Telangana's blanket ban is turbo-charging the offshore online sports betting and casino economy, kills domestic gaming industry: finds PRAHAR consumer survey
The study reveals how sports betting and casino operators—most of them foreign offshore entities—continue to engage users directly through aggressive digital marketing, celebrity endorsements, and encrypted platforms, circumventing enforcement and raising critical threats to digital sovereignty and public safety.
The study titled Click. Bet. Repeat: Consumer Survey on Forces Driving Online Betting and Gambling in Telangana, is based on a comprehensive field study of 2,671 respondents who indulge in real money gaming . It uncovers how foreign betting operators target Indian users through online ads, YouTube videos, Telegram groups, and meme pages, often using local influencers to add legitimacy.
Explains Mr. Abhay Raj Mishra, President & National Convenor of PRAHAR: 'Telangana led the way in 2017 with a blanket ban on all online real-money plays—skill or chance—without even drawing a line between legal and illegal play. What was hailed as a bold move has, in reality, created the perfect storm for offshore sports betting and casino to thrive unchecked.'
'Eight years on, the evidence is undeniable: the ban has failed. Instead of protecting citizens, it has driven domestic operators out and handed the market on a silver platter to offshore betting syndicates. This has left users more vulnerable than ever. The newly formed SIT has its work cut out—but let's be clear: more bans and crackdowns won't solve what is now a deep-rooted menace undermining national security.', he adds
Calling out strong recommendations, Mr. Mishra said 'Telangana has a rare second chance. The first, cautious step was a blanket ban; the wiser next step is bold, inclusive policy. Citizens have already moved on—real-money gaming isn't vanishing, it's evolving. The ask isn't to rubber-stamp vice, but to stay ahead of its risks by providing clean avenues for people to play real money games of skill, instead of sports betting and casino. Lead with foresight, not fear, and turn a growing reality into a safer, transparent system that works for everyone.'
KEY FINDINGS
Illegal, but popular, making national security a casualty
96% of users know real money gaming in Telangana is banned, yet participate in sports betting and casino, with 87% playing daily. This has pushed domestic online platforms away from Telangana, paving way for more sinister activities, with a significant national security risk.
Who's Playing — a young, mostly male, broadly educated crowd
Nearly two-thirds of users are under 30 (45 % are 18-25 and 17 % are 26-30), and men outnumber women four to one (78 % vs 22 %), yet at 22% women participation is significant. Education is mixed: while 42 % stopped after school, 50% hold a college degree. Students (35 %) and salaried professionals and self-employed (52 %) dominate the occupation split, and the activity cuts across income levels even though 60 % come from households earning under ₹30 000 a month.
Getting In and Paying Up — offshore apps, easy work-arounds, anonymous wallets
Stake, colour-prediction apps, 1xBet, 1win and Teen Patti are the five most-tried platforms (each 47–70 %). Access is effortless for 89 % of players, with 69 % relying on VPNs to hide their real identity and another 20 % using Telegram links to dodge geo-blocks, and also because they are provided with VPN links in these Telegram groups. Almost everyone plays incognito: 94 % skip real-name KYC, and 86 % fund accounts via UPI transfers routed through friends or agents, indicating existence of mule accounts, far ahead of wallets (14 %), cash (8 %) and cards (6 %).
Usage Intensity — daily play, modest tickets for most
Engagement is extreme: 87 % log in every day. Seven in ten spend ₹500–₹2 000 a month and 73 % keep wagers below 1 % of household income, yet 12 % already risk 5 % or more, signalling an at-risk minority.
Wins, Losses and the 'I'm Ahead' Illusion
Losses are almost universal (99 %), but so are wins (99 %). Four-fifths have lost between ₹1 000 and ₹10 000, while 71 % have won in the same band; about one in five have crossed the ₹10 000 mark on winnings and 5 % on losses. The near balance feeds the belief—held by 83 %—that they are net positive overall.
Mindset & Motivations — chasing quick cash and social proof
A spectacular 97 % play for the chance of quick money, 61 % cite entertainment, and half mention social acceptance. Tales of huge payouts lure 87 % into their first game and remain the chief reason (86 %) that grim media stories of debt or suicide do not scare them off. Players also underestimate danger: 64 % think fewer than 1 % of gamblers get into serious trouble.
Consumer Sentiment — ban rejected, legalizing welcomed
Almost everyone (96 %) knows the pastime is illegal in Telangana, yet plays anyway; 94 % now want the state to legalise and regulate real-money gaming, while only 6 % back the current blanket ban.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
38 minutes ago
- Business Standard
QUAD condemns Pahalgam attack, says perpetrators must be brought to justice
The QUAD countries (India, US, Japan, Australia) on Wednesday jointly condemned the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack, which claimed the lives of 26 people, mostly tourists, in Jammu and Kashmir's Baisaran valley. The leaders made these remarks at the QUAD Foreign Ministers' meeting in Washington. The group also urged all the member states of the United Nations "to cooperate actively with all relevant authorities in this regard." A joint statement was shared by the US Department of State, which read, "The Quad unequivocally condemns all acts of terrorism and violent extremism in all its forms and manifestations, including cross-border terrorism, and renews our commitment to counterterrorism cooperation. We condemn in the strongest terms the terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, on April 22, 2025, which claimed the lives of 25 Indian nationals and one Nepali citizen, while injuring several others. We express our deepest condolences to the families of the victims and extend our heartfelt wishes for a swift and full recovery to all those injured." "We call for the perpetrators, organisers, and financiers of this reprehensible act to be brought to justice without any delay and urge all UN Member States, in accordance with their obligations under international law and relevant UNSCRs, to cooperate actively with all relevant authorities in this regard."
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
38 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Trump says trade deal with India 'soon' as July 9 deadline approaches
Trump said he believed India was ready to lower trade barriers for US companies, a move that could pave the way for an agreement and avert the 26 per cent tariff he had announced on April 2 New Delhi US President Donald Trump on Tuesday (local time) said the US and India will soon finalise a trade deal with 'much lower tariffs,' which would enable fairer competition between the two countries. The deal, he said, would help American companies compete in the South Asian market, Reuters reported. 'I think we are going to have a deal with India, and it's going to be a different kind of deal,' Trump said. 'It will allow us to compete. Right now, India doesn't accept anybody in. But if that changes, we'll have a deal with much less tariffs.' Trump further said he believed India was ready to lower trade barriers for US companies, a move that could pave the way for an agreement and avert the 26 per cent tariff he had announced on April 2, which is currently on hold until July 9. #WATCH | On trade deals with India, US President Donald Trump says, "I think we are going to have a deal with India. And that is going to be a different kind of a deal. It is going to be a deal where we are able to go in and compete. Right now, India does not accept anybody in. I… — ANI (@ANI) July 1, 2025 Progress confirmed by US Treasury Earlier, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox News that Washington and New Delhi are close to reaching a deal that would lower tariffs on American goods entering India and help the South Asian nation avoid steep tariff hikes due next week. Talks intensify ahead of July 9 deadline India and the US have been engaged in talks to finalise a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) before the crucial July 9 deadline, which marks the end of a 90-day pause on proposed tariff escalations. The Indian delegation, led by Chief Negotiator Rajesh Agrawal, has extended its stay in Washington, according to an ANI report. Talks were originally scheduled for Thursday and Friday but have been prolonged as both sides push to finalise an interim agreement. Agriculture remains a sticking point As negotiations reach a critical stage, India has taken a firmer stance on agricultural issues, reflecting the political and economic sensitivities surrounding the sector. With much of its farming community made up of small-scale subsistence farmers, India remains cautious about making concessions that could affect their livelihoods. The US is pushing for lower import duties on a range of agricultural products, including apples, tree nuts, and genetically modified crops. In return, India is seeking greater market access for its labour-intensive exports such as textiles, garments, gems and jewellery, leather goods, and agricultural items like shrimp, oilseeds, grapes, and bananas. (With agency inputs)
Scroll.in
40 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
How the uncivility in India's gated communities is the result of deliberate political design
A recent piece in Scroll (Many Indians can't stand living with each other – today's uncivil politics reflects this) explored the paradox of Indian urban life, where the aspiration for peaceful, well-serviced housing enclaves often gives way to everyday violence and hostility. It astutely laid bare the contradictions of India's fraying urban fabric, where dreams of harmonious living collapse into a theatre of squabbles, a war zone of parking disputes, fistfights, and even urine-splashed vengeance. Longing for a more civil, collective ethic of neighbourliness, the author Ajay Gudavarthy concludes with a wistful reflection: Have Indian cities become 'urban battlefields' because we are constitutionally incapable of living with difference? But what if this incivility is not rooted in moral failure, or the overflow of casteism and communalism, but is a consequence of governance driven by free-market capitalism? In Indian cities, the dominant aspiration is not a shared commons but secure boundaries. From luxury towers to middle-income colonies, the urban dream has been reduced to a desire for private order with CCTV surveillance, biometric entry and exclusive schools. These spaces are more than class conveniences. They are miniature models of the larger political ethos. The disintegration of everyday life in the metropolis is not just a sign of social fragmentation; rather, it is a product of political engineering designed to erode any sense of a shared public life. Routine politics Gated communities, caste enclaves and hyper-surveilled colonies are not mere housing solutions; they are metaphors for our political time. Feeding on separation, fear and managed hostility, they normalise suspicion and embody principles that reward exclusion and punish presence. This is routine politics enacted at the level of the residential block. In this landscape, there are no collective struggles, only micro-disputes. No public grievances, only private ones. Neighbours who become enemies because of their proximity. In The Coddling of the American Mind, social psychologists Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff describe a mindset they call 'vindictive protectiveness'. It refers to a social phenomenon where people defend themselves, or their imagined values, by punishing others for perceived transgressions. It's a culture that encourages defensive aggression, transforming disagreement into offence, and discomfort into justification for revenge. Citizens no longer imagine themselves as active participants in a democracy, but as stakeholders guarding a fortress – be it their home, their gated community or their nation. As fortress politics deepens, trust erodes, and fear takes root. Consequently, the neighbour becomes a liable threat, the Muslim tenant a source of suspicion, the domestic worker a potential thief and the dog feeder a nuisance. This is what it means to be socially and politically abandoned but intimately policed. We have no tools to demand change, but every mechanism to punish deviation, whether it's a broken rule, a jarring noise or a person who doesn't belong. In the 2007 Hollywood film I Am Legend, the infected creatures (not quite zombies, not quite human) display remarkable solidarity when pursuing the living, but turn feral without a clear antagonist. Without direction, they turn on one another. This is our urban condition. Urban zombification The puzzle is not why neighbours fight, but why their anger doesn't travel upwards, toward the elites and institutions that fuel our anxieties. For historian Michael Katz, the answer lies in the strategic 'incapacitation' of a vibrant citizenry, through 'selective incorporation, mimetic reform, indirect rule, consumption, repression, and surveillance.' Under neoliberalism, where individual responsibility is glorified and structural critique discouraged, rage is deflected laterally. As bureaucracy turns opaque and the political class is insulated, our neighbours become the obstacle, not the system that makes housing unaffordable, schools inaccessible, or healthcare exploitative. When dissent is criminalised and solidarity pathologised, people increasingly channel frustration from systemic disappointment into interpersonal conflict. Not because they are irrational, but because punishing a neighbour feels more attainable than demanding systemic reforms. This is not an urban breakdown. It is urban zombification: a condition wherein public life exists without memory, meaning or direction. There was once a political language of the commons in India. Of maidan, basti, adda, sangathan, and andolan. Even when imperfect, these spaces created friction alongside fraternity, not against it. Today, we have replaced the commons with controlled access. Neighbourhoods no longer train us to live together; they teach us to avoid one another. No wonder many live in religious or caste-exclusive territories to preserve peace. But peace without encounter is not peace. It is withdrawal. When public schooling collapses, when the poor are fenced out of parks, when protestors are jailed and free speech stifled, the idea of a shared future is strangled. What rises in its place is a politics of resentment, where difference becomes injury and proximity a provocation. This prepares fertile ground for authoritarian populism. It does not need loyal citizens. It needs paranoid neighbours. The remedy to our urban predicament is not etiquette workshops or WhatsApp reminders about being respectful to our neighbours. In fact, it is not moral at all. It is political. We must recover the language of common purpose through public housing, neighbourhood councils, shared transport, and accessible education. Alternatively, we must fight for the right to cohabit meaningfully, not resentfully. Today, our neighbourhoods need more playgrounds, not surveillance; more assemblies, not FIRs; more forums, not fences. But it is one thing to call for constructing the commons and quite another to organise it. So, we must ask: who will champion the cause of the commons? And how can we build the solidarity that survives the atomisation, isolation, and mistrust of our times?
