The Bubble Cash Economy: A Player's Guide to Winning Real Money

Yes, Bubble Cash is Legit & Pays Real Money.

Tested as of June 24, 2025: This isn't just theory. We played, we won, and we cashed out.

While it's tough to win the paid contests, it is possible. I personally won a tournament and successfully withdrew my winnings. You need a $5 minimum balance to cash out, and they take a $1 processing fee, but the money arrived in my PayPal account as promised.

If you want to try it yourself, use our referral link to get started!

Our Verdict: It's Legit, But Play Smart

Our hands-on testing confirms that Bubble Cash by Papaya Gaming is a legitimate app that pays real-money winnings. However, it operates in a high-risk environment where the financial model is built to favor the house. Claims of easy money should be taken with a grain of salt. Success requires skill, strategy, and an understanding of the game's economy.

The rest of this report provides an exhaustive, expert analysis of how the game works, its monetization model, the profitability challenges, and the serious legal questions facing the developer. Read on to become an informed player.

Section 1: Anatomy of the Game: Disambiguation and Core Mechanics

A comprehensive analysis of Bubble Cash must begin by addressing a significant point of confusion in the public domain: the distinction between the official application developed by Papaya Gaming and a multitude of imitator apps that leverage the same name. Only after isolating the legitimate app can its core mechanics and player journey be accurately detailed.

1.1 Market Confusion: Identifying the Real Bubble Cash

The mobile app marketplace is saturated with applications using the "Bubble Cash" name, leading to a conflation of user experiences that muddles public perception. A substantial volume of negative reviews, particularly on the Google Play Store, complains of an experience plagued by constant advertisements and a complete inability to win or withdraw cash. Users report being forced to watch "1 to 3 ads between each level" and describe apps with "no sign of winning money".

However, a closer examination reveals these complaints are directed at applications from different developers, such as "LTDCharif" and "bubblecashshooting.cashofthebubblecash," not Papaya Gaming. These clone apps appear to operate on a simple ad-revenue model, using the lure of cash prizes to attract users and generate income by serving them an overwhelming number of ads, with no genuine payout mechanism.

In stark contrast, the official Bubble Cash app from Papaya Gaming, available on the Apple App Store and Samsung Galaxy Store, is explicitly marketed as offering an "ad-free" experience for players participating in its cash tournaments. This fundamental difference in the user experience is the primary method for distinguishing the legitimate product from its imitators. The existence of these low-quality clones creates a "fog of war," where the serious and specific allegations against Papaya Gaming's app—such as unfair matchmaking and the use of bots—can be mistakenly dismissed by a casual observer as part of the general noise surrounding scammy mobile games. Filtering this noise is a prerequisite for a meaningful analysis.

To clarify this distinction, the following table outlines the key differences between the official Papaya Gaming app and the common imitators.

1.2 The Player Journey: From Gems to Cash

The legitimate Bubble Cash operates on a classic skill-based bubble shooter premise. In timed matches, players compete to achieve the highest score by aiming and shooting bubbles to create matches of three or more of the same color, thereby clearing the board. Speed and strategic efficiency are paramount to outscoring opponents, as all players in a given tournament receive the exact same board layout and bubble sequence, ensuring the competition is based on execution rather than luck.

The player's journey is structured around a dual-currency system designed to onboard users and incentivize real-money deposits:

• Gems: This is the game's soft, non-withdrawable currency. Players earn Gems by winning free-to-play "Freeroll Tournaments," collecting daily bonuses, or completing other in-game tasks. Gems serve as the entry fee for practice tournaments, allowing players to hone their skills without financial risk.
• Cash and Bonus Cash: To compete for real money, players must deposit funds into their account. These deposits constitute their "Cash" balance. Papaya Gaming frequently offers "Bonus Cash" as an incentive for making a deposit. This Bonus Cash is a critical component of the monetization strategy; it cannot be withdrawn directly. Instead, it must be wagered in cash tournaments. Any winnings generated from these matches are then credited to the player's withdrawable cash balance. This mechanism effectively forces players to risk their own money to "unlock" the value of the bonus, preventing them from simply depositing funds to claim a bonus and immediately cashing out.

The typical progression path starts with a tutorial, followed by encouragement to participate in Gem-based tournaments for practice. The app's user interface and promotional pop-ups then persistently guide the player toward making their first cash deposit to enter the real-money tournaments, which are framed as the core competitive experience.

Section 2: The House Always Wins: Deconstructing Papaya Gaming's Monetization Model

While Bubble Cash is marketed as a game of skill where players compete against each other, its financial architecture closely resembles that of a casino. The system is structurally designed to ensure a consistent net revenue stream for Papaya Gaming by taking a commission from every game played, a model that makes long-term profitability for the player base a statistical challenge.

2.1 Tournament Entry Fees and Prize Pools

Participation in cash tournaments requires a real-money entry fee. These fees vary depending on the tournament's prize pool and prestige, with entry points ranging from less than $1 to $6 or more. For example, a lower-tier "Rookie" tournament might have a $1 entry fee for a share of a $5 prize pool distributed among the top finishers. A higher-stakes, limited-time game like "Shamrocks & Bucks" could require a $6 entry fee to compete for a $21 prize pool. To begin playing in these cash games, users are typically required to make a minimum deposit of $5.

2.2 The "Rake": The House's Commission

The most accurate framework for understanding Papaya's revenue model is the concept of a "rake," a term borrowed from poker that describes the scaled commission fee taken by the operator of a game. In every cash tournament on Bubble Cash, the sum of all player entry fees is greater than the total prize money paid out to the winners. The difference between these two amounts is Papaya Gaming's revenue.

For instance, in a seven-player "Rookie" tournament with a $1 entry fee, Papaya collects a total of $7 from the players. However, the advertised prize pool is only $5. The remaining $2 is the house's rake, representing a commission of approximately 28.6% on the total money wagered. This figure is corroborated by user analysis on platforms like Reddit, where a player examining the similar Papaya game Solitaire Cash calculated a "30% house rake".

This commission rate is exceptionally high when compared to other online skill-based wagering industries. For example, the standard rake in online poker is typically between 2.5% and 10%. A rake of nearly 30% creates a formidable statistical headwind for any player. To be profitable in the long term, a player must not only be more skilled than their opponents but must be so much more skilled that their winnings consistently overcome this significant house advantage.

2.3 Withdrawal Mechanics and Fees

The financial structure further benefits the house through its withdrawal policies. Winnings are paid out to players via PayPal. However, this process is subject to several conditions designed to discourage frequent or small withdrawals:

• Minimum Withdrawal: A player must have at least $5 in their withdrawable balance to initiate a cash-out.
• Processing Fee: Papaya charges a flat $1 processing fee on every withdrawal transaction. This fee represents a substantial 20% of a minimum $5 withdrawal, creating a strong disincentive for players to cash out small winnings.
• Bonus Cash Forfeiture Rule: This is arguably the most potent rule for retaining player funds. Upon making a withdrawal of any amount, the player automatically forfeits their entire remaining "Bonus Cash" balance.

The combination of these elements creates a system that is inherently designed for player losses over time. A player might deposit $5 and receive a $5 bonus, giving them $10 to play with. They must then compete in tournaments with a high house edge (the rake). If they manage to increase their withdrawable balance to, for example, $6, they face a choice. They can withdraw their funds, but after the $1 fee, they will only receive $5, meaning they have merely broken even. In doing so, they also lose any remaining bonus cash, which can feel like a significant loss and psychologically pressures them to continue playing to "earn" that bonus. This cycle—playing against a high house edge to convert bonus cash into real cash while being financially penalized for withdrawing—ensures that, over a large number of games and players, the net flow of money is from the user base to Papaya Gaming. The documented experience of reviewers who invested money only to end up with a net loss is the mathematically expected outcome of this system.

Section 3: The Profitability Paradox: A Reality Check on Earning Potential

The central marketing premise of Bubble Cash is the opportunity to win real money. While this is technically true, a deep analysis of documented user experiences reveals a significant disconnect between the advertised potential and the practical reality for most players.

3.1 Marketing vs. Reality

App store descriptions and promotional materials for Bubble Cash highlight the potential for substantial winnings, with some sources claiming players can earn prizes up to $500. These claims are designed to attract users with the prospect of a lucrative side hustle.

However, independent, in-depth reviews conducted by third-party sites consistently conclude that turning a profit is highly improbable. A detailed test by SideHustles.com found that after investing $5 and spending over two hours playing, their final withdrawable balance was just $0.40, resulting in a net loss of $4.60. Similarly, a reviewer for FinanceBuzz who played for dozens of hours reported that they were never able to maintain a balance greater than $5 or $6, effectively just breaking even on their initial deposit.

The overarching consensus from these critical examinations is that while the app is legitimate in that it does pay out winnings, it is not a viable way to make money. The difficulty of consistently winning against the house rake and other players, combined with the withdrawal fees, makes it nearly impossible to generate a reliable income stream. As one review concludes, it "can quickly escalate into gambling territory if you're not careful".

3.2 The "Swagbucks" Anomaly: Profiting Through Third-Party Platforms

A fascinating and important exception to the general pattern of financial loss exists for a niche group of highly strategic users. These individuals generate profit not from their gameplay skill within Bubble Cash, but by leveraging third-party reward platforms like Swagbucks. These platforms run promotional "offers" that pay users for reaching certain milestones in other apps, such as installing the app or spending a specified amount of money.

One detailed account on a Reddit forum described a strategy that yielded a net profit of $1,036. The user deposited a total of $1,604 across three of Papaya Gaming's apps. From gameplay, they cashed out only $1,390, incurring a direct loss of $214. However, for meeting the spending requirements of the offer, they received $1,250 in rewards from Swagbucks.

This reveals a completely different economic model at play. For these users, the "side hustle" is not winning at Bubble Cash, but rather a form of financial arbitrage where the payout from the external offer exceeds the expected financial losses from playing the game. The user who detailed this strategy explicitly advised others to ignore the in-game goals related to winning:

"Don't worry about the SB goals for so many 1st place wins. This seems pretty rigged... This is all about the spend and then just churning it through to redeemable cash as efficiently as possible".

This perspective treats the game itself as a "money sink" or a mechanism that must be churned through to unlock a larger, external reward. The profit is derived from Papaya Gaming's user acquisition budget, which funds these third-party offers to attract high-spending players. This is a sophisticated and complex strategy available only to a small subset of users and is fundamentally different from the simple "play games, win money" proposition advertised to the general public.

Section 4: Voices from the Field: Synthesis of User Reviews and Complaints

Beyond the financial modeling and expert reviews, the direct feedback from the user base provides a rich, albeit often contradictory, picture of the Bubble Cash experience. Once the noise from clone apps is filtered out, a clear spectrum of opinions on the legitimate Papaya Gaming app emerges, ranging from casual enjoyment to serious allegations of misconduct.

4.1 The Positive View: Engaging and Addictive Gameplay

A significant portion of the user base expresses genuine satisfaction with the core gameplay of Bubble Cash. The app maintains high average ratings—typically 4.6 out of 5 stars or higher—on both the Apple App Store and Samsung Galaxy Store, supported by tens of thousands of reviews. Many players find the game to be entertaining, addictive, and a pleasant way to pass the time. The skill-based, competitive nature of the tournaments is a frequently cited positive aspect.

Furthermore, numerous sources confirm that the app is "legit" in the fundamental sense that it does pay out real money to winners. Users who have successfully navigated the system and received payments via PayPal validate the app's basic operational premise, distinguishing it from pure scams that offer no chance of winning.

4.2 Common Complaints and Issues

Despite the positive ratings, a deep dive into user forums and consumer protection sites reveals a consistent pattern of serious complaints against the official Papaya Gaming app.

• Withdrawal Problems and Delays: While withdrawals are possible, users report significant friction in the process. The promised processing time of two to five business days is sometimes extended to as long as 14 days. One user described a particularly frustrating experience where a $300 withdrawal was issued in fragmented parts as "refunds" to different payment accounts (PayPal and Apple Pay), making it difficult to track and confirm receipt of the full amount. This complexity stands in contrast to the simple, direct payout that users expect.
• Unauthorized Charges and Deceptive Billing: The most severe complaints, particularly those filed with the Better Business Bureau (BBB), center on billing practices that users describe as fraudulent. Multiple customers allege that Papaya Gaming made unauthorized withdrawals from their bank or PayPal accounts and enrolled them in autopay services without their consent. One user claimed they were charged $10 and then another $15 during the initial game tutorial, where on-screen prompts to learn the game mechanics allegedly triggered real-money transactions without clear disclosure. These users report having to escalate the issue to PayPal or their bank to stop the payments, indicating a lack of control within the app itself. Papaya Gaming, in its responses to BBB complaints, has denied offering subscription services and stated that all purchases require manual submission, though they have confirmed issuing refunds in these cases.
• General Scam Allegations: Reflecting the high-risk, low-reward financial model, a large number of users on public forums like Reddit categorize the entire genre of real-money skill games as a "scam" or a "pyramid scheme". They argue that the business model is inherently designed to mislead players about their true chances of profiting, preying on the hope of easy money while the house rake ensures the operator is the primary financial beneficiary.

Section 5: The Ghost in the Machine: Matchmaking, Fairness, and the Specter of Bots

The most damaging allegations against Bubble Cash strike at the very heart of its claim to be a fair, skill-based competition. A large and vocal segment of the player base believes the game is rigged through a manipulative matchmaking system and the use of undeclared, computer-controlled opponents, or "bots." These claims suggest that players are not always competing on a level playing field, but rather within a controlled environment designed to manage outcomes.

5.1 The "Fair Matchmaking" Promise

Papaya Gaming's marketing and official documentation repeatedly emphasize the fairness of its platform. The company claims its system "analyzes the skill level of player and matches them with others of similar abilities" to create a "fair game for everyone". The official Terms of Use further specify that this skill-matching algorithm considers factors such as a player's history of paid contests and their scores and results in previous games. When a player's performance improves, the system is designed to match them against "stiffer competition".

5.2 User Allegations of Rigged Matchmaking

Contrary to these official claims, a pervasive complaint among players is that the matchmaking system feels unfair and manipulative. Users frequently describe a pattern where they are allowed to win consistently at the beginning of their journey, but as soon as they start accumulating a withdrawable cash balance, they are suddenly pitted against opponents with impossibly high scores. This experience leads many to believe the system is designed to prevent players from becoming too successful.

This sentiment is echoed in communities for similar platforms like Skillz, where players describe an algorithm seemingly engineered to maintain a win rate near 50% for most users. Such a system would prevent highly skilled players from consistently profiting and draining funds from the ecosystem, while also preventing less skilled players from losing so much that they quit the game entirely. In a particularly telling example, one user of a Skillz game reported that their account was suspended for "intentionally poor play to falsely influence the algorithm, to be matched with opponents of lower skill". This suggests that the platform actively monitors and enforces its matchmaking rules to prevent players from gaining an advantage, confirming that the system is not a neutral arbiter but an active manager of game outcomes.

5.3 The Bot Allegation: Competing Against the House

The most serious allegation leveled by users is that they are not always competing against other human players. Many believe they are being matched against computer-controlled bots deployed by Papaya Gaming itself. Evidence cited by players includes facing opponents with generic, formulaic usernames like "Longingfan386," "Normalfan432," and "QuietCat243". Players also report achieving perfect or near-perfect scores, only to lose to opponents whose scores seem mathematically unattainable by a human player within the game's time limit.

One user described a multi-day tournament where they held a commanding first-place lead until the final hours, when two new accounts "swooped in," rocketed from zero to over 3,000 points to take the top spots, and then "mysteriously disappeared" from the platform afterward. These anecdotal reports, which are widespread across app store reviews and online forums, form the basis of the significant legal challenges now facing Papaya Gaming.

The structure of the platform creates a fundamental conflict of interest. As the operator, Papaya Gaming's revenue is derived directly from the rake collected on every cash game played. A player who is highly skilled and consistently wins is a net drain on the platform's ecosystem, as they withdraw more money than they deposit. Conversely, a player who wins and loses at a roughly even rate will keep their money circulating within the system for a longer period, playing more games and therefore generating more rake for the house. Since Papaya Gaming has exclusive control over the matchmaking algorithm, it possesses a powerful financial incentive to manage player win rates to maximize this rake generation. This could be achieved by matching a winning player against a vastly superior human opponent or, as alleged, by deploying a house-controlled bot programmed to win. This economic incentive provides a logical and compelling explanation for the patterns of experience reported by so many users.

Section 6: Papaya Gaming Under Scrutiny: Corporate Profile and Existential Legal Threats

Papaya Gaming has rapidly grown into a significant force in the mobile gaming market. However, its success is now shadowed by profound legal and regulatory challenges that attack both the fairness of its games and the fundamental legality of its business model. The company is currently fighting a two-front war that poses an existential threat to its operations in the United States.

6.1 Corporate Overview and Market Position

Founded in Israel in 2019, Papaya Gaming has carved out a substantial niche in the skill-based, real-money mobile gaming sector. Its portfolio is led by a trio of highly popular and lucrative titles: Solitaire Cash, Bingo Cash, and Bubble Cash. The company's growth has been explosive; by 2021, it was reportedly hosting over 15 million tournaments daily and was on a trajectory to exceed $150 million in annual revenue. It stands as a direct and major competitor to other platforms in the space, most notably Skillz and AviaGames, setting the stage for intense market and legal battles.

6.2 The Lanham Act Lawsuit: Skillz vs. Papaya Gaming

On March 4, 2024, a significant legal challenge materialized when competitor Skillz Platform Inc. filed a federal lawsuit against Papaya Gaming in the Southern District of New York. The suit alleges false advertising under the Lanham Act, a federal statute that prohibits deceptive commercial practices.

The central claim of the lawsuit is that Papaya "deceives consumers by implying that fellow competitors will be human players when it in fact deploys bots to compete against human players". Skillz argues that Papaya's marketing language, which refers to matching "players," "opponents," and "individuals," creates an implicitly false impression of a human-only competitive environment. The lawsuit further notes that when users have directly accused Papaya of using bots in app store reviews, the company has responded without ever explicitly denying the practice.

In a critical development for the case, on July 23, 2024, U.S. District Judge Denise L. Cote denied Papaya Gaming's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The court ruled that the complaint "plausibly alleges that Papaya employs bots as 'players' in its competitions while creating the impression that all players will be human competitors". This ruling allows the case to proceed to discovery and potentially a jury trial, lending significant legal weight to the long-standing user complaints.

This lawsuit is not an isolated event. It is part of a broader, aggressive legal strategy by Skillz, which previously won a landmark $42.9 million jury verdict against another rival, AviaGames, in a case involving similar allegations of bot usage and patent infringement. This precedent raises the stakes considerably for Papaya Gaming.

6.3 Regulatory Rupture: The Michigan Gaming Control Board Cease-and-Desist Order

While the Skillz lawsuit attacks the fairness of Papaya's games, a second, arguably more severe, threat attacks their legality. On October 3, 2024, the Michigan Gaming Control Board (MGCB) issued a formal cease-and-desist letter to Papaya Gaming, demanding that it immediately stop offering its real-money games, including Bubble Cash, to residents of Michigan.

Following an investigation, the MGCB concluded that Papaya Gaming is "operating illegal gambling" in direct violation of multiple state laws, including the Lawful Internet Gaming Act and the Michigan Penal Code. This action represents a direct regulatory rejection of the company's core legal defense—that its games are permissible because they are based on "skill" rather than "chance." The MGCB's letter makes it clear that under Michigan law, any game involving consideration (an entry fee), a prize, and an element of chance requires a gaming license, which Papaya does not possess.

Papaya Gaming was given a 14-day deadline to comply or face further legal action from the state, which could include felony charges against the company punishable by fines of up to $100,000 or even imprisonment.

These two concurrent challenges place Papaya Gaming in a precarious position. The federal lawsuit brought by Skillz threatens the company's reputation and financial stability by challenging the fairness of its platform. If a jury finds that Papaya has been deceiving players with bots, the damage to consumer trust could be irreparable, accompanied by substantial financial penalties. Simultaneously, the regulatory action from Michigan threatens the company's market access by challenging the fundamental legality of its business model. If other states adopt Michigan's interpretation and reclassify skill-based games as unlicensed gambling, Papaya's entire U.S. market could collapse. The company is thus forced to defend its integrity to consumers and its legality to regulators at the same time, creating a two-front war over its very existence.

Section 7: Navigating the Bubble: A Strategic Guide for Players

For individuals who choose to play Bubble Cash despite the inherent risks, a combination of tactical gameplay and disciplined financial management is essential. The following strategies, synthesized from expert reviews and experienced player feedback, can help maximize performance while mitigating potential losses.

7.1 Gameplay Strategies for Higher Scores

Success in Bubble Cash tournaments hinges on maximizing points within a tight time limit. The following tactics are crucial for achieving a competitive score:

• Prioritize Speed and Efficiency: The game clock is a primary opponent. Players should avoid spending excessive time searching for the "perfect" shot. Making rapid, decisive moves is often more effective than deliberating over every bubble. Clearing the board before the timer expires awards a significant time bonus, which is often necessary to place in the top ranks.
• Employ Advanced Tactics:
  • Bank Shots: Use the side walls of the game board to bounce bubbles into hard-to-reach places. This is a key skill for clearing obstructed clusters.
  • Hanging Bubbles: Focus on popping bubbles that are supporting other bubbles below them. A single strategic shot can cause a large cascade, clearing a significant portion of the board at once and yielding substantial points.
  • Color Elimination: When possible, concentrate on completely clearing all bubbles of a single color. Once a color is eliminated from the board, it will not appear again in the bubble launcher, simplifying subsequent moves and making it easier to create large combos.
  • Adapt to New Mechanics: Papaya Gaming periodically introduces new gameplay elements. For example, the "Color Shift" mode features special "chameleon bubbles" that change color after every shot. Players must anticipate these changes and adapt their strategy in real-time, rewarding those who can think several moves ahead.

7.2 Financial and Risk-Mitigation Strategies

Given the game's financial structure, managing risk is as important as gameplay skill.

• Practice Extensively with Gems: Before depositing any real money, players should spend considerable time in the free "Gems" tournaments. This allows for skill development and a deeper understanding of the game's mechanics without any financial exposure.
• Strategically Manage Bonus Cash: The bonus cash forfeiture rule is a critical trap to avoid. When a player makes any withdrawal, all remaining bonus cash is lost. Therefore, a prudent strategy is to attempt to play through the entire bonus cash balance before initiating a withdrawal. This maximizes the value derived from deposit incentives.
• Avoid High-Risk Tournaments: One reviewer specifically recommends that players avoid tournaments with an unlimited number of participants. While these events often advertise the largest prize pools, the probability of winning against such a large field is extremely low. Smaller tournaments with fewer players offer a statistically better chance of placing in a prize-winning position.
• Adopt a Realistic Mindset: The most important strategy is to approach the game with the correct expectations. Players should view any money deposited as a payment for entertainment, similar to buying a movie ticket or playing an arcade game. The expectation should not be to earn a profit. As multiple sources warn, the game can "quickly escalate into gambling territory if you're not careful," and should be played responsibly.

Section 8: Final Verdict: A High-Risk Proposition

The analysis of Bubble Cash reveals a product and a business model fraught with complexity and contradiction. On one hand, the application developed by Papaya Gaming is functionally legitimate. It provides an engaging and polished gameplay experience that attracts a large user base, and it does, in fact, process and pay out real-money winnings to successful players. This surface-level legitimacy, however, conceals a far more problematic and high-risk reality for the consumer.

The app's monetization architecture is not designed to facilitate a "side hustle" but is instead engineered with the precision of a casino floor. The combination of an exceptionally high commission (rake) on every tournament, a flat fee on all withdrawals that disproportionately punishes small-stakes players, and a rule that forfeits all bonus funds upon cash-out creates a powerful financial vortex. This system is structurally designed to retain player funds and ensure that, over time, the net flow of capital is from the player base to the house. For the average user, achieving sustained profitability is a statistical improbability.

Compounding the financial risks are the serious and credible allegations that undermine the platform's core claim of fair, skill-based competition. Widespread user complaints of manipulative matchmaking and impossibly skilled opponents are no longer merely anecdotal; they are now central claims in a federal lawsuit filed by a major competitor, a case that a judge has allowed to proceed. The specter of undeclared, house-controlled bots competing against human players calls into question the very integrity of every match played for cash.

Perhaps most critical of all is the existential threat posed by state regulators. The Michigan Gaming Control Board's classification of Bubble Cash and its sister apps as "illegal gambling" represents a direct assault on the legal foundation of Papaya Gaming's business in the United States. This action challenges the tenuous distinction between "games of skill" and "games of chance," a line upon which the entire industry operates in a legally gray market. If other states follow Michigan's lead, the company's addressable market could be decimated.

Ultimately, Bubble Cash is a high-risk proposition. It is not a viable method for making money but rather a form of online entertainment where the cost of play is often obscured and the potential for financial loss is significant. For consumers, the allure of cash prizes must be weighed against an unfavorable financial system and serious questions of fairness. For the developer, the mounting legal and regulatory pressures from both competitors and governments present a clear and present danger to their business model in its current form.