## Building Tomorrow’s Gaming: Navigating the Omnichannel Landscape
The phrase “omnichannel” echoes throughout the gaming industry, but its true meaning and practical application remain points of contention. At the ICE Totally Gaming conference, a group of specialists convened to address these critical inquiries.
Moderated by Shaun Kiely from Mybet, the discussion featured prominent figures such as Gerhard Burda (Inspired Gaming Group), Claire Barry (Camelot), Silvia Niccolai (Rank Group PLC), and Nikolaos Papazoglou (Intralot).
Although almost every company present seemed to espouse the omnichannel philosophy, the panel delved further, examining whether it truly lives up to its lofty reputation.
Is it genuinely essential for triumph, or is the yearning for smooth interplay between platforms confined to a select group of users?
Drawing on her tenure at Camelot, Claire Barry emphasized the evident need for both digital and physical engagement. While specific requirements may diverge between these avenues, the fundamental desire for a cohesive experience is irrefutable. For example, lottery participants appreciate the convenience of effortlessly verifying results irrespective of their ticket’s point of purchase.
Weve observed that a significant portion of retail patrons interacting with us digitally, be it via our application or webpage, primarily prioritize reviewing their outcomes rather than engaging in games. Their preference leans towards experiencing gaming within a physical casino setting.
Consider Grosvenor Casinos, as an illustration. Operating 56 establishments across the UK, they hosted 1.7 million distinct visitors in the preceding fiscal year. Our understanding suggests that approximately 45% of their physical establishment patrons also partake in online gambling, yet they are not opting for Grosvenor’s digital platform. Consequently, for casinos, securing the loyalty of these in-person customers and fostering brand allegiance is paramount.
Within the realm of gaming, numerous avenues exist to steer offline patrons towards online offerings. To my mind, omnichannel revolves around being accessible to the customer at their point of presence, regardless of whether they choose to engage with the brand in-store, on their tablet device, or on their desktop computer. This encompasses utilizing the customer service hub to disseminate information regarding recently acquired rewards or even the daily specials available at their neighborhood casino’s dining establishment.
The discourse surrounding omnichannel, in my view, emerged alongside the surge of mobile technology within the online and retail domains. Users anticipate a distinct experience on mobile platforms compared to physical retail outlets—their usage behaviors on a desktop versus a mobile phone are entirely disparate. Your mobile device effectively becomes an extension of yourself. Nevertheless, brand uniformity remains of utmost importance, and the means to achieve it is the million-dollar puzzle everyone is striving to solve.
Is our trajectory leading us to a multichannel framework? Does the entire group fully support a complete transition to a multichannel approach?
GB: I believe so. We cannot disregard the existence of multichannel users. Our information reveals that approximately 20% of participants interact with us through various avenues. We recognize these as our most important participants, and we aim to retain them.
Nevertheless, a genuine multichannel approach necessitates a completely unified technology infrastructure, and that’s where the obstacle resides. Our existing frameworks and their interconnectivity, even tasks like executing a promotional campaign, remain quite isolated. We require a multichannel resolution for that.
Certain organizations assert they’ve attained complete unification, but I’m skeptical if anyone has truly deciphered the solution yet.
Are there justifiable grounds for reservations about multichannel, or circumstances where it’s unsuitable?
CB: I wouldn’t characterize it as reluctance, but I acknowledge that complexities arise when managing two distinct backend structures and markets, one digital and one physical, while attempting to introduce a novel offering like an instant-win ticket available both in-store and online. There are simply more components and variables to contemplate. The response time for physical retail differs significantly from digital, and the method of conveying that prospect to the customer is quite distinct.”
The significant disparity between occurrences in a brick-and-mortar space and the digital realm necessitates a keen understanding of tailoring the appropriate encounter – a potential shift in messaging might be required. This isn’t detrimental, rather demands additional contemplation.
Is utilizing digital marketing strategies for your multi-channel retail clientele advisable?
Unequivocally. Previously, our tracking capabilities were limited to registrations, oblivious to a patron’s actions upon entry – whether they opted for a discreet beverage in the periphery, a complete dining experience, or tempted fate at Blackjack or Roulette. Loyalty initiatives revolutionized this. Currently, patrons can utilize their membership cards, enabling us to monitor their engagements. Each pound expended earns points, providing clear visibility into whether these points originated from the bar or the gaming tables. Consequently, we can target patrons with heightened efficacy. Our arsenal includes email, SMS, and a substantial reliance on direct mail within the retail sphere.
However, we wouldn’t proclaim: “During a recent visit to one of our establishments, we invite you to participate in our Blackjack competition” as we lack knowledge of the customer’s familiarity with, let alone proficiency in, Blackjack.
The obstacle lies in the nascent stage of multi-channel strategies within this sector. We are engaging with diverse demographics.
Younger generations just aren’t interested in physically purchasing lottery tickets. It’s comparable to offering them an audio cassette in an era dominated by streaming services. However, enticing partnerships and reward initiatives might be the key!
The irony is that these individuals will readily share their entire life online but hesitate to provide their name at a store. It’s as if they believe we’ll exploit their identity for a complimentary lottery entry!
The challenge lies in translating the seamless online experience to offline interactions without raising privacy concerns. Consider our vending machines, which require age verification, but encounter resistance from users hesitant to disclose personal data. It’s a perplexing situation. Bridging the divide between how these demographics prefer to shop and traditional retail practices poses a significant hurdle for the entire sector.
While ensuring the seamless integration of our systems presents a technological obstacle, the root of the problem lies deeper. It pertains to the fundamental structure of our organization. How can we dismantle internal barriers and foster company-wide alignment?
GB:
It’s disheartening when progress is hindered by a lack of synchronization. Why should our mobile team be constrained by the retail team’s timeline? This transcends individual teams; it necessitates a collective adaptation to the evolving landscape.
When facing quarterly performance demands, there’s little opportunity to consider how other avenues can conquer their own obstacles. The strain is immense.
To tackle this, we can utilize predictive modeling and genuine data examination. Participants engaging both virtually and physically are incredibly important for companies like ours. Our focus should be the brand initially and the consumer secondly – we must locate the ideal consumer at the optimal moment with the appropriate communication. This must be established on a bedrock of customer respect – I wouldn’t request the customer relationship management team to electronically message everyone who has connected with us digitally and in stores with the identical generic promotion, because if you forfeit that respect, they’ll switch to a rival.
Should play mechanics and the product differ across avenues?
Varying perspectives exist on this matter, and I hold my own viewpoint. The crux is the necessity of a cohesive brand personality to cultivate and bolster, but does that dictate identical gameplay elements? I harbor personal doubts. Conversely, there’s the opposing perspective advocating for complete consistency. I’m dubious of this because player conduct varies significantly across platforms.
We possess a prime illustration where in 2015 at Inspired, the same mathematical framework and gameplay element achieved substantial triumph in both digital and physical realms. However, there’s the counterargument that in the digital domain, reward-based games excel, while in retail, the emphasis is on complimentary spin games.”
The era of striking it rich in mobile games has ended. Recall when it seemed any title could explode in popularity? The sector has shifted from pursuing fads to a far more strategic methodology. Imagine choices based on analytics, cultivating a distinct identity, and developing games customized for particular player demographics.
