Did We Just Become Best Friends?
California tribes and commercial sports betting operators have found a point of agreement... They all hate the current effort to legalize sports betting in the state.
The Bulletin Board
NEWS: California tribes and major commercial operators have joined forces to oppose the latest sports betting initiative.
BEYOND the HEADLINE: From the archives: Customers deserve legal options, but only if it benefits me.
WEEKEND CATCHUP: It’s legislation season, and there are updates on gambling bills in California, Virginia, Alabama, and New Jersey.
NEWS: Analysis and outlook of New York’s latest online casino bill.
AROUND the WATERCOOLER: Affiliate blinders.
STRAY THOUGHTS: Remembering Martin Luther King Jr.
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
California Sports Betting Effort Creates Strange Bedfellows
I’ve been concerned that the current effort to legalize sports betting in California will further delay legitimate attempts to bring mobile betting to the state.
As I previously reported, the effort, led by Kasey Thompson and Reeve Collins, seeks “to cleanse offshore sportsbooks through some sort of sale to tribal entities in California.”
But maybe I’ve been wrong; perhaps the doomed effort will bring the tribes and commercial operators (two groups that were at odds over the 2022 effort) together.
In a statement to Play USA, Nathan Click, a spokesman for the Sports Betting Alliance representing FanDuel, DraftKings, Fanatics, and BetMGM, said the group opposes the efforts.
“We recently learned that the authors of two sports wagering initiatives in California are trying to find financial support for signature gathering from sports betting operators. In the interest of clarity, and consistent with our previously stated opposition to these measures, we can commit that SBA won’t be funding or otherwise supporting either of these sports wagering initiatives.”
The enemy of my enemy situation may help mend some of the fences torn down during the 2022 initiative battles that turned ugly very early on. In a recent episode of the World Series of Politics podcast, Pechanga.net publisher Victor Rocha also noted the hiring of Rikki Tanenbaum by FanDuel, who, as Rocha put it, could help teach the commercial operators how to “talk to tribes.”
However, the California online poker battles from a decade ago also saw some shifting coalitions to no avail. Still, on the plus side, it appears the commercial operators have come to terms with their previous California follies.
The question is, are they willing to adjust their goals and get on tribal time? “We measure time in a different manner than the industry does,” Rocha said on the World Series of Politics podcast. “We don’t measure it in financial quarters.”
Beyond the Headline: We’re Pro-Legalization [Sometimes]
A small side story to keep an eye on going forward in California is how commercial operators’ opposition to the current legalization effort is framed now and in the future.
Going back to those California online poker fights, PokerStars received some terrible PR when it opposed a 2016 legalization effort that would keep the company out of the market through a bad actor clause - which was the tribes playing a trump card.
Legalization supporters quickly pointed out that PokerStars and the Poker Players Alliance (which was heavily funded by PokerStars at the time) were only amenable to legalization if it benefited the company. While arguing for legalization from the consumer POV, it opposed the legislation that included a bad actor clause (on the grounds it was anti-competitive).
That makes perfect sense from a business perspective but flew in the face of previous arguments that Californians deserved legal online poker and that the tribes were the obstructionists.
Of note, there was never another serious effort to legalize online poker in California.
Tribal sports betting efforts were never rooted in Californians deserving legal, regulated options, so tribal opposition to the current attempt is safe from criticism. But that is the argument the commercial operators were making. The current proposal would keep them out of the California market, and not surprisingly, they oppose legalization efforts they aren’t a part of.
It’s a wholly acceptable position, considering the absurdity of the plan. Still, I wonder if it [a self-serving position to benefit the companies and not Californians] will resurface as a talking point.
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.
Weekend Catchup: Gambling Bills Introduced in California, Virginia, Alabama, and New Jersey
California cardrooms are mobilizing opposition to a bill (SB 549) that gives tribes standing (one use) to sue California cardrooms for offering certain table games that tribes argue go against their tribal exclusivity. Per a press release, “more than 200-plus California local elected officials, union leaders, community leaders, and cardroom employees” descended on the capitol in opposition to SB 549.
Legislation in Virginia would remove the betting prohibition on in-state colleges and universities. The bill would still prohibit prop betting on Virginia teams and athletes. Per the summary, SB 124 “Permits betting, with the exception of proposition betting, on Virginia college sports.”
Alabama lawmakers met behind closed doors on Wednesday to discuss a comprehensive gambling expansion package. Details were not revealed, but the effort is believed to encompass lottery, casinos, and sports betting.
New Jersey State Sen. Vincent Polistina has introduced a bill that would raise the threshold from one to three years for an online gambling account to be considered dormant. The bill would also allow account owners to reclaim funds rather than forfeit them to the state.
NY State Sen Addabbo Unveils Online Casino Bill
And there is one more bill to consider today, courtesy of New York State Sen. Joseph Addabbo.
Addabbo’s new bill, S8185, attempts to solve several lingering problems and generate revenue and problem gambling funding to garner enough support.
Addabbo’s case is that 1) the state needs money to fill a budget deficit, and 2) consumers deserve legal, regulated sites and additional funding for research and treatment to counteract the social harms of gambling.
On those fronts, S 8185 delivers, with a 30.5% tax rate (estimated to generate $1 billion in tax revenue annually) and $11 million in annual problem gambling funding.
My previous reporting on the 2024 online casino effort in New York can be found here, and Legal Sports Report has a good recap covering all the details of the new online casino bill.
Addabbo and online gambling supporters will have to overcome several concerns, including the fear online will cannibalize land-based gaming properties in both revenue and jobs.
The bill seeks to quell those concerns by creating a $25 million fund for retraining and the inclusion of live dealer games, which would create jobs. But by addressing them, it also legitimizes them.
An outside group representing BetMGM, DraftKings, Fanatics, and FanDuel has echoed Addabbo in a recent advertising spot touting online casinos as an alternative to raising taxes and cutting services.
Around the Watercooler
Social media conversations, rumors, and gossip.
As Jessica Welman noted on X, it’s strange how affiliates pretend some operators don’t exist because they don’t have an affiliate deal.
To its credit, Catena’s websites accurately display all three Vermont operators, and the company went back and revised the press release. The original press release reads: “Vermont’s Department of Liquor and Lottery selected two operators – DraftKings and Fanduel – to go live on 11 January.”
And this is not an issue isolated to Catena.
I see similar instances across affiliate sites, which often makes getting accurate information about licensees difficult. The story should be the story, regardless of affiliate deals in place.
As much as the regulated affiliate sector complains about black market sites muddying the waters and confusing consumers, this behavior does the same, albeit on a far lesser level.
Stray Thoughts
“The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.” ~ Martin Luther King Jr.