Unenforceable Rules
Regulators are holding online gambling operators' feet to the fire, but in some instances, like prevent account sharing, their hands are tied.
The Bulletin Board
NEWS: The Massachusetts Gaming Commission wants sports betting operators to do a better job detecting underage customers. But is that a reasonable request?
NEWS: Indiana is already taking online gambling off the table in 2024.
NEWS: Californians are not interested in sports betting.
AROUND the WATERCOOLER: What’s good for SI is good for gambling affiliates? AI content in the affiliate sector.
STRAY THOUGHTS: I need to explain this better.
SPONSOR’S MESSAGE - Underdog: the most innovative company in sports gaming.
At Underdog we use our own tech stack to create the industry’s most popular games, designing products specifically for the American sports fan.
Join us as we build the future of sports gaming.
Visit: https://underdogfantasy.com/careers
MGC Wants to Crackdown on Underage Bettors
During a Monday meeting, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission spent quite a bit of time interrogating operators on underage bettors accessing accounts.
As Cover’s Geoff Zochodne tweeted, “It’s clear someone spoke to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission about underage online sports betting recently, as it prompted a lot of talk during today’s meeting. Commissioners used examples of kids wagering via parental account, older friend allowing [a] younger friend to do same.”
Zochodne has an excellent write-up of the conversation here, including how operators identify and combat underage access to mobile apps.
During the meeting, several operators divulged the results of investigations into underage access:
Caesars Sportsbook suspended zero accounts in Q3.
WynnBet also suspended zero accounts in Q3.
DraftKings reported five suspensions in Q3 and six in Q2.
Penn reported three suspensions in Q3, five in Q2, and six in Q1.
MGC commissioners had questions, with Commissioner Jordan Maynard being the most blunt, pointing to the results of an NCAA survey to crystallize his concern.
“I’m just going to be honest: I don’t believe that the number is zero or single digits,” Maynard said. “Take a look at the NCAA survey. You’ll see that is definitely happening, and it’s happening in high numbers.”
Underage gambling should be a concern. But I’m not sure how we increase detection. Short of drastic measures (that no one wants to implement), little can be done.
These types of unenforceable rules are an area I have covered in the past (during the Iowa and Iowa State proxy account investigations), and unfortunately, like an adult buying booze for a minor, getting to zero is an impossibility. You might catch bumbling fools, but the vast majority will go undetected.
Even heavy-handed measures like forced biometric logins aren’t foolproof. Something as invasive as recording the person placing their bets doesn’t guarantee they are not placing that bet for someone else.
The current policies that are being discussed to combat account sharing merely add friction without doing anything to solve the problem.
Sponsorship opportunity
Want to sponsor the fastest-growing newsletter in the gambling space? Straight to the Point has multiple sponsorship opportunities available.
Reach out to Steve at iGamingPundit.com for more details.
Indiana Throws In the Online Gambling Towel
A state legalizing online gambling in 2024 was always a bit of a long shot. In the past couple of weeks, two of the best candidates have seen their chances greatly diminish.
Last week, it was Maryland that was downgraded following the release of an online gambling study by The Innovation Group that concluded online gambling cannibalizes land-based gambling to the tune of 10% - a number I have some questions about.
And now it’s Indiana. Indiana was a top candidate last year, but key lawmakers are already punting in 2024, citing the optics of Former Rep. Sean Eberhart pleading guilty in a federal corruption case. Eberhart supported a 2019 bill in exchange for a promised post-legislative job with Spectacle Gaming at a salary of $350,000.
Per local reporting:
“Both House Speaker Todd Huston (R-Fishers) and Senate President Pro Tem Rodric Bray (R-Martinsville) agreed the fallout from that will rule out any gaming legislation in the upcoming session.
“It taints the Statehouse,” Bray said. “It diminishes the confidence that people have in the integrity of the Statehouse. It causes an awful lot of problems and it makes it particularly difficult to engage in that kind of policy.”
Bray believes the fallout might extend past 2024, putting Indiana online gambling hopes on ice for years to come.
It’s not quite December, but here are my updated 2024 online casino legalization rankings (and keep in mind, none of these candidates are good candidates):
California Voters Oppose Legal Sports Betting
Californians are not enamored with the idea of online sports betting. The state continues to be an outlier in polls and surveys following the failed sports betting ballot initiatives of 2022.
Reminder: Prop 27, the 2022 online sports betting effort, received just 17.7% support and polled terribly.
The recently filed online sports betting initiatives aren’t faring very well in polling.
As Matthew Kredell of Play USA reported, A recent survey by FM3 Research shows just 30% support for mobile betting, with 63% of Californians opposed. Internal polling from the group that filed the initiatives isn’t much better, with Kredell reporting support of just 35% but with more undecideds, as only 48% oppose online sports betting.
Mike Mazzeo of Legal Sports Report tweeted an image of the FM3 polling:
Even a favorable rewording by the supporters of the initiatives, “Would you support or oppose a law allowing sports betting in California if run by tribal casinos who acquire the offshore sports betting assets, have them licensed and in turn offer a regulated taxed online sports betting industry to Californians by all licensed casinos, racetracks and cardrooms?” only increased support to 50%.
The longer California sports betting remains fractured, with groups at odds with one another, the longer it will take to win back the support of Californians. And as Victor Rocha explains, getting to “yes” in California takes total buy-in from everyone involved.
Around the Watercooler
Social media conversations, rumors, and gossip.
One of the big gambling adjacent stories is the recent allegation that Sports Illustrated (SI) was not only writing articles with AI but also creating fake AI writers.
As Dustin Gouker wrote on LinkedIn:
In a LinkedIn reply, industry veteran Alec Driscoll, currently working at Delaware North, stated, “I’d bet a $ some of your peers are doing this right now.”
I agree with Driscoll. There is a near-zero chance affiliate companies are not publishing AI-generated content and a high likelihood that some are creating fake authors (which has always been a common practice in the sector, with single writers using multiple pseudonyms).
Former Sports Illustrated writer Jeff Pearlman also had some thoughts.
Presently, undisclosed AI content seems unethical, but I wonder how we will feel about this in 5, 10, or 50 years?
Stray Thoughts
A non-gambling tweet from Tyler Austin Harper (someone who randomly came across my X feed) has me thinking:
“An editor told me years ago, when I made a remark about the anti-intellectualism of the public, that many regular people read seriously and many more are hungry for ideas. What gets called “anti-intellectualism” is often the hostility of people to bad ideas that don’t have stakes.
As someone who has been interacting in both circles for much of my life, this rings very true. My own experience is that “regular people” don’t have the time or energy to deal with what they would consider nonsense and trivial ideas. Academics can sit around and interrogate anything and everything at a granular level; most people just don’t have the time.
In a second tweet, he said:
“Anyway that remark stuck with me and I think about it all the time. Since then I have really *tried* to assume that the average reader is smart and can grapple with hard ideas, and if they don’t like what I have to say I begin with the assumption that it’s a “me” problem.”
This is also interesting, as it’s something I say when I talk to other martial arts instructors. If someone (particularly a kid) doesn’t know something you think they are supposed to or is struggling with something, I blame myself first. It’s not 100% always my fault, but if I approach these situations with that mindset (I’m not explaining this properly), the outcome will be better for all involved. More kids will get the material, and I’ll be able to communicate the concept better in the future.