Is the ASA about to crack down on online gambling operators or is this weeks ruling just another example of William Hill being a little unlucky? William Hill, the gaming giant which also runs William Hill Bingo, has been in the media constantly over the last week over the strikes at its centre in Israel. The company has now had one of its promotional offers banned after a single person complained to the ASA.

William Hill might not be to upset though, as like the string of online gambling companies so far that have had TV adverts and promotional material banned by the ASA, it brings extra publicity on the back of a campaign which has already been used and unlikely to be displayed again anyhow. It does beg the question however why the ASA did not look into the offers by some online bingo operators?

A number of online bingo brands and bingo portals have been crossing the line in recent years. A clear example of false advertising was where they were promoting a 900% first deposit bonus which was in fact 3 x 300% bonuses (which is far from the same if you deposit £10 on a 900% bonus you get £90 extra, on 3 x 300% bonuses you would have to deposit 3 x £10 to get £90 bonus). It seems to date the ASA, with the exception of TV advertising have not been pursuing online gambling operators; however this latest episode which concerns online website material would suggest the ASA are cracking down. Online gambling operators might see this not just as the ASA cracking down but the UK government as a whole. With new legislation imminent along with a new tax system, online gambling operators will have to tow the line with the UK Gambling Commission and no doubt we will see companies being a little bit more transparent and honest when it comes to promoting and advertising which can only be a benefit to the players. It will come as no surprise if we see the ASA ruling on a number of questionable advertising practices of operators over the next 12 months.

The Content in Question

An offer on the William Hill Casino website in April 2011 stated "£150 Bonus For all new casino players". Smaller text stated "* Requires a £35 minimum deposit, terms and conditions apply".

Issue

The complainant challenged whether the claim "£150 Bonus For all new casino players" was misleading because they understood that the terms of the offer were that deposits between £35 and £150 would be matched.

Response

William Hill said the statement "* Requires a £35 minimum deposit, terms and conditions apply" immediately below the headline claim made it clear that terms and conditions applied. They said if the customer then clicked on the £150 bonus option from the drop-down menu on the “Promotions” tab, the full terms and conditions (the conditions) were shown for the offer. They submitted a screenshot of the first part of those conditions which they said made clear that the bonus was a 100% match bonus dependent on the customer's first deposit and that also explained the mechanism which the customer would need to follow to receive the bonus. They said, in addition, when the customer completed the registration process there were numerous steps provided for the customer containing the terms and conditions information and opt-in details for the bonus scheme.

Assessment from the ASA

Upheld

The ASA considered that the headline claim "£150 Bonus For all new casino players" and the qualifying text “* Requires a £35 minimum deposit, terms and conditions apply" would be interpreted by readers to mean that, if they joined the William Hill Casino and deposited £35, they would receive £150 with which to bet on games on the site.

We understood however, with reference to the conditions, that the actual terms of the offer were that William Hill would match any deposit from £35 to £150 inclusive and therefore to receive a £150 bonus a customer would have to deposit not £35 but £150. While we noted William Hill’s argument that the conditions were available via the drop down menu from the “Promotions” tab, we considered that they should have been linked to directly from the offer itself and, notwithstanding that, we did not consider that the content of the conditions was capable of countering the misleading impression given by the offer itself.

We also noted that the conditions contained an additional stipulation that, before being able to claim any winnings, players would have to wager 20 times their deposit and bonus amount or more. We considered that that was significant information likely to affect readers’ decision whether or not to take up the advertised offer and should also have been made clear. Because it was not and because the ad implied that customers could obtain a £150 bonus by depositing £35 when that was not the case, we concluded that the offer was misleading.

The offer breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1, 3.3 (Misleading advertising) and 3.9 (Qualifications).

Action

The offer must not appear again in its current form.

About the ASA

The ASA is the UK's independent regulator of advertising across all media, including marketing on websites. It works to ensure ads are legal, decent, honest and truthful by applying the Advertising Codes.