Mike de Graaff, Chief Compliance Officer at BetComply, and Tom Squirrell, Chief Product Officer at Pretty Technical, discuss igaming data vaults, the key challenges for operators, and why combining technology with expertise is the only way to keep regulated onside.
Why are data vaults becoming an increasingly vital component of the compliance burden for iGaming businesses?
Mike de Graaff: We’re seeing a clear trend globally of regulators demanding greater transparency, security and accountability from both operators and suppliers. Many have chosen to place data vaults (also known as a SAFE or CDB) at the very heart of this process.
These vaults are essentially secure storage systems designed to record, timestamp and then report all gambling transaction data, providing a clear record for regulators to review.
With regulators introducing greater complexity to their frameworks, particularly around issues like affordability and duty of care, finding the correct vault solution is a fundamental part of remaining compliant.
Tom Squirrell: At risk of repeating Mike, data vaults’ fundamental purpose is to create transparency between regulators and their operators. This is important for a variety of reasons, particularly the player protections which come from the result of adherence to responsible gambling requirements.
Moreover, they provide simplicity. This is beneficial to both the operator and the regulator in that the means by which data is communicated is consistent, which in turn reduces operational overhead.
Which markets are most impacted by this trend?
Mike de Graaff: The requirement for a data vault is now quite common across regulated jurisdictions. The Netherlands, Spain, Denmark, Portugal, parts of Germany, Greece and Romania are some examples in Europe, but the trend extends beyond. In Latin America, it is a requirement in Colombia and certain regulated provinces of Argentina. We’re only going to see more markets demanding something similar.
What are the primary challenges when searching for a data vault solution across multiple markets?
Tom Squirrell: Although the concept of a data vault may be largely universal, there are significant differences in technical standards across jurisdictions. From the data model through to the mode of communication of data, one market is never the same as another, even though the ultimate purpose of the vault is the same.
This means that the software which processes raw platform data – for example, bet information – into the reports, stores them, makes them available to the regulator and such like is never the exact same. I like to describe it as: more alike than different, but still different.
When speaking with customers, the important thing in our experience is simplicity and consistency. Operators want this overhead removed – both operationally and technically – and that is particularly true when they have multi-jurisdiction requirements.
In practice this means providing them with a common interface into our system. In other words, a single API for receiving their data – and we take care of the rest.
Mike de Graaff: The first thing to say is that the requirements differ by jurisdiction. There’s no single vault which can be seamlessly used in all regulated markets. Ideally, you partner with a solution that’s flexible enough to adapt to whichever requirements are relevant in your active markets.
This raises a bigger issue around how you view data vaults. We see them as sitting between technology and regulatory expertise. There are now some great, bespoke solutions for all markets that can be purchased off-the-shelf, but a key component in all of this is understanding the regulations and how they apply. You need that 360-degree approach, and the knowledge it comes with, to ensure full compliance.
The Netherlands is a great example of this. The regulator, the KSA, is not only insisting that its data reporting requirements are met, but also expects that operators show they understand the issues around the requirements, and why they are in place. This is what I mean when I say data reporting is more than a simple technology issue.
Can you tell us about the partnership between BetComply and Pretty Technical?
Tom Squirrell: BetComply are a key strategic partner for us and have been since BetComply’s inception over a year ago. There is a clear and obvious synergy between the services we provide, and they are complementary to one another. BetComply provides industry-leading compliance consultancy which is crucial during, for example, license applications, and that is both valuable to us as the technology supplier and the operator in joining up all the dots and making sure the application (or whatever it may be) is coherent and robust.
Mike de Graaff: We’ve been partnered with Pretty Technical for more than a year now. For us, Pretty Technical’s Domino Data Vault ticks all the boxes, particularly when it comes to jurisdictional flexibility. We’ve seen first-hand the vault be tailored to new markets within a matter of weeks. And in our industry, that speed can be the difference between grabbing a significant share or missing the boat. We’re actually working closely with several operators that utilise Pretty Technical’s technology, and it makes our lives considerably easier because we’re able to provide regulatory advisory in the knowledge that our advice can be quickly actioned via the tech.
