Well, the question is certainly a good way to trigger controversial exchanges of opinion - especially in the affiliate community, where views differ wildly over past affiliate-related issues like Grand Prive, and there's a tendency for positive views of eCOGRA to be howled down.
One element that detractors most often take issue with is the manner in which three major but competing firms provided the set-up funding in an attempt to provide the industry with a practical cross-border standards and player protection system.
That was seven years ago, and if you monitor eCOGRA's progress you will find that it has grown considerably since then with a staff of professionally qualified IT and audit experts...and that it has been self-funding for some time as a result of offering standards and advisory services to business generally (ie outside the eCOGRA 'Fair and Safe' seal process)
The industry credentials of its controlling independent directors are difficult to challenge (these highly experienced people have been widely publcised so I'll not digress here on that)
There are those who feel that if it accredits casinos it cannot be unbiased in its disciplinary measures against non-compliance with its standards - the Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? argument (who will watch the watchmen), but the costs, international political hurdles and initiative to set up an independent and professionally qualified standards watchdog acceptable to some affiliates in an environment like the Internet has meant that that dream will not likely be realised.
I believe this is evidenced by the lack of harmonious regulatory measures in Europe, where governments are developing their own regimes, always with one cautious eye on the European Commission.
The CEO, Andrew Beveridge and Fair Gaming Advocate, Tex Rees are both very communicative in my experience and will always respond on questions regarding their activities. Importantly, they have shown in the past that where it has been proved that a judgement has erred, they are prepared to review and reverse.
That's a rare thing in this industry.
Of course (when it's not experiencing difficulties as I believe is the case at present) the website has a lot of interesting information on it if interested parties take the time to visit ecogra.org.
The standards introduced by this outfit have been developed in line with the technological growth of the industry, usually in expensive consultation with international specialists, so in practical terms the framework is relevant and pretty sensible, and if applied diligently can result in business efficiency improvements as well as a more sensitive approach to player issues.
This has made eCOGRA a useful liaison contact with a number of other businesses and licensing jurisdictions.
The player dispute channel appears to have proved effective for players with a beef with an eCOGRA seal operator, with the FGA turning around complaints within 72 hours in most cases, and the rare practice of regularly published dispute statistics...if memory serves the last couple of quarterlies have indicated disputes resolved in favour of the player around the 45 to 49 percent mark.
One of the side benefits of this transparency (for industry obervers at least) is that it also reports on the average percentage of disputes per casino, which gives one a useful perspective, bearing in mind that seal operators are normally large and well established groups that generate millions of transactions a month.
Finally, in a business sense a large number of the industry's top corporate groups and associations like the European Gambling and Betting Association (EGBA) have developed close ties with eCOGRA, which to my mind is an indication of the professional respect this London-based not-for-profit company has earned.
On balance, therefore, my own opinion is that inevitably there have been stumbles along the way, but there has always been a willingness to debate and if necessary redress.
Personal experience in individual incidents will always colour opinions, and there are those, usually in the affiliate community, who appear to harbour some hostility toward Beveridge and his people.
There are also many - and I count myself among them - who believe that these are professional folks who have done an enormous amount of good organisational and standards work in an industry sorely in need of guidance on proper standards and fair treatment of players.
