TradeBetSolutions.com>

Furthermore, what does having the biggest brand mean exactly? That a company gobbles up all the advertisign space it can find on TV, onlin e and in print, or that it gives on a spree of sponsorship agreements with sports clubs and poker celebrities?

Such questions are simplistic.  They also don't take into account the work that is being done behind the screen in building up users' trust in their brand names.  They do this through their customer service and retention departments or their programmes aimed at promoting social responsibility.

Operators probably dream of the day when punters will log onto their sites to place a bet or play a hand of poker in the same way that they purchase a book or CD from an online retailer such as Amazon.  Such thoughts are natural and the industry should be praised for having the breadth of vision and skill to implement the strategies that will get them to that stage.  This point is reinforced when one considers the unclear regulation and protectioonist policies operators have to contend with in many of Europe's major markets. 

But for all the talk of dominance by the major companies in the sector, their arguments raise significant issues.  If their claims turn out to be true, this would lead many to wonder about the variety and originality of egaming by a small number of large companies. 

Various companies are now establishing key partnerships with suppliers and operators that see it act as an egaming "enabler", offering softwares suppliers' products as well as its own to other operators.

So what's the point of the leading firms in the industry openining up to third-party deals?  Are they worried about not generating enough revenues from their players or about the liquidity pools sinking further from that of their competitors that have continued to take beds in the US?  Many companies have been very busy recently signing distribution and third-party agreements and many believe smaller operators will not have the capacity to survive the next 12 to 18 months unlesss they are bought out or merged with other operators.

The reasons behind going down the white label route are manifold as the regulation of the industry will probably lead to many new entrants in the sector who will not own or be able to build their own software platforms.  It is clear that there will be demand for providers and these new entrants will want to deal with transparent, publicly traded companies with a view to using their products.

While it is true that only the major brands in egaming will be big enough to operate on grandiose levels, smaller operators will be able to strive in their shadows, thanks to their flexibility and speed to market, operating on the coat-tails of the "majors".  It's what they have always done and it shoudl be praised, as they provide the oriogniality and variety that is vital to any industry aiming for the mass consumer market.

(Taken from an article by Jake Pollard in Egaming Review)