I’ve got a pretty lengthy piece of the differing evolution of gaming regulations and transparency in gaming in Nevada, Macau, and Singapore in the latest Global Gaming Business Magazine:
Today, gaming is a truly global industry. Casino gaming, which was once a small-scale business confined to a limited number of jurisdictions, has blossomed into a multibillion-dollar enterprise with numerous competing markets. This not only means that gamblers get their pick of where they want to play; it also means that states, nations and special administrative regions compete with each other by offering regulatory regimes that best suit the growth of casinos.
Nevada, whose current regulatory regime is the longest-lived of the major gaming markets, may have some historical lessons for jurisdictions on the rise, particularly when it comes to the role of transparency in promoting the public—and investor—trust in the gaming industry.
via Gaming Regulations: Evolution and Transparency | Global Gaming Business Magazine.
Can you tell how eager I am for Singapore to start releasing monthly, or at least quarterly, revenue data?
That was a fun piece to write because it made me think about how Nevada, Macau, and Singapore are similar and different. It wouldn’t make sense to impose Nevada’s regulatory system top-down on other jurisdictions, but at 80 years it’s got the longest history of modern regulatory regimes (though Macau has had legal commercial gambling since the 1850s), so there are definitely going to be some lessons there for everyone.