Operators Are Looking Beyond Their Primary License

One thing I heard repeatedly was interest in new jurisdictions and secondary licenses.

That's significant.

The conversation isn't always about abandoning an existing license and moving somewhere else. Increasingly, operators are asking whether they should have another licensing option alongside their existing structure.

There are plenty of reasons for that. Regulations change. Markets change. Banking relationships change. Commercial requirements change.

But there's something I've said for years that remains just as relevant:

Getting a license is one thing. Having a license the industry is prepared to work with is another.

Before choosing a jurisdiction, an operator needs to look beyond the application cost and how quickly the license can be issued.

• Will your platform providers accept it?
• Will aggregators work with you?
• Will PSPs support the structure?
• Will banks be comfortable with it?
• Will it work for the markets you're trying to reach?

A license can look attractive on paper, but if it creates problems everywhere else in the business, it isn't necessarily the right license for you.

Curaçao Was Part of the Conversation

That wider question around licensing naturally brought Curaçao into a number of conversations.

The recent CGA cybersecurity incident naturally came up in conversations, together with broader questions about the transition to Curaçao's new regulatory environment and operators still moving through the licensing and vetting process.

I'm not going to speculate about the incident itself.

What interested me more was what those conversations demonstrated.

Operators are becoming increasingly aware that regulatory risk and business risk are connected.

If something changes within a jurisdiction — whether regulatory, operational or reputational — the effects can extend far beyond the license itself.

That brings us back to the conversations around secondary licenses.

Businesses want options.

What Makes a Jurisdiction Work?

We also spoke with operators and suppliers about a number of established and alternative licensing jurisdictions, and we had the opportunity to introduce KUNAISA to people at the Summit, which was well received.

But regardless of whether the conversation is about Curaçao, Anjouan, Nevis, Kahnawake, KUNAISA or somewhere else, operators generally want the same thing.

They want a jurisdiction that is stable, workable and accepted by the industry.

That last part is particularly important.

A regulator can issue you a license, but your business still needs an ecosystem around it.

Platforms. Games. Aggregators. PSPs. Banks. Corporate services. Compliance.

They all need to work together.

That's why I don't believe operators should choose a jurisdiction by asking only:

"How much does it cost?"

or

"How quickly can I get licensed?"

Those are valid questions. They're just not the only questions.

Banking and Payments Are Still Difficult

Some things in this industry change quickly.

Banking isn't one of them.

Getting reliable banking and payment solutions remains a challenge for gaming businesses, and it was once again a regular subject of conversation at SBC.

Payments had a particularly visible presence this year, with PSPs gathered into their own dedicated area.

At the same time, compliance expectations around the sector continue to develop.

FATF's recent work examining money laundering, terrorist financing and proliferation-financing risks in gaming and gambling highlights areas including online gaming, cross-border transactions, payment methods, virtual assets, beneficial ownership and customer activity.

For operators, the practical message is straightforward:

Don't wait until after you've chosen your license to start thinking about banking and payments.

Licensing, target markets, banking, payments and compliance should be part of the same conversation from the beginning.

B2B Businesses Are Asking Similar Questions

The same thinking applies to B2B.

Platforms and suppliers are constantly looking for new ways to offer their games, technology and services to operators in different markets.

Their business model may be different from a B2C operator, but many of the underlying questions aren't.

• Where can we operate?
• Which licenses will our partners accept?
• Which jurisdictions make sense for our clients?
• What compliance requirements will apply?
• And will the structure allow the business to grow?

B2B licensing is becoming an increasingly important part of the wider licensing conversation.

And Then There's AI

There is one other subject I think we'll be talking about considerably more: artificial intelligence.

AI is going to have a big influence on the gaming industry.

Exactly where that takes us remains to be seen.

There are obvious potential applications across compliance, fraud detection, customer interaction, responsible gaming, analytics, marketing and operations.

There will also be questions for regulators to answer.

Will every development be positive?

Probably not.

But whether you are an operator, supplier, regulator or service provider, AI is going to become increasingly difficult to ignore.

What Should Operators Be Watching Heading Into 2027?

For me, there are two big areas.

Changing regulation around the world.

And:

How AI becomes integrated into the industry.

Both have the potential to change how gaming businesses operate, and neither is something you should start thinking about only after it affects you.

The businesses that prepare for change generally have more options than those forced to react to it.

Are We Finally Learning?

After more than 25 years in this industry, I was asked whether anything at SBC made me think, “We’re finally learning” or, alternatively, “I can’t believe we’re still talking about this.”

I’m not sure either is quite right.

When I first became involved in iGaming, the industry looked very different. The days when an operator could build an international gaming business around a relatively simple corporate and licensing structure are disappearing.

As regulation developed around the world, so did the expectations attached to a gaming license. Compliance, KYC, AML and player protection became increasingly important parts of operating a legitimate gaming business.

Not everyone adapted at the same pace. As regulation increased, some operators moved towards less-regulated or grey markets, while at the same time players, software providers, PSPs and banks increasingly looked for businesses operating within recognized licensing frameworks.

Then came crypto, bringing another wave of change — and another set of questions around transparency, movement of funds and accountability. As crypto became more mainstream, expectations around how those funds are monitored and understood evolved with it.

And now we’re talking about AI.

Today, operators increasingly need to think beyond a single company and a single license. Depending on their markets and business model, they may need a combination of licensing, corporate structures, payment relationships and regulatory approvals across different jurisdictions.

That’s why I don’t think it’s fair to say we’ve finally learned.

We’ve learned that we have to keep learning.

Regulation will change. Technology will change. Payments will change. Player expectations will change.

And the businesses that survive will be the ones prepared to adapt with them.

Maybe that’s the biggest thing I’ve learned after more than 25 years in iGaming.