Is the Philippines an attractive market to invest in? PAGCOR and veteran igaming executive take differing views on the details
Philippine gaming regulator PAGCOR has defended its revamped regulatory framework amid an accusation by veteran igaming executive Harmen Brenninkmeijer that the country’s “complicated and inconsistent” gaming regulations are preventing major suppliers from entering the market.
In a lively clash with PAGCOR’s Assistant Vice President of the Remote Operations and Ancillary Services Department, Jessa Mariz R. Fernandez, during a panel session at the inaugural CiG iDEA Summit – hosted by Complete iGaming – at Manila’s Newport World Resorts on Monday, Brenninkmeijer argued that international operators have no objection to regulation but desire a system that is substantially similar to those they experience in other large gaming markets around the world.
In particular, he took aim at the requirement for operators to be tied to a physical land-based gaming venue and to undertake certifications that he claims are not usually required elsewhere.
“Why does the Philippines not attract any of the major players from around the world?” Brenninkmeijer asked. “It is because it is very difficult to operate in the Philippines and, even though it’s regulated to a certain extent, it is completely inconsistent with what an operator wants or expects.
“I speak to operators who want to come to this market because it’s a 110-million-person market which makes it very attractive. And even though there are a couple of very large incumbent players here, according to some international people, they can be beaten.
“But do they have a chance? Coming into this country is very complicated. You have to buy into land-based locations, you have to do certain certifications, [operators] can’t use their standard operating system because, if they did, they have to go through PAGCOR and that would take a very long time to be approved, and on it goes.
“If you make the rules that different and that complicated, these international companies are either going to find it too hard and go down the black-market route instead, or if they want to stick to the regulated markets, then just choose a few simpler ones to operate and leave it at that.”
However, Fernandez jumped to the country’s defence, arguing that not only are international entities showing up in the Philippines but that the Philippines has taken a leading role for the industry across the entire Asia-Pacific region.
“I think the reason why operators would like to enter the Philippine market is because of the effort the Philippines has been exerting in improving its regulations, in addressing some of the problems that are coming up in the industry,” she stated.
“And having the flexibility to listen to stakeholders, to the people that are operating in the Philippines, I think that’s one of the main reasons why many operators, international and local alike, are interested in entering the Philippines.
“So, to answer, I think that would be the improvement in the regulation and the regulatory agreements that attract operators to the Philippine market. The Philippines has taken the lead on the regulatory side of the industry.”
Brenninkmeijer, for his part, agreed that the Philippines has taken the regional regulatory lead, adding, “There’s no doubt about that. It does it better, especially with regards to igaming at the moment, than anybody else in the Asian market. In that sense, I absolutely agree with what the Philippines is doing.
“But what the Philippines also needs to do is ask, “How do I attract the real professionals to come into this market?” And that’s what I think is very important.”
According to Fernandez, PAGCOR’s regulatory framework is designed to strike a balance between the provision of an attractive operating environment and one that maintains compliance and player protection as core tenants of growth.
“When we do our KYC checks, we ask [prospective industry entrants] about their background in the gaming industry, which jurisdictions they have served or where they have provided their services,” she explained. “And when we do a system walkthrough, we immediately see their systems, their preparedness, their willingness to comply with the regulations and to correct anything found in the system that they have shown us.
“It is important that we determine whether an applicant will last so we need to see that they have the system, that they are backed by company owners or operators with experience in the gaming business and that they have legitimate needs and legitimate goals to achieve in entering the Philippine market.
“Last is if they can show us that they already have the systems in place, that they have invested in their infrastructure here in the Philippines. And with those initial things that we see during their applications we can already have a sense that this license will last for a long time.
“It’s really about investing in their gaming business here in the Philippines.”
Dig Deeper
Related stories
2026/08/30: Complete iGaming announces full program for igaming-focused CiG iDEA Summit at IAG EXPO in Manila on Monday 14 September
2026/08/25: Total Philippines gambling ad ban seen handing market back to illegal operators, data from five countries show
2026/06/26: Into the unknown with Light & Wonder’s New Markets guru
2026/08/24: PAGCOR’s Jessa Mariz R. Fernandez to deliver Keynote Address at CiG iDEA Summit at Newport World Resorts on Monday 14 September 2026
2026/08/30: Complete iGaming announces full program for igaming-focused CiG iDEA Summit at IAG EXPO in Manila on Monday 14 September
2026/08/25: Total Philippines gambling ad ban seen handing market back to illegal operators, data from five countries show
2026/06/26: Into the unknown with Light & Wonder’s New Markets guru
2026/08/24: PAGCOR’s Jessa Mariz R. Fernandez to deliver Keynote Address at CiG iDEA Summit at Newport World Resorts on Monday 14 September 2026
The Backstory
Philippines’ online gaming opening meets investor scrutiny
The clash between PAGCOR and veteran iGaming executive Harmen Brenninkmeijer reflects a broader tension that has followed the Philippines’ attempt to turn a large, partly informal online gambling market into a regulated industry attractive to global capital. The country offers what few Asian jurisdictions can: a population of more than 110 million, widespread mobile payments, deep gaming familiarity and a regulator willing to license digital products. But the same framework that gives the market its legitimacy also adds cost, approvals and structural constraints that international operators may not encounter elsewhere.
PAGCOR’s position is that those requirements are the price of channeling players into legal platforms, protecting consumers and building an industry that can survive political scrutiny. Critics argue the rules remain too distinctive, too slow and too closely tied to land-based gaming infrastructure to draw the largest global brands. That debate has become more urgent as the Philippines moves from early experimentation into a more mature phase, with tighter ownership checks, marketing controls, fee obligations and technology approvals reshaping the business case for new entrants.
A summit built around a market at an inflection point
The discussion unfolded at the CiG iDEA Summit, a forum designed specifically to examine the commercial and regulatory forces shaping Asia-Pacific iGaming. Complete iGaming had framed the event as a response to the speed of change in the region, particularly in the Philippines, where PAGCOR’s evolving framework has become a reference point for other jurisdictions considering regulated online gambling. The published agenda showed how central the Philippine question had become, with sessions on market entry, localization, outsourcing models, suppliers, Special Class BPOs and industry sustainability. The full CiG iDEA Summit program positioned the event as a venue for assessing whether regulation can support growth without giving illegal operators room to regain share.
Jessa Mariz R. Fernandez’s role at the summit was also significant. Before the event, Complete iGaming announced that the PAGCOR official would deliver the keynote and join a panel on future-proofing the sector. Her remit covers remote operations, electronic gaming licensing, service-provider accreditation and approval of platforms and content, placing her near the center of the regulatory changes under debate. The announcement of Fernandez as keynote speaker underscored PAGCOR’s intention to explain its approach directly to operators, suppliers and investors rather than leave the market narrative to critics or intermediaries.
That context matters because the Philippines is no longer being judged only against other Asian markets. Operators compare it with Europe, Latin America and newly regulated jurisdictions where licenses may not require the same local structuring. Suppliers assess whether certification pathways and platform approvals can accommodate global technology stacks. Investors ask whether regulatory certainty offsets obligations that can reduce flexibility after acquisition.
Regulation as a channelization strategy
The defense of PAGCOR’s framework rests heavily on channelization: the migration of players from illegal offshore sites to licensed platforms subject to oversight. In a separate analysis, Arden Consult’s Tonet Quiogue argued that Philippine policy had helped reverse years of dominance by unlicensed online gambling. The article on the risks of a total advertising ban said legal online share had risen sharply after PAGCOR cut e-games license fees, required know-your-customer checks, accredited the supply chain and increased enforcement against illegal sites. It also said licensed e-games revenue more than tripled from 2023 to 2025 as online gambling overtook land-based casinos for the first time. That analysis of the proposed gambling advertising ban framed the issue as a choice between gambling the state can supervise and gambling it cannot see.
The same argument helps explain PAGCOR’s insistence on compliance-heavy market entry. The regulator has sought to make legality commercially viable while ensuring licensees have real infrastructure, accountable ownership and systems capable of monitoring transactions. That approach can frustrate foreign operators accustomed to standardized platform deployments, but it gives PAGCOR leverage that does not exist against illegal operators. Licensed companies can be fined, suspended, compelled to stop promotions and required to correct weaknesses. Offshore sites can be blocked, but they can also reappear under new domains.
The stakes are fiscal as well as regulatory. PAGCOR remittances help fund enforcement and broader government programs. If licensed revenue falls because legal operators cannot market, scale or compete effectively, the enforcement budget weakens while consumer demand may simply move offshore. That is why the current dispute is not a narrow disagreement over paperwork. It is a test of whether the rules that built the legal market can also attract the operators and suppliers needed to keep it competitive.
Suppliers see opportunity, but local lessons have been costly
Global suppliers have shown interest in the Philippines, though not always with the assumptions they brought from more mature markets. Light & Wonder’s experience is instructive. In an interview with Complete iGaming, Magdalena Podhorska-Okolow, the company’s vice president of new markets, described the Philippines as an eye-opener after the supplier became the first to receive a PAGCOR license. Light & Wonder expected its land-based casino content to translate naturally online because omnichannel strategies had worked elsewhere. Instead, it found that many online Filipino players lived far from casinos and had little attachment to familiar land-based brands. The company had to adjust quickly, using its aggregation platform and internal studios to build a more localized offering. That profile of Light & Wonder’s new markets strategy showed that regulatory approval is only one hurdle; product-market fit is another.
The lesson cuts both ways. For PAGCOR, the entry of a major supplier supports the claim that sophisticated international companies are willing to participate under the Philippine model. For critics, the example shows that even well-capitalized groups must spend time and resources navigating local complexity, technical approvals and unexpected consumer patterns. A market can be promising and still be difficult to enter.
Localization also affects operators deciding whether to build in-house online capabilities, outsource to specialist providers or buy an existing accredited business. The Philippines’ link between land-based venues and online operations may support responsible oversight and draw on established casino infrastructure. But it can also deter purely digital operators that prefer direct licensing models without physical partnerships or legacy assets.
Consolidation exposes the limits of buying a shortcut
As PAGCOR tightened conditions, the market began to consolidate. A moratorium on new Gaming System Administrator applications and a new minimum guaranteed fee structure created pressure on underperforming license holders. Arden Consult warned that a wave of “PAGCOR license for sale” offers could mislead potential investors into thinking accreditation can be acquired like an ordinary asset. In reality, buyers must purchase the company and its regulated business while still obtaining PAGCOR approval for changes in ownership or control. The report on the complications of acquiring PAGCOR-accredited iGaming companies said investors also inherit liabilities, including unpaid fees, penalties, tax exposure, player-fund obligations and compliance risks.
That warning reinforces the point raised in the current debate. The Philippines is not offering a frictionless route into Asia’s most advanced regulated iGaming market. It is offering access conditioned on continuing regulatory authority. Platform administrator credentials, player wallets, settlement accounts, domains, brands and technical systems cannot simply be transferred or launched by private agreement. PAGCOR must approve the relevant arrangements, and the accredited operator remains responsible for player accounts, reporting, funds and compliance.
For strategic investors, those constraints affect valuation. A license holder below revenue benchmarks may look like a scarce asset during a moratorium, but its value depends on whether a buyer can satisfy PAGCOR, fund the minimum obligations and operate within the approved structure. For international operators, the acquisition path may be no simpler than applying under a more familiar regime elsewhere.
The balance that will decide the market’s next phase
The Philippines has achieved something rare in Asia: it has built a regulated online gambling sector large enough to compete with illegal operators and visible enough to attract global attention. That achievement gives PAGCOR credibility when it argues that its framework protects players, supports enforcement and has made the country a regional leader. It also raises expectations. A market that wants international operators and major suppliers must persuade them that compliance burdens are predictable, approvals are timely and structural requirements serve a clear purpose.
Brenninkmeijer’s criticism and Fernandez’s defense therefore point to the same underlying challenge. If rules are too loose, the market risks consumer harm, political backlash and the return of illegal dominance. If rules are too complex or idiosyncratic, legitimate operators may stay away, leaving incumbents stronger and offshore sites more attractive to players seeking choice. The outcome will shape not only Philippine investment but the broader Asia-Pacific regulatory model now being watched by other governments.
The next phase will depend on whether PAGCOR can maintain discipline while reducing unnecessary friction. Investors want evidence that the Philippines is open for business. The regulator wants proof that entrants are built to last. The market’s appeal lies in reconciling those demands before illegal competitors exploit the gap.
