Cameroonian authorities have centralized all online gaming payment solutions under a single operator. While justified by security concerns related to gambling, this move is negatively impacting the burgeoning African video game industry. In this interview, Olivier Madiba, founder and CEO of Kiro’o Games—Central Africa's first professional video game studio, recognized internationally for promoting African values through entertainment—discussed the detrimental effects of this government decision on his studio's operations.

We Are Tech: In a recent X post, you mentioned that the Cameroonian government's decision to grant exclusive online gaming payment rights to InTouch has disrupted your services. Could you explain how this decision has specifically affected your business as an online gaming provider focused on entertainment, not gambling?

Olivier Madiba : I believe the Ministry of Territorial Administration's directive was primarily intended for gambling and online lottery services. However, because the legal term "online games" was used, those of us in the video game industry, which falls under culture and entertainment, have been unfairly impacted.

It’s important to understand that we provide a cultural entertainment service. We offer video game enthusiasts a competitive alternative, allowing them to enjoy gaming experiences rooted in African cultural references. This is our way of contributing to a market largely dominated by Western or Asian models, particularly Japanese ones. In contrast, gambling and lottery games are financial bets that can generate monetary winnings and, indeed, may be used for money laundering.

To comply with the directive, we are now obliged to switch payment providers in just three weeks, after years of establishing stable payments with our existing provider. While many payment aggregators exist, very few are reliable. We had to painstakingly vet them, case by case, at significant research and development (R&D) cost.

Just as we were overcoming that challenge, being forced to use a single operator now poses a major threat to our digital economy. This monopoly gives the selected operator the power to dictate terms in the most critical area: cash flow.

To illustrate the impact, for over ten days, we've received no payments from our customers—not just for video games, but for all our cross-media activities, including coloring books, comic books, Rebuntu, and more. These are consequences the government should have anticipated. The onboarding process with InTouch is, understandably, lengthy, despite their team's goodwill.

For a startup like ours, if we were 100% dependent on the Cameroonian market, this decision could push us straight into bankruptcy. And yet, as I often say, I created this job from scratch—both for myself and for my team."

WAT: Given that the president has himself encouraged digital innovation, why is it vital to avoid exclusivity and prioritize a competitive environment within this fintech segment?

Olivier Madiba : Given that online payments in Francophone Africa are made at least 80% via Mobile Money—If I’m not mistaken—avoiding a monopoly in this sector is crucial for two key reasons.

First, many fintech companies that aggregate Mobile Money services count online gambling operators—lotteries, sports betting, and other online gaming platforms—as major clients. Removing this customer base would severely cut their revenue, threatening their survival and the jobs they support.

Second, competition among these fintech companies is key to ensuring quality service. Clients like Kiro’o Games have switched aggregators at least two or three times or use multiple providers simultaneously to maintain service stability. A monopoly would eliminate this crucial safeguard, eroding customer trust and damaging the entire digital ecosystem that's been built over years.

WAT : Do you understand the government's security argument for this decision? It seems that authorities have not fully grasp the consequences this could have on the digital product value chain. Given your experience and based on conversations with industry experts, are there viable alternatives to a single-operator monopoly?

Olivier Madiba : We understand and support the government's core decision to regulate and track financial flows related to online gambling. However, we believe this should have been done through discussions with key stakeholders who understand the ecosystem, ensuring harmony within the value chain and anticipating potential consequences.

It's important to recognize the fundamental difference between video game operators like us and gambling or lottery operators. Our players pay for an entertainment service they actively control. In contrast, gambling players pay for the uncertain hope of financial gain, over which they have virtually no control. This crucial distinction is why gambling requires a license, while our industry does not.

For instance, the government could establish clear conditions that payment aggregators must meet to process payments for online gambling, or even online gaming in general. These conditions could include mandatory participation in rigorous government audits or the implementation of monitoring and control protocols, similar to those in place for banks. Additionally, the government should clearly define "online gambling" to avoid conflating simple entertainment games with gambling, preventing unnecessary regulatory burdens on unrelated digital activities.

We also believe this decision should have been made in consultation with the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications. These ministries have been instrumental in integrating finance and technology in Cameroon and could have provided valuable expertise. Their input would likely have helped anticipate potential implications and define appropriate measures to mitigate any negative impacts."

WAT : How is this decision being received in the fintech sector? Does it create regulatory uncertainty that could deter investors? Given that Central Africa, especially Cameroon, already attracts less venture capital than markets like Kenya or Nigeria, do you think this could further hinder investment in the region's fintech sector?

Olivier Madiba : We have closely followed the public policy developments on this issue, and indeed, the successive decisions made by the authorities have introduced a level of uncertainty. Fintech is highly sensitive to changes in the economic environment.

We are competing on a global scale, and to succeed, we need to operate as a united and well-structured ecosystem. In many countries where online payment services are thriving, regulation plays a crucial role. Just as a physical economy requires efficient financial infrastructure, a digital economy needs highly sophisticated payment channels. For investors, this demand represents a real opportunity, as every transaction generates fees.

Take, for example, the competition in money transfer solutions—it has clearly benefited customers. Costs have decreased, and transaction volumes have risen. Similarly, companies like ours have been able to grow in ways that would have seemed impossible a decade ago. Back then, few would have bet on the viability of such a business model.

From this perspective, introducing uncertainty or excessive market concentration in our digital economy would be a costly mistake in an increasingly digital world. While this monopoly decision may indeed enhance security, I sincerely believe we can achieve that important goal while maintaining a sufficient level of competition to protect consumers from the risks associated with a near-monopoly.

WAT : Can you provide a clear explanation of how the payment system functions in these transactions, outlining the roles of the key players? How has government intervention altered these dynamics, and what are the resulting opportunities and risks?

Olivier Madiba : Here's how a typical digital payment with Mobile Money works:

The customer initiates a payment in a video game (or application) where they want to purchase digital content–not for gambling.

The system prompts them for their phone number and email to generate a receipt.

Once the customer provides this information, Kiro'o's server connects with the payment aggregator's server.

The aggregator's server then communicates with the Mobile Money provider's server, either Orange or MTN.

The player completes the payment through Orange or MTN.

The payment confirmation is sent back to the aggregator, who then forwards it to us.

Finally, the player receives payment confirmation and the digital content within the game.

It took us years to refine this process. Finding a reliable aggregator to handle steps three through six flawlessly is incredibly difficult.

Many aggregators are simply unreliable. By imposing a monopoly on a single aggregator, you eliminate competition, which removes the incentive to improve their technology. This could result in payment failures in as many as half of all transactions. Imagine customers making payments that you can't validate, even though their money has been debited.

That's the risk inherent in this monopoly decision—it could severely damage hard-earned consumer trust, disrupt the payment value chain, and impede the president's goal of digitizing our economy.

Interview by Idriss Linge