
Personal issues central to Adelson's opposition to online gaming
Marco Valerio
Online gaming was the main event of the main event at this year's Global Gaming Expo (G2E) in Las Vegas, as highly anticipated keynote speaker Sheldon Adelson fielded questions about his controversial opposition to US igaming during the latter part of his one-on-one interview with Roger Gros, carried out in front of a large audience.
Adelson has been much maligned by the igaming industry for views deemed divisive and out of touch, but his occasional portrayal as an outcast may turn out to be misinformed.
During the one-hour session, the casino magnate elicited several ovations when he railed against online gaming – an indication that he may secretly enjoy broader support in the US gaming industry than commonly imagined.
After bulky discussions about Adelson's humble beginnings and business exploits in Asia, the conversation turned to online gaming, and stayed there for the remainder of the session.
Adelson seemed keenly aware of many of the objections typically levied against him, as shown by his immediate refutation of online gaming being a “states' rights” issue.
“This is not a states' rights issue - as the proponents would have us believe - because the Internet is all over the country, in every home, across borders. There's no place the Internet doesn't exist.”
Adelson fundamentally believes online gaming cannot be regulated as well as bricks-and-mortar gaming.
Tech-savvy children
“I've asked regulators in this state to name one land-based regulation we live by that you can enforce on Internet gaming. They couldn't come up with one.”
Gros tentatively suggested age and ID verification – quickly rebuked by Adelson for being no match for his young, tech-savvy children who can “get around anything” on the Internet.
“Any kid will get around this in a heartbeat. It won't take them long, because these kids are growing up on these electronic devices.”
In addition, Adelson worries there is no definitive way to keep players who have cleared the verification process from letting the gambling platform fall into the hands of a child.
The idea that online gaming is better off legalised because “it's already happening” seemed to downright anger Adelson. “Then why don't we legalise prostitution? Why don't we legalise cocaine, and heroin, since people are 'doing it already?' That's not a good reason, just because they are doing it anyway.” This drew considerable applause.
Prosecution, not regulation, is Adelson's measure of choice to combat illegal Internet gaming activity.
He called on federal law enforcement agencies to suppress unregulated US-facing online gambling, eschewing the need for regulatory intervention.
For all of the focus on these technical issues, Adelson repeatedly showed the basis for his opposition to be deeply rooted into an emotional aversion.
He frequently cited his family's struggles with excessive gambling habits, plus the death of one of his sons to a drug overdose, as forming his sensitivity to addiction.
Because online gambling is so accessible, Adelson says he worries it might become a gateway to serious gambling problems for children or those who are already at risk for addiction.
Harsh words for PokerStars
“To me, it's a matter of principle,” he said. “I was raised in a family that suffered from the scourges of uncontrolled gaming. I don't want people to get abused, because when I look at people like that, I see the faces of my parents.”
Adelson reserved some harsh words for current igaming operators. He called PokerStars “essentially lawbreakers”, a viewpoint unchanged by the company's recent acquisition by publicly-traded Amaya Gaming Group.
“It's the same organisation – just different stakeholders,” he said.
Without mentioning the company by name, Adelson also seemed to ridicule Caesars Entertainment's support for igaming.
“Why [should we legalise it]? Because one of our colleagues in the industry has a plan that they think is going to save their company?”
In the end, all safety and morality aside, US-regulated igaming's early revenue reports do not impress Adelson or stimulate his business acumen.
Nevada, Delaware and New Jersey have taken in “several millions a month,” as Adelson put it. “Why, any one of us [in the casino business] makes that in minutes!”
Adelson concluded by saying: “I just don't see any compelling reason to put an electronic casino in 318 million hands.”
Another round of applause.
Related articles: Divisions lead AGA to withdraw support for US regulation
Georgia Lottery opposed to US online gambling ban
Clear and Present Danger - The Adelson Effect
