Legalize This; Prohibit That
A new bill in Massachusetts would legalize online casinos while prohibiting sweepstakes... But does it have a chance to pass?
The Bulletin Board
THE LEDE: A new iCasino bill in MA would prohibit sweepstakes.
ROUNDUP: NFL media briefing on sports betting; NV’s warning to FanDuel; WY Tribe calls iGaming threat under-reported; DK-Railbirds talks fizzle.
NEWS: DraftKings is prohibiting credit cards.
BEYOND the HEADLINE: Life after credit cards: Plenty of options exist.
AROUND the WATERCOOLER: NCAA breaks silence on prediction markets (sort of).
STRAY THOUGHTS: Don’t get distracted by the glitz and glamor.
Sponsor’s Message: Increase Operator Margins with EDGE Boost Today!
EDGE Boost is the first dedicated bank account for bettors.
Increase Cash Access: On/Offline with $250k/day debit limits
No Integration or Costs: Compatible today with all operators via VISA debit rails
Incremental Non-Gaming Revenue: Up to 1% operator rebate on transactions
Lower Costs: Increase debit throughput to reduce costs against ACH/Wallets
Eliminate Chargebacks and Disputes
Eliminate Debit Declines
Built-in Responsible Gaming tools
To learn more, contact Matthew Cullen, Chief Strategy Officer, Matthew@edgemarkets.io
The Lede: New MA iCasino Bill Includes Sweepstakes Ban
Massachusetts has had three online casino bills since the start of the legislative session. Two of those bills fully materialized early on (HB 332 and SB 235) while the third, which Straight to the Point has pointed to as the one to watch, is now also fully formed.
Rep. David K. Muradian, Jr., who is on the NCLGS committee that drafted the organization’s model legislation, officially introduced HB 4431 last week (previously a placeholder bill, HD 2393, with no text).
Muradian’s bill:
Limits online casino licenses to the state’s three land-based casino operators (Encore Boston Harbor [Wynn], MGM Springfield [MGM], and Plainridge Park Casino [Penn]), and each casino can partner with three platforms.
Licensees will have to pay a $100,000 license fee, renewable every five years. The fee for internet gaming platform providers (skins) is set at $50,000, and $15,000 for suppliers.
Allows Massachusetts to enter into interstate compacts.
Requires AI monitoring of betting behavior.
Prohibits funding accounts with credit cards.
Sets the tax rate at 15%.
Limits deposits by an individual over 24 hours to $20,000.
The bill also bans online sweepstakes and creates enforcement powers, including against affiliates and payment processors, with fines up to $100,000 per violation and up to two years in prison for repeat offenses.
The SPGA called the move to ban sweepstakes while legalizing online casinos, “a poor understanding of the sweepstakes model and undue deference to iGaming lobbyists. Instead of a blanket ban, Massachusetts could embrace oversight and regulation, securing millions in potential tax revenues, instead of deciding for its residents what games they can - and can’t - play on their mobile phones.”
As I noted last week, don’t expect much from Massachusetts. As I’ve written in the past, there are numerous hurdles in Massachusetts:
The state legalized online lottery sales in 2024, with a planned launch in 2026, marking a significant expansion of its gambling offerings. The iLottery launch is a priority, and as we’ve seen in other states (especially states with online instant win lottery tickets that resemble slot machines), the lottery isn’t a fan of competition.
Despite its success, the legalization of sports betting has led to significant criticisms and regulatory scrutiny over responsible gambling, addiction, and operator practices.
The Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe’s efforts to build the First Light Resort & Casino in Taunton have been ongoing for over a decade, marked by legal, financial, and political challenges. A welcome center with a smattering of slot machines is up and running, but the tribe has grander plans and won’t be happy if it is at a competitive disadvantage in the online realm.
Now, toss in a sweepstakes ban debate, a low tax and licensing fee burden, no untethered licenses (which will not go over well with Boston-based DraftKings), and the bill being sponsored by a Republican (there are 25 Republicans, 134 Democrats, and 1 Independent in the MA House), and you can see how many needles the state will need to thread.
Roundup: NFL Media Briefing; NV’s Warning; WY Tribe iGaming Threat Underplayed; DK-Railbirds Talks Fizzle
NFL announces media briefing to discuss legalized sports betting [Press Release]: The NFL has scheduled a media briefing for later today, Monday, August 25, at 1:15 PM EST, to discuss issues around sports betting. What exactly the NFL will discuss is unclear at this point (integrity concerns, player harassment, prop bets, micro bets, prediction markets, or some combination of issues).
Nevada regulators issue warning to licensees about sports contracts [CDC Gaming Reports]: “Nevada gaming regulators issued a warning Thursday to Flutter Entertainment to stay away from sports prediction markets after its FanDuel brand announced it’s teaming up with CME Group.” Nevada Gaming Commissioner Brian Krolicki told Flutter reps that “until the courts resolve it… Complying with federal and state matters isn’t possible today.” Krolicki also said, “This events market is a very sensitive spot for us and in conflict with this state and our Gaming Control Act and other states’ sports betting.”
Wyoming tribe says gaming study ‘under-reported’ impacts [County 10]: Travis McNiven, spokesperson for the Northern Arapaho Business Council, told local press that the Spectrum Gaming report on the impact of gambling expansion didn’t fully capture the threat to tribal gaming. The study says “(we do) not believe further expansion of HHR in Wyoming would negatively impact the state’s three Native American casinos because a) the two forms of gaming have coexisted – and grown – since 2013 and b) the expansion of HHR is likely to take place in locations distant from tribal casinos and closer to out-of-state population centers.” According to McNiven, HHR has already reduced foot traffic, and online gambling “would (compete with) those same games where somebody would drive to a brick-and-mortar and play… It certainly would have a significant impact.”
DraftKings-Railbird talks reportedly break down [Earnings+More]: “Talks between DraftKings and yet-to-launch prediction market operator Railbird over a potential buyout have 'fallen apart,' according to sources. DraftKings was previously reported to be kicking the tires by Front Office Sports.” Previous STTP coverage of the DraftKings-Railbird rumors.
SPONSOR’S MESSAGE: Are you a founder trying to navigate the brutal realities of building and scaling a business? Hear straight from the people who’ve been through the wringer, so you don't have to.
This invite-only, final edition of the Challenger Series in Las Vegas brings together some of the most influential founders and leaders you won’t normally see on a conference panel. No fluff. No PR spin. Just real lessons from industry giants.
News: DraftKings Voluntarily Prohibits Credit Cards
DraftKings is the first major online gambling operator to prohibit credit cards for deposits — Betr also prohibits credit cards.
Here are the basics of DraftKings’ new policy: Starting August 25, stored credit cards and future credit card deposits will be disabled.
“DraftKings has made the strategic business decision to remove credit cards as a deposit option for sportsbook and casino in the United States,” a DraftKings spokesperson told SBC Americas. “Customers can still fund their DraftKings Sportsbook and casino accounts using debit cards, bank transfers (ACH), wire transfer, and payment platforms like PayPal, Venmo, or Apple Pay (with an eligible payment method, such as a debit card), where permissible.”
DraftKings is framing the change as a way to “avoid cash advance fees and higher interest rates” associated with credit card funding — in most cases, customers are charged the cash-advance rate when they deposit via credit card.
There are several other potential reasons, too:
Chargeback fees pose a significant financial risk to online operators, as they often incur additional costs of $20 to $100 per incident, along with other potential penalties, such as higher processing fees. By prohibiting credit card deposits entirely, DraftKings mitigates these costs and risks, shifting users to lower-dispute methods like debit cards or e-wallets.
Navigating the mishmash regulatory environment, with eight states prohibiting credit card deposits (Iowa, Tennessee, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Oregon, Vermont, and Illinois), and the disparate regulations led to a massive $450,000 fine for DraftKings in Massachusetts when customers deposited in other states and then placed bets in Massachusetts.
Credit card prohibitions are picking up steam, and DraftKings is getting out in front of them. As Shawn Fluharty said on my podcast, a credit card ban is almost required for an online gambling bill to pass in the current environment: “I don't care how many studies you bring me after the fact. You need votes to get legislation passed, and including the credit card ban is going to help you get votes to get legislation passed… It's just one of those things; good policy isn't always good politics.”
Beyond the Headline: Solution to Credit Card Problem
Edge Markets, a newsletter sponsor, offers a solution to the credit card problem for online and land-based gambling operators — if you’re an operator considering a DraftKings like ban, I recommend you get in touch.
As Edge CEO Seni Thomas explained on my podcast, the Edge Boost debit card eliminates chargeback fees for the merchant, as well as:
Provides a dedicated account (Edge Boost is only accepted at licensed gambling sites and operators) for transparent tracking of betting expenditures,
Offers social accountability programs with peer support and resources like 1-800-GAMBLER integration to promote safer play.
Enables seamless funding via ACH transfers, quick deposits/withdrawals with no interest fees, and 100% approval for gambling transactions.
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
Around the Watercooler
Social media conversations, rumors, and gossip.
The NCAA has broken its silence on the rise of sports contracts in the prediction market space:
So, much like the traditional sports betting operators, the NCAA is “monitoring” the situation.
And as Dustin Gouker noted in his Closing Line newsletter, the NCAA has been crusading against college player props and lobbying to have them prohibited at licensed sportsbooks. At the same time, the real integrity and player safety threats are happening outside of the licensed, regulated sports betting markets.
Tomorrow I’ll look at the The Whole Story with Anderson Cooper segment that aired on CNN last night: "Sports Betting: America's Big Gamble.”
Stray Thoughts
One of the biggest issues I have with self-defense seminars is their focus. These seminars attract untrained people, yet the focus is often on the final, and most challenging to learn and execute, phase of a self-defense encounter: the physical.
The truth is, the physical should be 5% of the seminar, and its only function is to give them a taste of what it takes to get good at that phase. There aren’t any secret techniques you can learn in a day; the secret is to train consistently over a long period of time.
90% of potential problems can be solved by not being there or leaving. Many others can be solved by calming the situation down. A tiny sliver requires physicality.
So, why do so many self-defense seminars focus on the physical? Because it’s flashy, and the instructor can show off a bit. Talking about checking around your car and locking the door as soon as you get in doesn’t have that same ‘Holy s**t!’ impact as a fancy self-defense technique.
I feel the same way about most responsible gambling innovations: a lot of flash (and they usually cost a lot of cash), but not much in the way of benefit or practical value.