Here’s the Ticket

The amusement games industry (AMOA and AAMA) continues to do a good job of educating state legislators about how our industry is different and separate from the gaming industry. This educational work is never ending and why state associations are so important. However, the issues are complex and in many instances the legislators privately view the amusement games industry as small potatoes and not worth opening a can of worms over.

Over the past two months two stand-alone bills in Florida (HB 945 & SB 668**) are in limbo, being held up while Florida legislators try to deal with negotiating tribal compact exclusivity provisions with the Seminole Indian Tribe and figure out if gaming can be expended in its two southern counties. In addition, adult arcades/sweepstakes are trying to re-open under the current law (with a little creativity and new technology added). Florida is in need of updating and re-writing its gaming statues and that mess will take some time to accomplish. It appears that the amusement industry may have to wait to see what happens with the Seminole negotiations.

** Current Florida law states that a minimum of 50 games are required to offer redemption games, the games must be only coin operated, the maximum prize limit/play is 75 cents and games must be based on an ‘application of skill’.

Ohio is back in the news as adult ‘skill-based’ gamerooms are opening that are much like the hundreds of Ohio Internet cafes that had slot machine video sweepstakes that were shut down under the law that placed a $10 prize limit per play. HB 491 was proposed in March that would require skill-based gamerooms to apply for and receive a state license to operate. Each game would have to be tested to meet compliance standards. This is very similar to how New Jersey licenses and regulates games in the boardwalk arcades, amusement parks, and individual city/state approved FEC’s.

California is also trying to shut down sweepstakes games and perhaps avoid having to place a prize limit per play on all games by trying to redefine a gambling sweepstakes game. AB 1439 proposed language would prohibit “any method intended to be used by a person interacting with a gambling-themed or simulated gambling electronic video monitor.” This language is from January 2014 and already needs to be updated to cover skill-based games like those that are now operating in Ohio.

What could all this really mean? After 47 years in the amusement games industry, and being very involved in fighting to overturn restrictive amusement game laws and excessive license fees, the reality is that the battles are never ending and a necessary part of being in this business of providing fun. The main objective has always been to educate the legislators and regulators about our business and to continuously raise the bar and get the general public to like and accept our business.

Ohio, like other states, is trying to shut down sweepstakes games. This is a difficult objective. The problem is that gambling is difficult to define and the definition constantly changes as new technologies keep any definition a moving target. The sweepstakes industry works full time to try different ways to get around any current laws. In some instances a state fights back and unintentionally hurts the amusement game industry. Then we are forced to try our best to ‘creatively’ comply with the new laws just to stay in business. Florida is the worst case so far. It looks like this cat and mouse game between the states and the sweepstakes industry will continue until a state comes up with a practical solution that can work temporarily for all parties. I use the word temporarily because new technology always seems to be years ahead of any law and no one can predict how a new technology or idea can find a loop hole in a gaming definition.

I have come to the conclusion that it is impossible to define what is gambling and what is not. There is no such thing (at least on Earth) as 100% skill. There is always some luck or chance (I tend to use these works as being very similar) that could be involved in any skill action. For many years ‘skill predominant’ has been the best description and legal interpretations by the courts took this to mean ‘more than 50% skill. Over time, this interpretation has changed with the percentage of skill increasing to arbitrary amounts. This is where it got fuzzy.

Perhaps Ohio will take the lead and license and regulate sweepstakes games and then amend the laws to be fair to our amusement industry. No matter which course the different states take, our industry will need to continue to educate the regulators and maintain the acceptance of the general public. Whenever one or more amusement game operators cross and stretch the public acceptance line, we can be sure that there will be push back and new battles to fight to get back to what is acceptable. Don’t ever lose sight that public opinion is like a clock pendulum swinging back and forth. Determining its current direction and measuring its arc, and speed are our biggest challenges.