Interviews
Thought Leadership with Donna Kelly, Chief People and Culture Officer at Push Gaming
European Gaming spoke to Push Gaming’s Chief People and Culture Officer, Donna Kelly about how they have developed to become one of the best employers in iGaming and what structures they have in place to encourage internal progression.
Push Gaming has seen rapid growth over recent years. Can you tell us more about how the culture at Push has grown with it?
We’ve come a long way over the past few years but we have stayed true to what makes us unique. Our team is at the forefront of everything we do here at Push Gaming and we have built a culture that is centred around trust, collaboration, transparency and accountability.
We have a talented team who are highly driven to create premium quality and exciting game and we work hard to nurture a healthy and positive atmosphere to compliment this..
The same passion we pour into our games is mirrored in the way we build our teams. We give everyone the freedom, flexibility and trust to execute their roles. We are always looking for ways to improve, regularly asking for feedback from the team; what is working, what isn’t and as a result, we can ensure that we’re moving in the right direction.
Internal promotion seems to be a regular occurrence in Push. What about Push as a working environment inspires such high retention rates, and what benefits come from retaining talented people rather than externally hiring?
Individual progression is a key focus for us. We have many success stories where people have joined at the early stages in their careers and are now heading up teams and departments. With the company rapidly growing, there are plenty of opportunities for progression. This is something that we actively focus on internally.
We give our team the support, freedom and tools to work to the best of their ability and to allow them the opportunities to grow as individuals. It has served us well so far!
It is also important to us that we are providing people with learning and development opportunities. We have many different functions and skill sets at Push and we encourage teams and individuals to approach us with courses, tools and technology that can boost their personal development.
How has Push grown in recent months and years, and what does this mean for the future?
Push has seen significant growth over the last few years – our portfolio is constantly expanding, we have entered new markets and there are more on the horizon. To support that growth, of course, we must grow our teams. We’re growing in line with our long-term strategy of consistently bringing the best in entertainment to new players in new territories and creating content with a variety of themes, features and player demographics.
Our ethos has always been quality over quantity, but a well-thought-out long-term vision has put us in a place where we can grow our output, quality and variety of games all at once.
We are in a strong place, with an incredibly talented team and we will continue to build Push with like-minded individuals who share our vision for excellence and quality.
How does Push handle recruitment?
We understand the recruitment process can be lengthy for candidates and as such, we try to make it as smooth and quick as possible by identifying key candidates early to ensure we can progress quickly.
It is important that we are able to identify ambitious people with the potential to grow beyond their current capabilities and fit well into our culture – these are the key things we look for when recruiting.
How do you encourage the collaborative environment that is so important to commercial growth?
We regularly hold company-wide brainstorm sessions where anyone can throw out an idea, from a theme to a mechanic or art style they think players would like. Your role may not be involved in the game development process, but if you have a good idea, you definitely have a platform. That’s the culture we’ve managed to nurture here.
It’s also important for us to find smarter ways of collaboration, especially given that a big chunk of it occurs remotely. We source the latest in collaborative technology, encourage only important meetings that don’t run on, and motivate people to focus on outcomes rather than second-by-second monitoring.
Transparency and accountability really is key to ensuring this way of working takes us forward. Each team is encouraged to translate the company vision into the goals they want to achieve, meaning they set targets that are achievable but ambitious and generated from the bottom up.
All of this culminates in a really trusting and sharing environment where we all feel free to work collaboratively, regardless of location. We have a fantastic team and our games are born of a genuinely diverse group of minds who all feel comfortable expressing when they feel something can be done better, that way we are all accountable to continue innovating.
How do you promote teamwork and team building within Push Gaming?
We make sure we take the time to celebrate our wins as a team. We try to organise as many social opportunities as possible, both virtually so that we can get the whole team together and in person for those based in similar locations.
We regularly hold virtual launch parties for game releases and enjoy a company-wide games afternoon. It’s never mandatory to participate, so to see so many people show up makes it even more clear that our trust and confidence in our team is paying off – we’re lucky we have such a great team.
We try to link our themes to the games – for our recent release Mad Cars, we had our teams in various locations experience some different types of driving – our UK team tried out Quad Biking and blindfolded driving, our other offices tried buggies and go-karting.
We have a lot of fun, whilst also maintaining a high-performance culture which has been key to us continuing to evolve and reaching the heights we’ve enjoyed together.
Powered by WPeMatico
Following the recent launch of Winz.nl, powered by The Mill Adventure (TMA), we sat down with Bjørnar Heggernes, Chief Commercial Officer at The Mill Adventure, to discuss how technology, true partnerships and player-centric innovation are the keys to succeeding in the Netherlands and beyond.
Powering a new brand in a regulated market like the Netherlands is often seen as a compliance minefield. How does TMA help a partner like Winz.nl navigate these complexities while maintaining a focus on growth?
Bjørnar Heggernes: It is correct that the Dutch market is one of the most rigorous and demanding in the world. For a new brand, the technical overhead of meeting KSA standards, ranging from CRUKS (the central player exclusion register) integration to complex reporting, can be very difficult to overcome.
Our philosophy is centred around a compliance-first approach. We support complex regulated markets through configurable, jurisdiction-specific workflows. This means the heavy lifting of regulatory logic is handled at the core platform level. For the Netherlands, this includes localised onboarding, responsible gaming automation, CRUKS and CCBR integrations, vault reporting, and intervention controls.
For Winz.nl, this was critical. We provided the technical and compliance infrastructure required for the Dutch market, allowing them to move from licence acquisition to a full launch with total confidence.
With recent warnings from the KSA chair regarding the growth of the black market, there is a clear need for better channelisation. How can regulated brands use innovation to lure players away from illegal sites without resorting to aggressive tactics?
BH: To improve channelisation efforts, the regulated offer must be the superior choice and not just the compliant one. Through our AI-driven SmartLobbies, we automate the casino experience to ensure players see the content they actually enjoy in real-time. Another real game-changer for channelisation is our loyalty framework, exemplified by Winz.nl’s WinClub. It replaces traditional, operator-driven bonus mechanics with a player-initiated model where players earn points and choose their own rewards from a catalogue. It’s transparent, it aligns with responsible gambling principles, and it builds genuine trust. When a player feels in control and is presented with a comprehensive experience that is tailored to them, the unregulated alternative loses its appeal.
We often hear about the hold that legacy operators have on market share. Why is the partnership between an operator and a platform provider the deciding factor for a new brand’s survival?
BH: In today’s B2B landscape, a platform provider must be a strategic growth partner. Large-scale operators can be slowed down by massive, multi-layered infrastructures that make rapid pivoting difficult. Operator groups like Orange Gaming succeed because they are agile. Our partnership works because we provide the technical flexibility and regulatory infrastructure needed to support a differentiated brand while maintaining strong compliance controls. When a platform is modular, the operator can adapt to a sudden regulatory change or a shift in player appetite in days, not months. That speed-to-market is a crucial way to carve out share in a highly competitive regulated market.
How does a technologically advanced platform, one that utilises AI and real-time Business Intelligence (BI), tangibly impact an operator’s bottom line?
BH: It comes down to operational efficiency. Many established brands have massive internal teams manually managing lobbies and CRM campaigns, whereas our platform automates these manual processes. By using real-time BI and AI, a brand can identify and serve niche segments very effectively. For example, our SmartLobbies solution ensures the gaming content is relevant to the individual, which increases retention and Lifetime Value (LTV). We want our partners to make quicker, smarter decisions based on live data. In the Dutch market, where margins are tight and competition is fierce, that level of automation can make all the difference in terms of sustained profitability.
The post Navigating the Dutch frontier appeared first on Eastern European Gaming | Global iGaming & Tech Intelligence Hub.
apuestas deportivas
¿Son las casas de apuestas las culpables o la arquitectura económica construida por Brasil en los últimos 35 años?
Esta es la pregunta central planteada por Carlos Akira Sato en su análisis sobre el creciente endeudamiento de los hogares en Brasil.
En lugar de atribuir el sobreendeudamiento a las plataformas de apuestas deportivas, sostiene que el problema tiene sus raíces en décadas de transformación económica marcadas por la expansión del crédito, la financiarización y sistemas cada vez más sofisticados de estimulación del consumo en múltiples sectores.
El debate sobre el endeudamiento de las familias brasileñas ha ganado un nuevo objetivo preferente: las plataformas de apuestas deportivas.
Las llamadas “bets” han pasado a ocupar un lugar central en los medios, el discurso político y las discusiones regulatorias, frecuentemente asociadas al aumento de la morosidad y la compulsividad financiera.
Pero quizá la pregunta correcta sea otra: ¿el sobreendeudamiento de las familias brasileñas realmente nació con las bets?
La respuesta, desde un análisis histórico riguroso, es negativa.
El fenómeno es mucho anterior a la regulación de las apuestas deportivas y está vinculado a una profunda transformación económica, cultural y tecnológica iniciada en los años 90, cuando Brasil abandonó gradualmente una economía cerrada e inflacionaria para entrar en una lógica moderna de consumo, crédito y financiarización de la vida cotidiana.
La apertura económica promovida durante el gobierno de Collor cambió el patrón de consumo del país.
Pocos años después, el Plan Real trajo estabilidad monetaria y transformó la propia psicología económica de la población.
Por primera vez, millones de brasileños comenzaron a financiar bienes, usar tarjetas de crédito, pagar en cuotas e incorporar el endeudamiento como parte normal de la vida económica.
Este proceso representó un avance y una inclusión financiera.
Pero también consolidó un nuevo modelo económico basado en la anticipación del ingreso futuro de los hogares. El crédito dejó de ser una excepción y se convirtió en infraestructura permanente de sostén del consumo nacional.
Bancos, minoristas y entidades financieras comprendieron rápidamente este cambio. Grandes cadenas dejaron de actuar únicamente como distribuidoras de productos para convertirse en plataformas financieras.
Las tarjetas private label, los sistemas de financiación sofisticados y los mecanismos permanentes de crédito pasaron a integrar la vida cotidiana del consumidor. En muchos casos, el margen financiero se volvió tan relevante como la propia venta del producto.
A lo largo de los años 2000, el modelo se profundizó.
La expansión de la bancarización, de los medios electrónicos de pago y de las fintech aceleró la financiarización de la vida cotidiana.
A partir de 2013, con la apertura regulatoria impulsada por la Ley nº 12.865, el celular pasó a funcionar simultáneamente como banco, billetera digital, plataforma de crédito, marketplace y entorno permanente de monetización del comportamiento.
El crédito se volvió instantáneo, invisible e integrado a la experiencia digital.
El consumidor pasó a contratar financiación en pocos clics, muchas veces dentro del propio flujo de compra. Brasil entró definitivamente en la era de la hiperestimulación conductual del consumo.
Y aquí es donde el debate contemporáneo comienza a revelar una contradicción importante.
Mientras el país construyó durante décadas una sofisticada arquitectura económica basada en expansión del crédito, publicidad emocional, gamificación, captura de la atención y monetización del ingreso futuro, la inversión estructural en educación financiera siguió siendo insuficiente.
Brasil enseñó a su población a consumir antes de enseñarle a construir patrimonio.
Hoy, prácticamente todos los sectores relevantes de la economía operan mecanismos avanzados de estímulo conductual: retail digital, aplicaciones, streaming, delivery, marketplaces, bancos, fintechs y redes sociales.
La publicidad dejó de ser meramente informativa y pasó a ser algorítmica, personalizada y emocional.
El consumidor moderno compite por su atención y autocontrol contra sistemas diseñados para maximizar el engagement y el consumo continuo.
Este fenómeno aparece incluso en sectores raramente asociados al debate regulatorio.
El comercio alimentario, por ejemplo, utiliza técnicas sofisticadas de neuromarketing para impulsar el consumo de productos ultraprocesados, bebidas alcohólicas e ítems de compra impulsiva. Sin embargo, pocos segmentos han enfrentado un nivel de monitoreo similar al impuesto a las apuestas deportivas.
El sector regulado de las bets surgió en Brasil bajo uno de los marcos más estrictos de la economía digital.
Las plataformas deben identificar usuarios biométricamente, monitorear el comportamiento, rastrear operaciones, comunicar movimientos sospechosos al COAF, implementar políticas de juego responsable e impedir apuestas financiadas con crédito.
Es decir: el regulador entendió correctamente que la combinación entre compulsividad y crédito podía ser socialmente explosiva.
Pero aquí surge una pregunta inevitable: ¿por qué sectores históricamente asociados al sobreendeudamiento de las familias brasileñas operaron durante décadas bajo niveles significativamente menores de monitoreo conductual?
Datos de la CNC muestran que el porcentaje de familias endeudadas alcanzó el 80,2% en febrero de 2026 — el nivel más alto de la serie histórica.
Este escenario no nació con las bets. Es el resultado de décadas de expansión agresiva del crédito, financiarización de la vida cotidiana, hiperestimulación del consumo y ausencia estructural de educación económica de la población.
Marco comparativo : obligaciones regulatorias y conductuales
| Tema / Obligación | Bets | Bancos | Retail / Alimentos |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identificación formal del cliente (KYC) | Obligatoria, robusta, con biometría | Obligatoria | Limitada |
| Validación de titularidad de cuenta | Obligatoria | Generalmente obligatoria | Normalmente inexistente |
| Monitoreo conductual | Alto | Enfocado en fraude y crédito | Bajo |
| Prohibición del uso de crédito | Sí | No | No |
| Publicidad emocional | Con restricciones crecientes | Permitida con límites | Ampliamente utilizada |
| Protección contra compulsividad | Obligatoria | Muy limitada | Prácticamente inexistente |
| Herramientas de autoexclusión | Obligatorias | Inexistentes | Inexistentes |
| Obligación de reporte al COAF | Sí | Sí | Limitada |
| Control del origen de fondos | Obligatorio | Obligatorio | Generalmente inexistente |
| Fiscalización conductual | Intensa | Moderada | Baja |
| Políticas de consumo responsable | Obligatorias | Parciales | Generalmente inexistentes |
El punto más provocador quizá sea justamente la asimetría regulatoria que este debate revela.
Varios sectores históricamente asociados a la compulsividad, el hiperconsumo y la dependencia han operado durante décadas bajo una lógica regulatoria menos intervencionista que la actualmente aplicada a las apuestas deportivas.
Al final, el verdadero debate tal vez no sea solo “cómo regular las apuestas”, sino cómo preparar a la sociedad para vivir en una economía digital, hiperinanciarizada y permanentemente orientada a la captura de la atención, el consumo y la monetización conductual.
Carlos Akira Sato
Co-Founder de Fenynx Digital Assets y especialista en Mercados Regulados, Infraestructura Financiera, Gobernanza e Innovación. Vicepresidente de Relaciones Institucionales de PAGOS (Asociación de Gestión de Medios de Pagos Electrónicos).
The post ¿Son las casas de apuestas las culpables o la arquitectura económica construida por Brasil en los últimos 35 años? appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
Betting Companies
Are betting operators to blame, or is it Brazil’s economic framework of the last 35 years?
Are betting companies to blame or is it Brazil’s economic framework of the last 35 years?
This is the central question raised by Carlos Akira Sato in his analysis of Brazil’s rising household debt.
Rather than attributing over-indebtedness to sports betting platforms, he argues that the issue is rooted in decades of economic transformation shaped by credit expansion, financialization, and increasingly sophisticated systems of consumer stimulation across multiple sectors.
The debate surrounding Brazilian household debt has gained a new preferred target: sports betting platforms.
The so-called “bets” have taken center stage in the news, political discourse, and regulatory discussions, often associated with rising default rates and financial compulsiveness.
But perhaps the correct question is another one: did the over-indebtedness of Brazilian families really begin with bets?
The answer, under a serious historical analysis, is no.
The phenomenon predates the regulation of sports betting by decades and is linked to a profound economic, cultural, and technological transformation that began in the 1990s, when Brazil gradually abandoned a closed and inflationary economy to enter a modern logic of consumption, credit, and the financialization of everyday life.
The economic opening promoted during the Collor administration changed the country’s consumption patterns.
A few years later, the Real Plan brought monetary stability and transformed the population’s economic psychology itself.
For the first time, millions of Brazilians began financing goods, using credit cards, paying in installments, and incorporating debt as a normal part of economic life.
This process represented progress and financial inclusion.
But it also consolidated a new economic model based on the anticipation of families’ future income. Credit ceased to be an exception and became permanent infrastructure supporting national consumption.
Banks, retailers, and financial institutions quickly understood this change. Large retail chains stopped acting solely as product distributors and became financial platforms.
Private-label cards, sophisticated installment plans, and permanent financing mechanisms became part of consumers’ daily lives. In many cases, financial margins became just as relevant as the sale of the products themselves.
Throughout the 2000s, the model deepened.
The expansion of banking access, electronic payment methods, and fintechs accelerated the financialization of everyday life.
From 2013 onward, with the regulatory opening promoted by Law No. 12,865, mobile phones simultaneously became banks, digital wallets, credit platforms, marketplaces, and permanent environments for behavioral monetization.
Credit became instant, invisible, and integrated into the digital experience. Consumers started obtaining financing in just a few clicks, often within the purchasing flow itself. Brazil definitively entered the era of behavioral hyperstimulation of consumption.
And this is where the contemporary debate begins to reveal an important contradiction.
While the country spent decades building a sophisticated economic architecture based on credit expansion, emotional advertising, gamification, attention capture, and monetization of future income, structural investment in financial education remained insufficient.
Brazil taught its population how to consume before teaching them how to build wealth.
Today, virtually every relevant sector of the economy operates advanced behavioral stimulation mechanisms: digital retail, apps, streaming platforms, delivery services, marketplaces, banks, fintechs, and social networks.
Advertising is no longer merely informative; it has become algorithmic, personalized, and emotional. The modern consumer competes for attention and self-control against systems designed to maximize engagement and continuous consumption.
This phenomenon appears even in sectors rarely associated with regulatory debates.
The food retail industry, for example, uses sophisticated neuromarketing techniques to boost the consumption of ultra-processed foods, alcoholic beverages, and impulse-buy products. Yet few segments have faced a level of monitoring similar to that imposed on sports betting.
Brazil’s regulated betting sector emerged under one of the strictest frameworks in the digital economy.
Platforms are required to biometrically identify users, monitor behavior, track transactions, report suspicious activity to COAF, implement responsible gaming policies, and prevent bets financed through credit.
The Brazilian model requires prior deposits and prohibits “uncovered” betting.
In other words, regulators correctly understood that the combination of compulsiveness and credit could become socially explosive.
But here an inevitable question arises: why have sectors historically associated with the over-indebtedness of Brazilian families operated for decades under significantly lower levels of behavioral monitoring?
Data from CNC show that the percentage of indebted families reached 80.2% in February 2026 — the highest level in the historical series.
This scenario did not begin with bets. It is the result of decades of aggressive credit expansion, financialization of daily life, hyperstimulation of consumption, and the structural absence of economic education for the population.
Comparative framework: regulatory and behavioral obligations
| Topic / Obligation | Betting operators | Banks | Retail / Food |
|---|---|---|---|
| Formal customer identification (KYC) | Mandatory, robust, biometric | Mandatory | Limited |
| Account ownership validation | Mandatory | Generally mandatory | Usually nonexistent |
| Behavioral monitoring | High | Focused on fraud and credit | Low |
| Prohibition of credit use | Yes | No | No |
| Emotional advertising | Under increasing restrictions | Permitted with limits | Widely used |
| Protection against compulsiveness | Mandatory | Very limited | Practically nonexistent |
| Self-exclusion tools | Mandatory | Nonexistent | Nonexistent |
| Obligation to report to COAF | Yes | Yes | Limited |
| Source-of-funds control | Mandatory | Mandatory | Generally nonexistent |
| Behavioral oversight | Intense | Moderate | Low |
| Formal responsible consumption policies | Mandatory | Partial | Generally nonexistent |
Perhaps the most provocative point is precisely the regulatory asymmetry revealed by this debate.
Several sectors historically associated with compulsiveness, hyperconsumption, and dependency have operated for decades under a less interventionist regulatory logic than the one currently applied to sports betting.
In the end, the real debate may not simply be “how should betting be regulated?”, but rather how to prepare society to live in a digital, hyper-financialized economy permanently driven by attention capture, consumption, and behavioral monetization.
Carlos Akira Sato
Co-Founder of Fenynx Digital Assets and specialist in Regulated Markets, Financial Infrastructure, Governance, and Innovation. Vice President of Institutional Relations at PAGOS (Association for Electronic Payment Management).
The post Are betting operators to blame, or is it Brazil’s economic framework of the last 35 years? appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
-
Apple6 days agoIBJR hails App Store approval as a milestone in the fight against illegal betting in Brazil
-
Brazil6 days agoEsportes da Sorte campaign celebrates fans’ resilience in support of Brazil
-
apuestas deportivas6 days ago
¿Por qué Pix es central en la lucha contra el mercado ilegal de apuestas?
-
Africa7 days ago
Broadway Platform Partners with Ghanaian Operator Afrinova
-
Asia7 days ago
BetConstruct AI Showcases AI-Powered Solutions at G2E Asia 2026
-
affiliate marketing7 days ago
CasinoCanada partners with Slota Casino for content and traffic growth
-
Black Label6 days ago
Pragmatic Play signs Latam Agreement with Black Label
-
Latest News7 days ago
SCCG Launches LATAM Division and Opens Miami Office
