SINGAPORE: When it comes to claw machines, most of us have walked away empty-handed more times than we’ve won.
And in Hong Kong, where claw machine arcades have become almost ubiquitous, a recent rise in official complaints could soon prompt action by the city’s consumer watchdog.
Complaint cases have more than doubled in the past year, according to officials from Hong Kong’s Consumer Council, which said it received 42 complaints from January to November this year, as compared to just 16 cases for the whole of 2023.
“These games rely purely on luck and use valuable prizes such as game consoles, mobile phones and even cash to attract consumers,” said Gilly Wong Fung-han, the council’s chief executive in a statement on Monday (Dec 16).
“We believe it’s about time to review whether we should regulate claw machine businesses,” she added.
Claw machine businesses are not regulated under the Places of Public Entertainment Ordinance in Hong Kong, meaning operators and vendors do not need a license to set up shop.
Complaints filed have mostly been over machines that make it impossible to pick up items, Wong said.
These also included prizes which do not fall out properly as well as a lack of support from arcade staff or operators following up on technical issues.
“To increase revenue, the industry often modifies claw settings or introduces obstacles inside claw machines to make winning more challenging,” the council said.
Modifications or obstacles should also be “reasonable”, it added, and terms of play should be “clearly stated” to provide a “positive consumer experience, as excessive difficulty or unfair settings could aggravate consumers”.
“Fair and clear rules” for winning prizes should also be displayed, it said.
The council also shared details about cases filed by locals who fell victim to claw machines.
In one case, a man spent HK$500 (S$85) trying to win a waffle maker from an “instant prize” claw machine – guaranteeing immediate rewards to players.
After nearly an hour of playing, he received only a few trinkets in return and refused the prize. He contacted the operator, who offered him a chocolate fountain machine instead. But no agreement was made despite extended discussions and he filed an official complaint.
Terms and conditions regarding the collection of prizes were also nowhere to be seen around the machine.
“As such, he believed that consumers should have the right to select their reward,” the council said.
