A study of the lines featured at online gambling sites throughout Europe during the recent World Cup has found that coutries in which state monopolies handle all gaming gave consumers by far the worst betting odds. The evidence, which comes as Europe struggles to force EU member nations to adhere to open trade policies regarding Internet gambling, shows clearly that nations operating monopolies are using their competitive advantage to hurt their own residents.
Using data from both the monopolies and legal private online sports betting operators, the survey showed players taking the favored side in every match won 38 percent less at the state sites, and those playing underdogs throughout won 35 percent less. Odds from the national gambling sites were on average 32 percent worse than operators in competitive circumstances.
The report, compiled by Right2bet, backs the group’s claims that protectionist laws hurt consumers more than the cited risks of open competition. Many gaming analysts, including OCA’S Sherman Bradley, are saying the safety citations are really a mask covering government revenue grabs at the cost of citizens.
Intriguingly, the study found sharp differences between certain state operators. While Germany offered its players the worst odds to be found, over 48 percent less return than the average private site, the Danish gaming operator was found to be the closest in value to competitive sites. Danske Spiel, the report said, may be altering its position as new laws will soon open Denmark to other online casinos.
A player who made every correct choice and bet $20 per match would have, on average, made $629 less with monopolies. The argument that these organizations are necessary for public protection is in tatters, revealing the government greed for money lurking in the background.
Published on August 4, 2010 by EdBradley