The goal was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a cashless gaming system in curbing gambling harm and financial crimes. At the same time, it also examined its implications for the gaming industry, staff, and patrons.
The technology involved a digital gaming wallet, enabling players to transfer funds from their bank accounts to intermediary accounts, accessible through apps or physical cards.
These funds could then be used on electronic gaming machines (EGMs). Crucially, traditional systems like cash and loyalty cards remained operational during the trial.
From March to September 2024, the trial incorporated 14 venues and 2,388 EGMs across NSW. Three technology providers rolled out slightly varied solutions, all sharing core features such as harm minimisation tools and identity-linked gambling.
The IPGR included experts from gambling, public health, law enforcement, cybersecurity, and unions, along with individuals with lived experiences of gambling harm. Liquor & Gaming NSW and The Cabinet Office provided administrative support.
The evaluation process featured a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods. Stakeholders included users, venue staff, gambling industry experts, and gambling support advisors.
Despite extensive efforts, patron participation was minimal, with only 162 users signing up by August 2024, limiting the scope of conclusions.
Key findings
The trial highlighted several barriers and opportunities regarding cashless gaming adoption:
– Low Adoption Rates: Patron uptake of the digital wallet was notably low, consistent with historical resistance to new gambling technologies. Legacy systems’ continued availability and ease of use deterred patrons from switching.– Perceptions of the Technology: While the digital wallet’s harm minimisation features, such as self-exclusion and spending limits, were well-received, misconceptions and fears about government surveillance and loss of control fuelled scepticism. Many patrons viewed the system as unnecessary for those without gambling issues.
– Economic and Social Impacts: Industry stakeholders raised concerns about potential revenue losses, particularly if mandatory adoption were pursued. Smaller regional venues expressed fears about the financial burden of implementation and reduced patronage.
– Challenges for Vulnerable Groups: Resistance was especially pronounced among older patrons and those less comfortable with digital technologies. Infrequent gamblers viewed the sign-up process as inconvenient, while frequent gamblers expressed concerns about tracking and control over their gambling behaviors.
– Harm Minimisation Tools: The wallet’s harm reduction features were seen as valuable but underutilised in a voluntary model. More than half of active users set limits, but these measures were often perceived as unnecessary for personal use and targeted at others.
Recommendations and future directions
The IPGR’s report underscored the need for further research and refinement before broader implementation.
Recommendations included streamlining the sign-up process, addressing misconceptions, and ensuring data privacy.
Stakeholders suggested a hybrid model, allowing voluntary adoption alongside legacy systems, to ease the transition.
Mandatory implementation remains a contentious topic. While it could significantly reduce gambling harm, it may also alienate patrons and impact industry revenues.
While the IPGR has suggested a mandatory statewide account-based gaming system by 2028, it also feels that it’s too early to remove cash gaming from the market.
