The future of online lottery games including instant games
In a report published by Pennsylvania Inquirer, lottery players in that state are soon to get access to online gambling, like we have here through The Lott and other platforms. The report also foreshadows a move to reimagine instant stretch ticket games for the online customer.
The Pennsylvania Lottery hopes to do that by creating “totally new concepts” for the instant-win games offered online. Details about how exactly the games will work are still being figured out. The new games will be similar to some sold in other states, like Michigan, which is considered the most successful iLottery state.
“It’s really meant to just offer a different type of entertainment to a different audience,” Svitko said. “We believe the most responsible way we can grow our sales is to grow by reaching new players in new ways and not just by asking existing players to spend more.”
“We are working feverishly to try to figure all of it out,” he added.
Instant games bring in the most revenue for iLotteries across the country, according to research by Bogus’ group. An analysis showed that in Michigan the iLottery was growing rapidly — reaching $1 million by February 2017 — with retail sales nearing record highs.
In Michigan while they sell lottery tickets online, they are yet to offer instants on phones and tablets. Indeed, when you go to the Michigan lottery website, they make it easy for shopper to find lottery retailers:
Tatts should do this rather than their current approach of all but hiding their retailers.
All it will take is for one lottery provider to nail offering instants on mobile devices for others to follow. As we see from other games on mobile devices, the tech is there today.
Lottoland CEO reflects on retreating from selling best in Australian lotteries
9 News ran a story two days ago on Lottoland in which Luke Brill, Lottoland CEO, made some comments newsagents may find interesting:
“What Tatts wants to do is to protect the online space. They don’t care about the newsagents really, so when this obviously natural transition happens, it’s got nothing to do with Lottoland – it’s to do with the internet,” said Brill.
“People’s behaviour is changing. You don’t go to the video store anymore; you go to Netflix.
“Unfortunately, the reality is that for the next generation of people coming through, it’s unlikely they will go to newsagents to buy a lottery ticket.”
Checking out Lottoland syndicates
With Lottoland no longer selling bets on the numbers drawn for Australian lottery games, I expect it will intensify its marketing of bets on overseas lotteries. One focus I think we will see is more of is their syndicates. They have a comprehensive offer.
Check out the syndicates page on their website. It offers plenty of syndicates. Their packaging and marketing is clever. It is competitive against the way syndicates are handled for Australian lotteries.
Understanding a competitor is a important step in successfully competing. This is why I suggest newsagents who sell lottery products thoroughly research the Lottoland pitch, including their syndicators pitch.
I don’t see Lottoland retreating from Australia in the short to medium term. It wouldn’t surprise me if we heard more from them, not less … along with all the others players now in this online lottery relates space.
Lotterywest fails to meet GS1 barcode standard
Lotterywest has released new Lotto Terminals that print Price Embedded Barcodes (PEB), like Tatts.
These barcodes do not meet GS1 Price Embedded Barcode Standards. This means they will not scan like the Tatts Lotto Tickets and put in the price automatically. This only effects West Australian sites who have these new terminals and want to scan their lotto tickets.
Experts at my newsagency software company have looked at the barcodes on the Lotterywest tickets and confirm they do not meet GS1 Price Embedded Barcode Standards. Tower has sent information on Price Embedded Barcodes to Lottertwest many times.
The actual problem is the prefix of the barcodes. “51” is not a standard prefix for a PEB hence they don’t scan as a PEB but rather as a product.
Hey Lotterywest – this is not rocket science. Your organisation requires retailers to follow standards. You should do this yourselves.
Lottoland announces end of betting on Australian lotteries
Luke Brill, CEO of Lottoland, send this message to customers this afternoon:
Hi Mark,
We’ve not seen you around in a while and it would be great to have you back on board. I’d like to keep you up to date with all things Lottoland.
It’s been a huge year for us, in which we crowned our first Millionaire, paid out over $15m in winnings and launched our partnership with the Manly Sea Eagles and the Northern Territory’s, Mitchell Street Mile.
These are milestones we’re immensely proud of and are a sign of things to come.
On a different note, sadly, I have to announce that due to regulatory changes, after November 30, we can no longer accept bets on the Australian Lotteries. Namely, Mon&Wed Lotto, Tuesday Lotto, Thursday Lotto and Saturday Lotto.
Single and Subscription bets on these lotteries that were placed before November 30 will be honoured and winnings will be paid as though you entered the official underlying draw. Subscriptions will not be renewed after this date.
We will continue to keep you informed about new products and exciting alternatives available. To give you the chance to explore, here’s an early Christmas present:
Whatever you spend on your next cart, the first $5 is on us!
Kind Regards,
Luke Brill (CEO Lottoland Australia)
The withdrawal from betting on Australian lotteries has been brought after a long battle including late but welcome, I am sure, engagement by politicians from all sides on the Lottoland threat to lottery retailers, Tatts and, most important, government revenue.
I think this note from Brill could reflect a change in messaging from Lottoland.
Brill specifically refers to a Lottoland purchase as a bet. This has not been key in their advertising to now.
Yes, it is a bet, something that even Tatts did not push back against until late in the day.
Statement from ALNA on ban on lotto betting
ALNA released this statement yesterday on lottery betting:
Ban on betting on Australian lotteries a step in the right direction
New ban demonstrates the problem with synthetic lotteries and the need to protect consumers and small business.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Australia, 15 November 2017: A ban on betting on the outcome of Australian-based lotteries is a positive move in addressing the problem of synthetic lotteries and its threat to consumer protections and ethical conduct, according to the Australian Lottery and Newsagents Association. The Association is continuing its call for the Federal Government, in coordination with State Governments, to legislate against any operation of synthetic lotteries in Australia.
The move by the NT Attorney-General Natasha Fyles to ban bookmakers licensed in the Northern Territory from accepting bets on the outcomes of Australian-based lotteries, demonstrates that there is a serious problem with synthetic lotteries.
There is still a need for Federal Government intervention, in coordination with the states, to protect consumers and the Australian businesses that contribute to our economy.
Adam Joy, CEO of the Australian Lottery and Newsagents Association (ALNA) said, “We are pleased that the Federal Government and State Governments, in particular, WA, NSW and Tasmania, have worked together to address this issue and to deliver this important first step towards an overall ban.
Consumers will still be bombarded with potentially misleading advertisements for these risky betting products that are lacking certainty around payout figures. And they will still be lured into profiting a highly unethical business, including at the expense of news and lottery agents.”
The Federal Interactive Gambling Act makes it illegal to have online scratchies and online pokies, and it should also ban online betting on lottery outcomes.
“The facts are that Lottoland is under pressure because it has chosen to operate as an online bookmaker that poses as a lottery, outside of the much tighter regulations, consumer protections, and higher taxes that official regulated lotteries adhere to.
“It has attracted criticism because it allows consumers to be misled in a number of ways, and the bookmaker uses concerning tactics to attempt to hijack customers from news and lottery agents.
Synthetic lotteries are a matter of national concern, and this decisive action is a positive step towards the urgent action needed to address lotto betting in Australia,” continued Mr Joy.
– ENDS –
What is the difference between Lottoland and official regulated lotteries:
Lottoland is a wagering website that sends bets overseas, with customers betting on the outcome of lotteries. More colloquially known as lotto bets (synthetic/fake lotteries), these online-only bookmakers are different to official regulated lottery draws.
They do not offer tickets in a draw, rather they draw from regulated lottery businesses and offer bets on lottery outcomes, relying on complex insurance linked securities to pay any winners (there has only been one million-dollar prize recipient, compared to official lottery’s 253 millionaires in 2016).
Is this ad from Lottoland on Facebook misleading?
Take a close look look at this ad that appeared on Facebook yesterday. It appears to be pitching a $41 million Tuesday lotto game. What it was actually pitching was a bet of the numbers selected by the OzLotto game.
If you click on the link it takes you to the Lottoland page where you can place a bet on the outcome of the lottery. This is why I question whether the ad as shown on Facebook is misleading.
At the very lease the text should say: You could win a prize by betting on the outcome of the numbers drawn in Tuesday’s OzLotto jackpot. But, of course, that exposes their product for what it is, a bet, not a lottery ticket.
Independent Australia on Lottoland
Click here to access a comprehensive article by John Turnbull and published by Independent Australia about Lottoland. It is a good read. be sure to scroll down to the comments.
Tatts changes new shoplift deadline, again and again
Tatts has issued three shift deadline extensions in recent weeks. Here is one announcement from a week ago:
You were initially required to have the Generation One DigiPOS Retail Image installed at your Outlet by 30 November 2017, however an extension has been granted to 30 November 2018.
Here is an announcement from yesterday:
An email was sent to you on Friday 3 November 2017 stating the requirement to have the Generation One DigiPOS Retail Image installed in your outlet by 30 November 2017 had been extended to 30 November 2018. This was incorrect.
The extension has been granted to 30 June 2018. We apologise for any confusion this may have caused.
In addition to the timing changes, there are changes to the actual look to be installed. This is sure to leave a mixture of looks out there, making a mockery of their pursuit of a consistent corporate image.
It still bothers me that they call this a DigiPOS Retail Image. It’s not. there is the image and then there is the digital marketing platform. Two different things with the latter being new capex for which tatts is yet to provide any business case and for which any business that has undertaken the works is yet to provide evidence of commercially viable revenue increase.
This post relates to my more beef about Tatts – the capex they demand of retailers in this world where there is undeniable migration of lottery purchases to online. Tatts need to migrate purchases online, I get that. They should, in retail, contain costs for small business retailers and require them in the context of over the counter only and not online.
The impact of the Tatts digital marketing screen in one newsagency
Here is a message from a newsagent in a business that installed the Tatts required digital marketing platform.
Since we installed the Tatts demanded technology sales have declined. Syndicate sales especially have fallen.
Yesterday, we were stuck with 6 syndicates worth more than $120.
Since the refit, syndicate sales have cost us around $1,000.
Before the refit, we sold out.
This is a direct result of the refit, we previously maybe had to be an odd share rarely… our syndicates are usually sold out well before.
There solution to this problem when we raised it with them was to print out more posters and stick up!!!
After their amazing refit, we still have to print out posters which clearly are ineffective too!
If this was me I;d explore a class action as tatts demanded I invest in their technology with the promise from them it would increase sales.
Look at what is broadcast on the Tatts digital screens that fail to deliver sales boost
Tatts has demanded retailers install digital marketing screens at the counter, without a business case but with the claim sales will increase. Experience is showing no such increase for the stores forced to install the screens so far.
I stood at a counter yesterday and filmed for a minute, longer than most customers wait, to see the pitch. here it is.
This is a failure by Tatts in my opinion, for which many newsagents who have installed the screens so far are paying dearly.
If I was forced to install the screens by Tatts and if they were not delivering any benefit I would lodge a claim for compensation. Such a claim would include with state claims tribunals, state and federal small business commissioners / ombudsmen as well as with the ACCC through the Franchise Code of Conduct process. I would be seeking financial relief from Tatts. I would also talk with a legal firm that specialises in class action.
Note: I added the music to the video to mask shop noises.
Tha Age labels Lottoland a pariah
The Age today slices away at Lottoland.
The company does not tell us what this percentage is but only 16 per cent of its revenue is from this source. The vast majority of the revenue it recognises is actually just a reimbursement of costs incurred “generating stakes on behalf of EU Lotto Limited”.
In other words, the revenue number appears to be as synthetic as its lottery service.
Burn.
Lottoland pitches in media for newsagent support
At the same time Lottoland wrote to ALNA offering what appears to be a commission to newsagents they engaged a PR campaign, giving the ALNA letter to journalists. It’s been reported in newspapers and online. Lottoland CEO Luke Brill says Newsagents are an important part of Australian communities… So important that newsagents were mocked by Lottoland.
If Lottoland were serious about mending bridges with newsagents they would make their pitch, apologise for the harm they wreaked on newsagents and their families, negotiate their offer and then talked publicly about it. Instead, Lottoland made a somewhat vague pitch and gave it to at least one journalist as the same time.
Lottoland needs to apologise, publicly. They should promote newsagents on TV in a national make-good campaign. They need to do this first, as a gesture of good faith, to remonstrate their their pitch today is genuine. Apologising and declaring they were wrong is the starting point.
Footnote: I remain firm in my view that online overall is the biggest challenge to newsagent lottery revenue. Here in Australia, the lion’s share of online is driven by Tatts. They are the newsagents competitor.
Communication from ALNA from an approach by Lottoland
Luke Brill, CEO of Lottoland, visited the ALNA head office to talk newsagents, almost a year after his company started attacking and mocking our channel, calling on shoppers to stop shopping in newsagents.
here is a report from ALNA about the visit:
Lottoland’s Desperate Plea
Lottoland CEO Luke Brill visited the ALNA head office to ask us to join them and refrain from the fierce lobbying campaign that we have been undertaking in the last 18 months.On the top of his agenda was the plan to engage newsagents to sell his product. ALNA CEO Adam Joy made it very clear that Lottoland had damaged the relationship with news and lottery agents by:
- Producing advertisements that intended to harm newsagents and humiliate them publicly by labelling them unable to move with the times.
- Leveraging of the news and lottery agents hard work in the misleading way he communicated to members of the public
- Holding interviews outside newsagencies
- Using imagery and wording so close to the official lotteries that led to confusion for customers
- Ignoring the original and official channel for news and lotteries initially by taking a belligerent approach to proceed without any consideration for the community benefits from news and lottery agents
- Deliberate marketing to undermine current jackpots.
- Promoting large discounts and special offers to gamble with Lottoland instead of playing the official draw
- Misleading social media advising customers they could play all their games in one APP.
- Dishonesty in interviews where Lottoland claimed to not be targeting newsagent customers and claiming they are seeking new customers, Adam challenged this and asked why they use imagery, wording and colours of an Official Lottery? The answer provided by Brill did not answer the question.
Mr Brill said he would happily run a new TV advert where the person went back into the newsagent and was elated they could now access Lottoland. Adam advised that this was patronising and further enhanced the feeling that we were behind the times and late to the party.
Adam challenged Mr Brill on his comments from last meeting, where he claimed they will fly as close to IP replication without infringing, Mr Brill confirmed this was still their intention.
ALNA feel a public Apology in TV, Radio and print apologising to the network and transparently declaring that they have used existing IP and Newsagents to leverage their business and in our opinion that this was misleading.
It is apparent the recent announcements we have achieved by working in unison with the WA VIC, NSW and Tasmanian Governments have them rattled. He tried to talk about Tatts Lotteries with Adam about what Tatts are doing to retailers, Adam advised him that we have a separate discussion with Tatts and that this is irrelevant to the Lottoland plan to leverage newsagent customers.
ALNA continue to work with the other states and federally for a total announcement. We heard in Tasmania on the weekend even if the opposition win the next election they will also ban the wagering on the outcome of lotteries.
Further evidence of Lottoland’s plan for official lottery customers, Lottoland again extended an offer to pay newsagents a monthly marketing fee and a trailing commission on all transactions. Adam challenged why he would do this if he did not want newsagent customers and were focused on new customers? The response was so ALNA would leave Lottoland alone.
Mr Brill then went further and said, “what if we stopped focusing and transacting on domestic lotteries and only focused on overseas jackpots?” Adam advised this was an unanswerable question as there are many variables to this
- This does not stop other lotto wagering companies in the domestic market. E.g. nedd lotto, magpie millions and others.
- Lottoland could trade under another name and do this e.g. the white labelled William Hill product Planet Lottery.
- There is no guarantee of the length of time Lottoland would commit to this
- How could we trust Lottoland going forward?
Adam asked if they could change their name to Bet on Lotto and be transparent to what it is? The answer was that they have built a good brand around Lottoland. Adam interrupted and said on the back of news and lottery agents and the official imagery and words?
Mr Brill ended the conversation advising he will put an offer in writing to Adam, Adam advised he would share it with the Board and members but did not hold high hopes for its adoption.
Is Lottoland for real in its latest claims?
In commenting about the announcement from the Queensland government that they plan to ban Lottoland, Luke Brill, Lottoland CEO said:
The majority of Lottoland’s customers have never bought a lottery ticket in a newsagency, and are largely online sports betters who are embracing new technologies.
The Lottoland TV campaign that has run for most of this year does not support this opinion. They directly targeted newsagents, in an apparent effort to redirect newsagency shoppers to Lottoland. I call their claim – The majority of Lottoland’s customers have never bought a lottery ticket in a newsagency – as bullshit.
The Lottoland TVC also sought to educate customers about technology. If Lottoland customers are embracing new technologies then why promote it as they did?
Brill goes on to say:
We are open to talks with the Australian Lottery and Newsagents Association about a model that lets newsagents cash-in on online punters. We want to grow the market together, not try to destroy it like Tatts is doing in a bid to maintain its monopoly.
If true, they have left it to late in the day to try and work with newsagents. They have spent most of 2017 mocking newsagents. If they really want to grow the market together they need to apologise for the damage they did to the reputation of newsagents.
I don’t think Tatts is trying to destroy the market as Brill claims. I think the opposite is true. I think Tatts is trying to grow spending on its products. However, I think Tatts’ prime focus by far is on its revenue with minimal regard to revenue for newsagents.
That is an issue separate to the Lottoland issues. It is unhelpful that Lottoland links them.
Lottoland’s behaviour is like the kid who got caught misbehaving and responds by pointing to another kid and saying what about them. Grow up Lottoland. Own your situation and own that you have spent 2017 denigrating newsagency businesses, those who own them and those who working them.
Brill is becoming shrill because successive state governments are acting, like South Australia did earlier this year, to make the sale of Lottoland and similar products illegal.
Interesting interview with Lottoland CEO
David Spears interviewed the CEO of LottoLand on Sky News. Click here for a report of the interview and a story about a looming ban for Lottoland in Tasmania.
Be sure to watch the video in the story. At 7:57, Luke Brill, Lottoland CEO says when talking about Tatts: they’re using the little newsagents as pawns in the game. Lottoland launched targeting newsagents, using newsagents as pawns in the game.
At 8:06, Brill says 15% of Tatts revenue comes from the online space.
Brill is right about this. I also think he is right when he says Tatts has no interest in protecting newsagents.
Sure, Lottoland is a menace and a competitor of newsagents. However, tatts is a much bigger competitor and it is growing faster than Lottoland.
Clever Lottoland TVC
This TVC from Lottoland was in high rotation on free to air TV last night. It is a clever ad, looking like regular, timely, programming. Looking like legitimate lottery products on sale. While I get that state governments are crawling to resolve the Lottoland operation challenge, Lottoland appears to be spending like there is no tomorrow.