Deep Descent

What is Deep Descent?

A memorandum of understanding, signed on Monday, aims to tackle rising gambling exposure among schoolchildren through smartphones. The aim is to integrate preventative education with broader school-based initiatives.

The agreement was signed at Osan Seongho Middle School and links gambling prevention education with a “phone free” strategy alongside RAS education. RAS is an approach combining reading, arts and sports and is designed to occupy students’ time with structured, screen-free activities. 

The dual approach seeks not only to limit access to gambling content on smartphones but also to provide meaningful alternatives that reduce overall reliance on digital devices.

About Deep Descent

In the wake of their licence suspensions, announced a fortnight previously by the UK Gambling Commission, it is tempting to see the demise of BresBet and Bet St George as evidence that it is simply too easy to become a British gambling operator.

The two related businesses are associated with entrepreneur Nic Brereton and had only recently started operating under their own licences. BresBet was licensed in February 2025, while Bet St George received its licence in December and launched in March this year.

At launch six months ago, Brereton told iGB that Bet St George would use the experience he gained applying advanced data models in the medical sector to improve the customer experience in betting.

How to play Deep Descent

However, before he could even board the first cruise, Grant was told that he would not be able to proceed onboard. Grant had his son and partner along with him. The company only then went to inform Grant that he had been placed on a “no sail” list, effectively a ban, because of “breaking the house rules” in the casino.

Royal Caribbean informed Grant that he had broken various casino rules. While Grant filed a legal action against Royal Caribbean with the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal, he has enjoyed qualified success so far.

Grant is suing the company to reimburse him for the AUD 22,000 he is owed. However, his case was at first shot down. Grant, however, appealed the decision and saw the court agree that it qualified as a consumer-trader dispute.