AIM: Examines the use of Play Information and and Management Systems (PIMS), recognizing that they are still in an early stage of development and not fully operational in any form of venue-based gaming. METHOD: Used a variety of methods, including a literature review, interviews with technology experts, focus groups with regular gamblers and an expert forum. Explored issues of configuration and content of features, the technological demands of establishing such systems, the acceptability of cards by the gambling public, players' privacy concerns, the issue of mandatory versus voluntary use of player cards and a host of implementation topics. Reviewed international experiences in Nova Scotia, Sweden, Norway and Australia. FINDINGS: Virtually all existing or planned PIMS offer play activity reports, session feedback, limit setting (pre-commitment), ability for self-imposed timeouts and a risk assessment, and different implementation options are possible for each feature. The success of a PIMS will depend on assurance of security and privacy. Players were concerned that information would be misused, for example by operators to encourage more spending. Other implementation considerations include mandatory versus voluntary use; ease of use; technological implications and requirements; incentives, marketing and promotions; and system costs. CONCLUSION: The introduction of play information and management features would benefit those who actively use the features to help them control their play, and have minimal impact on those who choose not to use them.