Public Gaming International Magazine March/April 2021

16 PUBLIC GAMING INTERNATIONAL • MARCH/APRIL 2021 revisit the early days of Digital Lottery. What was happening in their states prior to launch, how did they prepare, and what guidance or suggestions do they have for their colleagues who are all on the Digital Lottery train even if the implementation of iLottery is not imminent? GRETCHEN CORBIN GEORGIA LOTTERY T he Georgia Lottery’s pathway to iLottery is a real-life example of the adage “slow and steady wins the race.” One of the rst lotteries to launch an iLottery site, Georgia began with a simple Players Club in November 2012. While it provided limited gaming options for players, it allowed the lottery to create an online community and begin collecting the player data necessary for online sales. Fast forward to today and the Georgia Lottery now o ers: n Players Club where players can enter second chance promotions n A “Buy Now” feature where players can buy Cash Pop, Fantasy 5, Mega Millions, Powerball, and KENO! tickets n Also under Buy Now, players can buy interactive Diggi Games, with prizes up to $350,000 n iLottery prizes deposit automati- cally to players’ accounts, up to and including $600 GRETCHEN CORBIN GEORGIA LOTTERY CORP. How did the lottery achieve this transition to full iLottery sales? “ e team made a concerted e ort to communicate objectives and realistic expectations to stakeholders early and often,” said Gretchen Corbin, president and CEO at the Georgia Lottery. “Conversations with board members, legislators, retailers and responsible gaming advocates prior to the launch were key to early acceptance and success. “ e strategy early on was to ‘crawl before you walk, and walk before you run.’ A soft launch was designed to gather customer feedback to ensure the product being introduced met customer expectations. Marketing e orts increased over time as we made enhancements to our product o erings and methods of online distribution.” So the lottery has created a growing online community, built an engaging iLottery site and launched a variety of entertaining content. Now, how to keep players coming back? Like with other facets of the program, the Georgia Lottery has that covered. “Player retention is a major focus for the Georgia Lottery interactive team,” Ms. Corbin said. “We spend a lot of time and e ort analyzing usage data to determine patterns of play, when a player may be losing interest, and other speci cs. We tailor promotions to increase player engagement, and we’ve seen signi cant success in reducing player churn.” Prize payout also can play a role in attracting players, but the lottery sees this facet of their program in a larger context. “Payout is an important metric but not always the primary one when considering how to attract, retain and engage players,” Ms. Corbin said. “It should be considered in the context of the composition of your overall online portfolio (draw games, KENO, etc.) and your e-instants portfolio (in terms of game mechanics and variety), price points, launch frequency, promotions/rewards program, and the structure of the prize pool.” To those lotteries with iLottery programs on the horizon, Ms. Corbin has a few words of advice. “Communicate early and often with stakeholders. Work collaboratively with your vendor partner(s) to tailor o erings to players. Invest time and resources into ensuring a top-notch user experience: Survey your players, perform usability tests, etc.” MARY HARVILLE KENTUCKY LOTTERY T o call Mary Harville a supporter of the online sales of lottery products would certainly be an understatement. e more accurate word is “pioneer” as Ms. Harville has been on the frontlines of ghting for iLottery for almost 10 years. She describes Kentucky’s strategy as “survive and advance.” MARY HARVILLE KENTUCKY LOTTERY CORP. Named President and CEO of the Kentucky Lottery Corporation in September 2020, Ms. Harville previously served as General Counsel. In late 2011, the U.S. Dept. of Justice issued an opinion that internet sales of lottery games would not violate the federal Wire Act. In 2012, Ms. Harville joined other lottery executives in Washington, D.C. to ght to keep the Wire Act from being amended to change that USDoJ opinion. eir arguments were convincing – the Wire Act, and the 2011 opinion of the DoJ, remained in place (and has been recently a rmed in federal court). On the heels of the D.C. success, the lottery’s board voted in March 2013 to o er Keno and internet-based sales. Keno was a bit simpler as there were a number of states from which to learn. But back then, iLottery was not as prevalent so they took a more measured approach. “We encountered a number of people who said we shouldn’t sell on the internet,” said Ms. Harville. “I recall one very uncomfort- able meeting in particular with a group of retailers about it. We even had a legislator wanting to le a bill making all Lottery transactions cash-only, which would have e ectively eliminated internet sales. All this meant we had to take a much more deliberate and careful approach right out of the gate.” at approach involved a modest launch. On day one, players could choose from only three traditional lottery games to play – Powerball, Mega Millions, and an in-state