Almost every now and then, there is a new casino that is setup, each week, it is like there is a new casino where gamblers could gamble. I am aware that the competition in the industry is good, but more casinos mean more publicity for gambling, and more publicity for gambling means more gamblers definitely, and if there are more gamblers, we will have a higher chance of people who will turn up with a gambling problem or challenge. This is a thought I had earlier, I may be wrong, what do you think? What do you consider is the effects of the many options and variety of casinos to gamble on, do you think that it has somehow promoted and made addiction easy? do you feel that gamblers would have been less addicted if we have fewer casinos?
On the one hand, the presence of many casinos is good - a wide choice of gaming platforms for gamblers. If you don't like one casino, you can always go to another. But on the other hand, it will be more or less the same everywhere and in fact, it turns out to be just an illusion of choice.
Competition among casinos should have a positive effect on the development of the industry (the emergence of new gaming offers, bonuses and promotions). Also, competition doesn't allow this industry to monopolize, which means that even large casinos are forced to strive to improve their service and their services.
Does the growing number of casinos affect gambling addiction? I think so. To maintain competitiveness, casinos are forced to resort to aggressive marketing, which will attract more new gamblers. In theory, this should directly affect the number of gamblers with gambling addiction (the more gamblers, the more of them with gambling addiction in percentage terms). If we proceed from this assumption, then a smaller number of casinos would
"generate" a smaller number of gamblers with gambling addiction. It is difficult to say how it would actually be, since it needs to be tested in practice.