IGA panel: Predictions markets a ‘serious threat’ and could cause ‘seismic shift’ in regulation

Speakers:

– Gene Johnson, EVP – Victor-Strategies, moderated

– Scott Crowell, Founding Partner, Crowell Law Office – Tribal Advocacy Group

– Joe Webster, Managing Partner, Hobbs, Straus, Dean & Walker, LLP

– Judy Shapiro, Partner, Dragonflly Law Group, LLC

– Stay tuned on Gambling Insider’s LinkedIn account this week for more on sweepstakes from the outspoken-as-ever Victor Rocha

Speakers at an IGA Panel, at which Gambling Insider was in attendance, believe verticals such as predictions markets and sweepstakes casinos could create a “seismic shift” in how sports betting and gaming are regulated.

Believing predictions markets in particular could pose a “serious threat” to the gaming sector, the panel, comprising of Scott Crowell, Joe Webster and Judy Shapiro, said they were not being “alarmist” in putting forward their claims.

Moderator Gene Johnson began the discussion with a 10-minute presentation on what he dubs “Gaming 2.0,” providing a number of examples of successful sweepstakes casinos, crypto operators and predictions market providers, among others.

Of those he singled out, Australia-based VGW was name-checked as the top sweepstakes operator, using celebrity promoters such as Paris Hilton, Michael Phelps and Ryan Seacrest.

Sweepstakes has taken $1.5bn in California alone, while PrizePicks and Underdog were once again named-checked as perceived threats in the DFS 2.0 category.

On the predictions market side, the most topical vertical in recent news, Kalshi and Robinhood were understandably mentioned.

As ever at IGA, the language here was not neutral, as tribal gaming representativeswant to ‘bring the hammer down’ on sweepstakes and other verticals

Crowell began his contribution by stating that predictions market providers are the biggest current threat to tribal gaming. If he was asked the same question in December, however, he would have pinpointed sweepstakes.

Operators like this, Crowell said, use the defence that “state law doesn’t matter.” He further suggested that, taking note of the success and relative regulatory freedom these sites are currently enjoying, FanDuel and DraftKings will soon follow suit in these areas, posing a “serious threat to the industry.”

Webster agreed, adding that we could be seeing a potentially seismic shift in how sports betting and gaming are regulated.

Indeed, right now, Webster noted, tribal operators are facing the unique issue of there being “so many threats at the same time.”

Particular attention was paid to sweepstakes during the panel, although predictionsmarkets have now overtaken sweepstakes as the industry’s most-discussed topic

In Shapiro’s eyes, technology today enables companies to ‘make something look like something else,’ i.e. gambling sites in all but name operating in states by circumventing tribal compacts that would normally prevent them from running.

The panel as a whole was consistent in its voice and theme, condemning the aforementioned verticals that have the potential to take so much revenue from tribal gaming.

But what can be done for the tribal industry, when class-action lawsuits are being circumvented by the defences put forward by this new breed of firm? Especially with the Attorney General’s office, according to the panel, “not doing its job.”