Ad description
A TV ad, for an online casino, depicted a man and a woman in front of a roulette table. A voice-over stated, "Supercasino.com. Real, live roulette." The croupier said, "Place your bets, please" and the voice-over continued, "Go straight up for a 35 to 1 return or choose red or black for odds of 1 to 1. And if you join tonight, you'll get a free £10 bonus. Experience the moment live at Supercasino.com and feel it for real."
Issue
Three complainants challenged whether the claim "choose red or black for odds at 1 to 1" was misleading, because they understood that the possibility of the ball falling on the green zero reduced the odds from being even to being slightly against the player.
Response
Netplay TV Group Ltd t/a SuperCasino said the complainants were mathematically correct in that, because there was a green 'zero' in addition to the 18 red and 18 black numbers, the odds were reduced from being even to being slightly against the player. They said, however, that the mathematical probability of an event occurring differed from the odds offered on an event occurring by a gaming operator, because they must include some sort of advantage to the casino (the 'house advantage'); otherwise a gaming business could not succeed.
SuperCasino considered that, given the prevalence of a wide variety of odds being offered by gaming operators for a wide variety of games, it was widely understood by consumers that the odds offered by gaming operators would not equate to the mathematical probabilities of the likelihood the bet would be successful, but would instead relate to the odds calculated by including the house advantage. They considered that offering odds in such a way was standard and part of the known convention within the betting and gaming industry.
Clearcast endorsed SuperCasino's response.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted SuperCasino's view that consumers would understand that the odds quoted in the ad would include a house advantage and that they would not, therefore, be the same as the mathematical probability of the ball falling on either red or black. We considered, however, that the claim "choose red or black for odds at 1 to 1" was ambiguous, because it did not make clear whether the stated odds related to the odds at which winnings would be paid out or whether they related to the mathematical probability of a bet being successful. We therefore considered it likely that some consumers would interpret the claim to mean that the mathematical probability of the ball landing on red or black was 1:1. Because we understood that was not the case, we concluded the ad was misleading.
The ad breached BCAP Code rules
3.1
3.1
Advertisements must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
and
3.2
3.2
Advertisements must not mislead consumers by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that consumers need in context to make informed decisions about whether or how to buy a product or service. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead consumers depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the advertisement is constrained by time or space, the measures that the advertiser takes to make that information available to consumers by other means.
(Misleading advertising).
Action
The ad must not be broadcast again in its current form. We told SuperCasino to ensure that similar ads made clear that the stated odds related to the odds at which winnings would be paid out.
