Planning is bringing the future into the present so you can do something about it now.” – Allen Lakein, Best Selling Author
Regulatory bodies in the gaming industry are often challenged to keep up with industry demands due to limited resources. This is particularly true in gaming jurisdictions undergoing expansion. Effective communication between regulators and the regulated is crucial in such scenarios. As the licensing director, I am often the first point of contact for companies interested in entering our jurisdiction. They frequently ask how long it will take to launch their technology, game, or product. Unfortunately, the reality is that it almost always takes longer than they desire.
This delay is not due to regulators intentionally moving slowly or lacking interest in seeing products launched. It is a result of the statutory and regulatory processes that regulators must adhere to, which often take time. This is especially true when introducing something new to the industry. Companies may need to undergo a licensing process, involving application completion, submission, and addressing any deficiencies. Background investigations, considering licensure, and internal staff discussions further contribute to the timeline. Licensing alone can take six to twelve months or more, depending on various factors.
In some cases, new regulations or policy amendments are necessary for the approval of certain technologies. The process of drafting and adopting these regulations is known for its lack of speed. Product demonstrations and thorough discussions with regulatory teams play a vital role in understanding the implications and requirements of new ideas. Additional back-and-forth with companies may be required to address any concerns or make modifications to the proposed product.
Testing is another important step in the regulatory process, which can involve in-house testing or utilizing independent test labs. Determining compliance with jurisdictional requirements can be a complex task. For instance, in Pennsylvania, determining whether a game should be classified as a slot or table game can significantly impact the tax levied. Internal controls, coordination between various stakeholders, and review processes may also be necessary to ensure secure and accountable product offerings.
The regulatory process prioritizes a well-reasoned and sustainable approach, which takes time. Limited staff and multiple competing priorities further contribute to the overall duration. Despite this, there are instances where regulators are approached for product approval with very little notice, often during major events like the World Cup or NCAA March Madness tournament. This lack of early communication between companies and regulators regarding their pipeline of ideas is a missed opportunity. Engaging with regulators during the early stages of product development allows for guidance, regulatory considerations, and smoother integration into the jurisdiction. Mitigating risks and establishing strong professional relationships with regulators are essential for businesses.
Innovation may require immediate development in response to market needs or emerging issues. Regulators do their best to expedite exceptional cases, but their hands are tied by regulatory constraints. However, for long-term innovation, effective communication with regulators about the pipeline of ideas can streamline the regulatory process for all parties involved. Avoiding surprises and proactively involving regulators in project planning is in the best interest of businesses.
Susan Hensel, named one of the ten most influential women in gaming by InnovateChange in 2020, is the Director of Licensing for the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board. As an attorney and former two-term president of the International Association of Gaming Regulators, Susan has extensive knowledge and experience in gaming law and regulation. The opinions expressed in this content are solely hers.
