regulatory oversight, taxable revenue, market and sports integrity, IBIA said.
Its central finding revolves around the correlation between consumers in jurisdictions offering wide availability of legalized sports betting utilizing such services, which in turn reduces the risk of exposure to sports betting related fraud on unlicenced markets.
However, it also notes that products like “in-play”, “side markets” and “prop” betting have a very significant impact on channelling customers towards the operators that offer them.
“New data challenges the assumption that these markets represent a heightened risk of match-fixing related fraud, while demonstrating that restricting their availability via regulated onshore operators significantly increases the number of consumers using riskier unlicensed offshore operators,” IBIA states.
The data, it adds, is backed by comparing jurisdictions, with Great Britain – which offers a wide range of betting products – boasting an onshore consumer channelling rate of 97%. Conversely, Portugal, which restricts access to football and tennis betting markets, has an onshore channelling rate of 79%, while Australia with its prohibition on online in-play betting has a rate of 75%.
“Whilst politically attractive, this study confirms that bet restrictions are a blunt and counterproductive instrument,” said IBIA CEO Khalid Ali.
“They don’t prevent betting, they just drive it into the unregulated market where most of the problems with sports integrity arise.
“The conclusions are clear: if you want to protect consumers and sports from corrupters, while maximizing tax revenues, then allowing a wide range of sports betting products is essential.”
According to the study, the global sports betting market will grow from US$94 billion in gross win in 2024 to US$132 billion by 2028, with more than 70% of that to be online.
RelatedPosts
