Research shows that 83,5% of beneficiaries of social programs in Greater São Paulo have never gambled.
Research conducted by Cruz Consulting with beneficiaries of federal government social programs in the 39 cities of the São Paulo Metropolitan Region shows that 83,47% of respondents have never used sports betting platforms. The survey, commissioned by the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL), was carried out on September 3 and 4 and released this Wednesday (9).
According to the data, 12,63% stated that they had previously placed bets but do not currently use the platforms, while 3,9% said they still use betting sites. Among those interviewed who had previously placed bets, 5,49% stated that they had been blocked by the federal government and 21,97% said they had voluntarily requested self-exclusion from sports betting platforms.
The survey also draws attention to a possible effect of user exclusion: 20% of respondents who were removed from legal platforms, either by government blocking or on their own initiative, stated that they had migrated to clandestine betting sites, which operate without authorization from the Ministry of Finance.
According to the president of the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL), Plínio Lemos Jorge, the results reinforce the need for the debate on betting to be data-driven and also consider the size of the illegal market. “When we talk about indebtedness, we need to look at the numbers carefully and avoid generalizations. The indebtedness of Brazilian families is a complex phenomenon that cannot be automatically attributed to betting. The research shows that the vast majority of beneficiaries of social programs interviewed have never used betting platforms. At the same time, the data on migration to illegal sites among people who are excluded or who requested self-exclusion deserves attention because it shows the importance of combining mechanisms to protect bettors with the permanent fight against clandestine platforms,” says Plínio.
The research also investigated the relationship between the positions of presidential candidates on the legalization of gambling and the voting intentions of respondents who have gambled or still gamble. For 68,1%, the candidate's position on whether or not to legalize gambling would not change their electoral choice.
The results indicate that, for most respondents who have already placed bets, the candidates' stance on gambling regulation would not be a determining factor in their voting decision.
According to the president of ANJL, the data contributes to a more informed public debate on the regulation of the sector, especially at a time when consumer protection, combating the illegal market, and responsibility in the activity are among the main points of discussion.
