ASA Adjudication on GameAccount Global Ltd

Ad

A TV ad for an online gambling service showed a serious-looking man and woman joining a casino table and playing Blackjack. The voice-over said "Everyone loves to play Blackjack. But if you play against the casino, it's the casino that always wins". The couple were shown looking increasingly stressed as the croupier took all of the chips from the table and on-screen text stated "Dealer wins again”. The man's shirt suddenly disappeared leaving him semi-naked and looking embarrassed and the voice-over continued "If you play against real people, there's less chance of you losing your shirt". The couple where then shown again looking happy and confident while they played each other without a croupier present. The voice-over said "At casinorip.com, you play Blackjack against other players so a real person always wins, guaranteed!” The man at the table was shown winning the chips and on-screen text stated "Real Player Wins". The voice-over and on-screen text then stated "Don’t play the Casino. Play a real person at casinorip.com".

Issue

The complainant objected that:

1. the claim "if you play against real people, there's less chance of losing your shirt" misleadingly implied that players were more likely to win with the advertiser than with a typical casino;

2. the claim "if you play against the casino, it's the casino that always wins" was misleading because he believed that at a traditional casino, the house did not always win in the short run whereas at casinorip, the house took a percentage of players' stakes (between 2.5% and 7.5%) on every single game.

BCAP TV Code

Response

1. GameAccount Global Ltd (Gameaccount) said the ad related specifically to their online multi-player blackjack game where one of the players would always win because they were only playing against each other and not the house or the dealer. They explained that all of their multiplayer games had a skill component which allowed stronger players to consistently win money when playing against weaker players, both in the short and long term and that players in peer-to-peer games could consistently win if they were good enough. They said that, in most online casino games, the house won more often than the players.

2. Gameaccount said that in a typical casino, a player was always expected to lose in the long run, but that with Casinorip.com, because of the skill levels in player-to-player games, the experienced players would win in the long run. They said that with typical casinos the house had fixed margins on stakes, with the typical margin on a Blackjack stake being between 1% and 2%.

Clearcast said that stronger players would benefit from playing at casinorip.com, whereas with traditional casinos it was the house that always benefited, regardless of player ability. They said they cleared the ad in 2006 and that they endorsed the advertisers defence.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA noted the multiplayer blackjack game involved a live game in which multiple players joined a table and played against each other without the house acting as the dealer. We understood this meant that the casino was not playing and therefore one of the real players on the table would always win. We considered that whilst none of the players could be beaten by the casino, it remained the case that the chances of winning games in both the long and short term depended on the skills of those around the table. We accepted that skilled players would be more likely to win against a table of weaker opponents, but considered that Gameaccount had not supplied evidence to show that the average player was more likely to win against other players than when playing against the house in a normal casino as implied by the claim "if you play against real people, there's less chance of losing your shirt". We concluded that the ad exaggerated the chances of individuals winning blackjack games through Casinorip.com.

The ad breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Code rules 5.1.1, 5.1.3. 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.4.6 (Misleading advertising) and 11.10.1k (Rules for gambling advertisements).

2. Upheld

The ASA noted it was generally acknowledged that casinos "won" in the long term because of the rake (the percentage of the stake the house kept) and because the rules attributed to the dealers hands meant the house would be less likely to lose. However, we considered the statement in the ad "But if you play against the casino, its the casino that always wins", the image of the dealer collecting all the chips and the on-screen text stating "Dealer wins again" implied that the traditional casino would consistently win also in the short term. We understood and agreed with the complainants view that the ad therefore implied that Casinorip.com offered greater rewards over traditional casinos.

Whilst traditional casinos collected a rake, we noted with regard to their multiplayer games, Casinorip.com took a commission of between 5% and 7.5% from the total pot of stakes in each game, which we considered to be much the same thing. Whilst we accepted that one of the players on a Casinorip.com multi-player game would always win, we considered that Gameaccount had not shown that the house consistently won in most hands of casino blackjack and concluded that the ad misleadingly implied that the service offered greater rewards over traditional casinos than were actually available.

The ad breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Code rules 5.1.1, 5.1.3. 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.4.6 (Misleading advertising) and 11.10.1k (Rules for gambling advertisements).

Action

The ad should not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)