Unibet Under The ASA Microscope

Unibet - ASA Luck Is No Coincidence For Unibet

A social media post on Facebook and three ads from Unibet recently came under scrutiny from the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) following a single complaint.

Whilst the single complaint about the adverts took umbrage at the strapline on the video that was posted, one that said ‘Luck Is No Coincidence’ and felt it was misleading, the ASA itself challenged whether this implied that gambling outcomes could be predicted.

The investigation looked at whether these ads were misleading and irresponsible because of the strapline.

The CAP Codes were 16.1 and 3.1

Marketing communications for gambling must be socially responsible, with particular regard to the need to protect children, young persons and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited.

Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.

The BCAP Codes were 1.2 and 3.1

Advertisements must be prepared with a sense of responsibility to the audience and to society.

Advertisements must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.

The full adjudication can be read here.

Unibet Response

When Unibet responded to the ASA the crux of that response was that because the ‘Luck Is No Coincidence’ strapline refers to sports betting, they believe that the consumer would understand that they key to great sports betting is information.

This was backed up with details from Clearcast, the company that check adverts against the UK Code of Broadcasting Advertising (BCAP), who told the ASA how they had worked closely with the advertising agency. Part of that process was a meeting before the storyboard had been prepared.

They went on to explain how Unibet used ‘insights’ as part of their service and this helped to make their players better informed before placing a bet. It was felt that the insights were no different to a customer studying form etc. when deciding on which horse to place their bet.

Unibet elaborated further and provided a full and frank response that clearly made sense to the ASA and none of the sections of the complaint were upheld.

Related to this story