Why do you view scalable Blackjack versions differently than the classical Blackjack game?

Classical Blackjack is an individual game. You have your own seat, you control everything yourself. You have your own cards or several hands, but these are yours. There's a stronger connection between you and the host, between you and the dealer. It's a more individual game and probably the most individual game in the live casino market. Scalable Blackjack, on the other hand, is built differently. You don't need to worry about seat availability. You can place very low minimum bets, serving many players at the same time. With classical Blackjack, you need to be careful with minimum bets because if your minimum bet is too low, it may not cover your running costs for the table. People tend to place minimum bets usually. So their bets may not cover your operational costs for the table, including salaries, electricity, and so on, because it's not scalable. Seven seats, that's it.

How have you seen live casino games change over the past few years?

For instance, they may offer more games. You can't enter the market with only Roulette, Blackjack, and Baccarat. You need more to make an operator consider your portfolio, even in addition to others. I'm not talking about exclusivity, but rather in addition to others. If you only have Roulette and Blackjack, no one will be interested in changing their provider or placing your content in front of players first.

How have you seen live casino games change over the past few years?

This is why Evolution has such a sophisticated lobby. They want players to see it and not feel motivated to leave. They usually place the exit button somewhere hard to find. Once you're on mobile, you either have to close the browser completely, press back multiple times, or find that button to leave the content and return to the operator's webpage.