iGaming existed long before the advent of any casino and will not disappear anywhere. The question is not whether to ban the game, but how to make it safe. Mikhail Zborovskiy expert in the development of iGaming products, claims that the maturity of the modern gambling industry is measured not by the scale of bonuses, but by the quality of the system that maintains a balance between excitement as an emotion and real risk for the player.

iGaming as part of human history

Mikhail Zborovskiy begins his argument with a thesis that is easy to forget in discussions about regulation. The impulse “what if I try” is not a product of modern technology, but a deeply human trait. In ancient Egypt, people played dice, in Rome, they bet on gladiators, in the Middle Ages, they competed in tournaments and bets. Today, it is not only a casino, but also predictions for e-sports matches, fantasy tournaments and gamified applications, technologies change, but the essence remains the same: expectations, competition and joy from the unpredictable.

According to his logic, this means that the industry does not create excitement as a phenomenon, it only forms an environment in which this already existing human impulse is either realized safely or not.

Legalization is about transparency

The main structural argument of the expert is the distinction between the legalization of gambling and the alleged "permission to do anything". In 2020, Ukrainian gambling came out of the shadows, and already in 2023 the industry brought more than 10 billion hryvnias in taxes to the budget, and in February 2024 alone, more than 2 billion more.

But the expert's thesis goes further than statistics:

"Legalization is just about bringing order," emphasizes Mikhail Zborovskiy.

His argument is simple

iGamIng has existed and will exist regardless of whether it is officially permitted or not, people will still play. The question is not whether it is good or bad, but how it happens. Legalization in this logic is a tool, not an end in itself.

Global standards of responsible gaming

Mikhail Zborovskiy supports his thesis with specific international examples that show what operator responsibility looks like in practice. The Finnish state-owned operator Paf was the first in the world to set a hard limit on losses, 25,000 euros per year, and in parallel cooperates with psychologists and holds summits on responsible gambling. 

The Canadian government corporation BCLC has launched the GameSense program, within the framework of which each player can undergo psychological counseling, self-exclude themselves from the game for 1–3 years or receive a warning about risky behavior. In the UK, there is a national self-exclusion program GamStop, which has already been used by hundreds of thousands of players, 83% of whom confirm that thanks to the program they were able to really reduce or stop playing.

According to Mikhail Zborovskiy, each of these cases has one thing in common: an industry that is not afraid to honestly recognize risks and work with them directly, rather than hiding them behind marketing.

Responsible brand as an industry standard

A separate and, perhaps, the most practical argument of Mikhail Zborovskiy concerns what today determines the competitive advantage of the operator in the market.

“Today, the winner is not the one who shouts “500% bonus”, but the one who builds trust,” notes Mikhail Zborovskiy.

He emphasizes that users expect partnerships that respect their time, money, and choices. Operators that implement transparent terms, self-control tools, and support, he says, lay the foundation for sustainable business development, not just short-term profits.

“A player who feels heard is a player who returns,” Mikhail Zborovskiy concludes.

Tabcorp Case

The most telling example of the opposite approach, which the expert cites, is the Australian operator Tabcorp. In June 2025, the company was fined more than $4 million for excessive marketing to VIP customers, about 3,000 SMS and WhatsApp messages were sent without the recipients’ consent and without the ability to unsubscribe.

An even more telling episode is the lawsuit against Tabcorp for exceeding the limits of “stimulation” of customers. One player lost over $900,000, but the operator continued to send her bonuses even after she directly asked them to stop any offers. In just one month, her losses amounted to $135,000, and instead of a pause, she received even more free bets, deposit bonuses, and invitations to events.

According to Mikhail Zborovskiy, this case clearly shows that responsible operators do not just formally stop aggressive marketing, they build a culture where respect for the player is more important than temporary profit. Short-term earnings, obtained at such a price, can destroy the long-term reputation of the brand, and this is why this behavior model does not work in a mature industry.

A different perspective

Mikhail Zborovskiy arguments describe a real and documented movement of the industry towards greater responsibility, but it is fair to add a few caveats:

• Voluntary self-restriction and self-exclusion programs depend on the initiative of the player himself;
• The business model of a significant part of gambling operators is still built on the retention of highly active players, which creates a structural conflict of interest between the company’s short-term financial performance and the long-term well-being of the client;
• The level and quality of regulation vary significantly between countries.

These caveats do not deny the expert’s main thesis that responsibility is a real strategic choice of the operator, but they remind us that the industry’s goodwill alone is often not enough without constant external control.