11 ms·

US lawyer who put Big Tobacco on trial takes aim at sports betting

178 points by donsupreme 3y ago

zoklet-enjoyer 3y ago
Sounds like a straightforward deal, not sure why he's suing.
- starwin1159 3y ago
  agree
- gs17 3y ago
  It doesn't sound straightforward to me. I saw the ads and assumed it would be credit and require a deposit of near the size of the bonus to be kept for X days and maybe bet at least once, but needing to risk $25k on bets you're very likely to lose (I honestly can't remember if 1-3 means 0.25 or 0.75 probability, or neither, but even 0.75 is going to be hard to keep) wasn't expected. I'm sure it's all there in the fine print when you go to sign up, but the ads pretty much just yell at you "we're giving you free money to gamble with!".
  - zoklet-enjoyer 3y ago
    I never saw the ads, but I have gambled on a couple of online casinos that use crypto, and that was how their bonuses worked. It was pretty easy to hit the targets. If you bet the same $200 ten times then you're at $2,000 gambled. I don't know anything about sports betting, so maybe that's different.
    - gs17 3y ago
      >It was pretty easy to hit the targets. If you bet the same $200 ten times then you're at $2,000 gambled. Yes, gambling is easy, as long as you win.
h2odragon 3y ago
oo. Bad move. Tobacco companies killed people in a theoretical, impersonal, non-contact manner. Some of the folks in the gambling industry have direct experience with impediment elimination.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- jdewerd 3y ago
  If Big Tobacco is full of spooky masterminds, why were we able to virtually eliminate smoking in the USA?
  - verdverm 3y ago
    Vaping, or e-cigs, is on a strong upward trend in the US. The statistics are alarming
    - lstodd 3y ago
      Mmm.. so a giant reduction in bad health outcomes is alarming? How so? I'd remind you that those same big tobacco companies fight vapes tooth and nail. You might ask yourself - why do they do that.
      - verdverm 3y ago
        I thought Big Tobacco is buying up the vape companies? Some cursory searching seems to indicate this is their preferred move. > You might ask yourself - why do they do that > giant reduction in bad health outcomes is alarming We are separating cigarette use from vapes. My "alarming statistics" is only for vaping. Cigarettes were down before vapes gained popularity. So since their introduction, health outcomes are becoming worse, would you not agree? In other words, it is not substitution at play, rather there was a reduction and now a new increase from vaping.
        lstodd 3y ago
Twirrim 3y ago
https://archive.is/s3k80 https://archive.is/s3k80
seydor 3y ago
I think social media should go first.
- huytersd 3y ago
  Anyone under 18 should not be allowed on social media. I would even take it a step further and say no smart phones till you’re an adult at 18.
  - kyrra 3y ago
    This is hard, as was talked about 8 months ago here (and other threads): "Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35307647 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35307647 "PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35786086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35786086 Utah passed an age based access to social media, but that means that websites need to effectively do a KYC on all users to determine their age.
    - seydor 3y ago
      we should start with public campaigns , like they did with cigarettes. mandatory warnings and bans on advertising such media.
  - wincy 3y ago
    I think Apple Watch with cell service is an excellent compromise. Gives my kid freedom to go around the neighborhood and visit her friends without having access to apps and all that smartphones bring.
    - kyrra 3y ago
      Phones can do that today, with things like Family Link: https://support.google.com/families/answer/7103340?hl=en https://support.google.com/families/answer/7103340?hl=en Or there is a purpose-built phone for people that don't want to figure it out: https://gabb.com/ https://gabb.com/
the_jeremy 3y ago
TL;DR for clickbait title: > The lawsuit outlined how DraftKings advertised a bonus for first-time users of “up to $1,000” through a range of social media, third party, TV and radio promotions. But in order to ever receive $1,000 in additional bets, customers had to make a $5,000 initial deposit, risk $25,000 in real money within 90 days and bet on events with odds steeper than 1-3, according to the lawsuit. The bonus would also be paid out only in non-withdrawable credit. The case has not yet gone to trial.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- skippyboxedhero 3y ago
  That is an aggressive promo strategy for anyone unfamiliar with the industry. The big problem with bonuses is that they are so easy to exploit so books end up having to do stuff like this. European operators have long worked out how to run these promos but, unsurprisingly, DK is struggling without that knowledge. A lot of native-US books seem to be like this. Clueless.
_factor 3y ago
It amazes me that sports betting is allowed to persist as is. It’s an addictive hobby with similar detriments to addictive substances, yet advertising to children is ok. If you go to Europe, you’re probably familiar with betting parlors. They shittify any town they take over, filling up with lonely men losing their money. Online just hides it a little better.
- Clubber 3y ago
  >It’s an addictive hobby with similar detriments to addictive substances, yet advertising to children is ok. We lost that battle when states introduced lotteries. Government gambling.
  - gs17 3y ago
    Do lotteries advertise to children in your state? I guess scratch-off game designs are bright and colorful, but here in TN the ads on TV/radio are largely angled at adults.
    - Clubber 3y ago
      Yes, we have commercials and billboards and convenience stores with big billboards saying they sold a winning ticket. I don't really buy the argument that if advertising is bright and colorful, it's distinctly targeted to children. Most advertising is bright and colorful. The only decent argument from the smoking / vape wars was Joe Camel because he was a cartoon character, but I didn't know who Joe Camel was until I was ad adult. I think the advertising to children because it contains non-unusual ________ argument is pretty weak. If you mean advertise where children would be able to see it, absolutely, all over the place.
  - afiori 3y ago
    Lotteries (gevernmental or not) and sport betting are worlds apart in term of societal damage
    - wincy 3y ago
burningChrome 3y ago
I was never into fantasy sports betting, especially after the FanDuel/DraftKings insider trading scandal it was pretty obvious there were a LOT of people playing both sides in order to make huge money. The entire industry (AFAIK) is still completely unregulated, so this kind of "insider trading" is perfectly legal. This story about DraftKings bonus play just confirms they're tilting the table in their favor more than a few percentage points to gain an advantage. They're looking for addicts or suckers to hand over large sums of money with little or no chance of winning anything. In case anybody is interested: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-fantasy-sports-employees-used-insider-info-to-bet/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-fantasy-sports-employees... An employee with one of the companies, DraftKings, admitted last week to inadvertently releasing data before the start of the third week of N.F.L. games. The midlevel content manager later won $350,000 at rival site FanDuel that same week, the Times reported.
- skippyboxedhero 3y ago
  ...insider trading like what? With fantasy sports, they controlled the game so could use pick rates. With sports betting, it is one of the most liquid markets in the world with billions traded every week. Sports books definitely use liquidity to set their lines, but 99.9% of the bets they take are uninformed bettors who aren't going to move the market..that is how they make money. And the books in the US have very little to no staff setting lines, they just work out what margin/risk they want to take and then add that onto current market prices...that is it. They aren't betting against you, you are betting against the market, they are taking a commission. The reason why they are doing the bonus stuff is because they are the most exploited part of the market. I live in the UK, when these bonuses were a bigger part of bookmakers promo strategy I knew people who made a living from them (I will leave it up to you to work out how). Most bookmakers deploy a more careful strategy these days, this clearly wasn't a careful promo that they decided to try and make up with onerous T&C...not a good idea (this is, unfortunately, the way things are going).
ck2 3y ago
If they do as well as they did with Big Tobacco it will be a massive failure other than giving themselves a huge paycheck. $50 BILLION in tobacco product sales and 46% profit margin last year (Coca-Cola has 26% profit margin in comparison) And all those payouts to the states that were supposed to help people, all those extra taxes to discourage smoking? Well all that money went to other pet projects because no law was ever made how it should be used.
- Daishiman 3y ago
  The absolutely drastic reduction of smoking says otherwise.
  - bequanna 3y ago
    I personally think that has more to do with state taxes raising prices and young people choosing vape over traditional tobacco.
  - lp0_on_fire 3y ago
    I'd argue the drastic reduction of smoking is the result of a culture shift around the activity (better education) and governments banning it from public spaces, not lawyers suing Philip Morris.
    - jurassic 3y ago
      Educational programs aren’t free, though. The tobacco industry was forced to spend billions paying for these programs as part of the master settlement in 1998. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_Master_Settlement_Agreement https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_Master_Settlement_Ag...
    - comrh 3y ago
      The "better education" part is directly funded from tobacco lawsuits.
    - plussed_reader 3y ago
      I'd posit that legal actions provide lubricant for shifts in social consensus. We could probably argue chickens and eggs for awhile though.
bentt 3y ago
This makes me so happy. To see sports betting corrupt ESPN in real time is so sad. Advertising of sports betting should be as legal as advertising of cigarettes.
- MavisBacon 3y ago
  100%. it's insane the lack of regulation around sportsbook advertising, considering we all know gambling to be potentially habit-forming and potentially life ruining- there's a reason support groups for gamblers are widely available. It's absurd to me that University of Colorado was willing/able to sign a deal with PointsBet to advertise on campus for $1.6M plus $30 for each user signup (likely to be a student)
  - bentt 3y ago
    Money is a hell of a drug. This is why regulation is the only answer.
    - plutoh28 3y ago
      But what do we do when the ones writing the regulations are on the money drug?!
      - bentt 3y ago
        Yeah that's the tricky bit, isn't it.
  - hnrodey 3y ago
    20 years ago, credit card companies could setup on college campuses to offer silly "rewards" to students that applied for the credit card. Pretty sure that was banned many years ago now. But if you're asking "how does this happen???" it's because a) much money is involved and b) it's novel.
imjonse 3y ago
Tangential: one of Romania's main investigative journals, part of the Swiss Ringier group had just fired its main editors and around 20% of their staff last week, over their reluctance to stop investigating and writing about the local betting industry. The explanation was cost-cutting as the printed edition is no longer profitable, but the journalists claim otherwise, having written extensively about the gambling industry which is a potential advertising partner.
- plutoh28 3y ago
  I imagine if you’re ok with exploiting desperate gamblers for profits you’re also probably fine with bribing whoever to maintain those profits. Money is a helluva drug
neuromanser 3y ago
Esports betting is the wild west frontier, targetting kids. It's one of the trifecta of biggest stains on professional Counter-Strike, along with Saudi and UAE money and weapon skins gambling. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JT17l53Fkj0&pp=ygUWaG91bmdvdW5nYWduZSBnYW1ibGluZw%3D%3D https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JT17l53Fkj0&pp=ygUWaG91bmdvdW5.... Edit: Vast majority of CS tournaments are structured into two phases, "groups" and playoffs. Losing a match in groups means falling through into the "lower bracket", one Major tournament (ESL Pro League) even has three brackets. This leads to many "upsets" as the top teams play the opening matches against much lower-ranked opponents half-asleep, and then march through to (semi-)finals through the lower/lowest bracket. This effect was clearly demonstrated in a recent tournament with no second chances (Gamers8), where every underdog got eliminated in the first round. i don't bet on CS because of the unpredictability enabled by bracketing, but anyone could have made a shit ton of money by betting on the higher-ranked teams in the first round of Gamers8. I'm convinced the bracketing is a result of collusion between tournament organizers and bookmakers, their major sponsors.
- jimbob45 3y ago
  Can you even bet with CSGO skins anymore? Once CSGOLounge went down, it seems like that scene died off for the most part.
  - neuromanser 3y ago
    The wepon skin-gambling part lies strictly with Valve and the $2.50 key mechanic, with a minor but vital support from popular commentators like Chad "SPUNJ" Burchill. You can unlock a skin that sells for six digits; you will (99.9999999%) unlock a skin that sells for $0.17... And Valve will take 30% of that sale.
    - Ekaros 3y ago
      If we do away with that. Maybe we should also ban Magic The Gathering and like. After whole one ring serialized card it is pretty clear that whole thing is just an unregulated lottery...
jjice 3y ago
The sports betting craze is really interesting to me. I'm from upstate NY and I remember when it got legalized I didn't think much about it. Let people do what they want. I won't play because I don't gamble. Then when I was hope for the holidays and every man I knew from my home town that was near my age was doing it. They'd watch a basketball game only to see if their 8 leg parlay would hit. Whatever app they were using even listed your all time wins/loses (probably legally required) and _all_ of them had all time loses over $500 and it had only been legalized a few months prior. It's just a drain on the average person, the same was cigarettes are. I struggle with the freedom for personal choice to do what you want vs the collective better situation we get to form for ourselves as a society by banning these things, but I think I'm just leaning more towards the latter now. On the other hand, I think weed and alcohol should be legal, despite it affecting people's lives in negative ways, but the majority if their users are completely normal people. This is such a tricky subject to me and I guess I'll just stop rambling now, but I am interested in what other people thing about societal restriction for a better group vs personal freedoms.
- lend000 3y ago
  The difference is that cigarettes directly affect people around you via secondhand smoke, which is a clear externality. The real problem with sports betting is the immoral anticompetitive behavior of the gambling companies, which kick any "smart" money with too high of win rates off of their platforms. And that means that the gambling platforms aren't just platforms allowing the spreads to be set by users, but also active participants trying to use their own predictions to gamble against their users or tweak the spread, essentially double dipping.
  - ecshafer 3y ago
    If someone is addicted to gambling, they make some bets and lose losing their rent money leading to eviction. And that person has a children. Are those children not affected by gambling?
    - jonfw 3y ago
      If we take impact on your own family has an externality, then all behaviors have externalities. I could easily spend enough of my time and money playing golf to negatively impact my loved ones. An externality generally refers to the general public
hospitalJail 3y ago
The issue isnt a single gamble. The issue is that gambling companies were able to use their tricks to create addiction. Sad stuff, no idea the solution. Might be worth teaching people in 10th grade health class brain science on addictions.
- deaddodo 3y ago
  Honestly, I wish they would tackle loot crates first. Obvious gambling mechanic that gamifies people's wallets for exorbitant cashouts. Whether they publish the odds or not.
  - Ekaros 3y ago
    I never understood how gacha games and loot boxes are allowed in first place... Or why people spend money on them... Whatever you say about CS and TF2, at least there is some after market, even if it is just in-store credit...
  - WorldMaker 3y ago
    I feel like if they did that the whole videogames industry might topple like a house of cards. There was a pinball prohibition in America where lawmakers decided all pinball looked like gambling whether gambling was involved or not and so they just banned all pinball machines and it took decades to undo the damage those laws did. I fear that if lawmakers started trying to pin down what in videogames was gambling and what wasn't, especially to crack down on "loot crates", who knows where they'd stop. A lot game mechanics look like loot crates. (On top of that, so much of the videogames industry is funded by things like loot crates today. The big budget games don't have their big budgets in 2023 without their parent companies out whale hunting with some terrible mobile game or another. There are more players on mobile devices spending more money than anywhere else in videogames.) Publishing odds and making sure that "real money can go in, but real money can't come out" were the contest laws that in part came out of compromises when pinball prohibition ended. They seem to be the best regulations we've come up with so far. They definitely don't feel sufficient to stop some of the worst offenders, but I would imagine any intelligent attempt to "tackle" loot crates would have to start with enforcing and beefing up those regulations rather than to start with bans.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
dirtybirdnj 3y ago
Sports betting is a black eye on one of the few "wholesome" parts of society left. We are tribal animals and at least sports lets us exercise some of that with a relative level of "don't kill each other" civility. I'm particularly annoyed at the superimposed ads on hockey boards. They are hugely distracting and make it difficult to watch the game. A game entirely dependent on following a small moving item onscreen. You're going to tell me that flashing / animated graphics don't make it hard to follow the action / puck? You know THE ENTIRE REASON PEOPLE ARE WATCHING?! Ads on jerseys and helmets is a slippery slope. It's been nice to see the NFL resist this pressure but the NHL sweaters and lids with logos are starting to look like european leagues. The incessent drumbeat of sports betting along with content about the game is disgusting. Gambling used to be a vice now it's just part of everyday life. It's another situation where the UX of the activity is hugely degraded, and the people doing it just. don't. give. a. fuck. I cannot have any compassion for the people that drive the enshittification of our lives.
- donmcronald 3y ago
  I hope Gretzky and McDavid starring in gambling ads has put some kind of cosmic curse on the Oilers so they never win a cup. Shame on both of those loser sellouts.
parrot987 3y ago
Echoing another comment, one huge problem with the current sports betting market is banning/limiting winners. I started prop-odds.com to help the more mathematically inclined gamblers take advantage of mispriced odds or let them build and backtest their own models. So while it's actually not too difficult to beat the book, the challenge comes from evading their detection and getting banned.
- francisofascii 3y ago
  I do find this annoying, but to play devil's advocate, it is supposed to be just entertainment. The question is who is losing money when you find an edge like that? Is it the sportsbook? Or is it poor souls (The fools) on the other side of those bets? Probably a bit of both. To some extent, the sportsbooks is simply acts as a marketplace to pair up two sides of a bet, and taking a cut. In all honestly though, if they set limits, fine, but they should set the same limit for everyone. I am intrigued by your web site, I have to say.
  - parrot987 3y ago
    Yes, you have a point. The "soft-books" (FanDuel, DraftKings) use the justification of being a form of entertainment as the reason to limit players. Fair enough, I have no personal issue with that. As for who is losing money, I think you're also correct about that. Both the sportsbook and losing bettors will subsidize the "sharp bettor". It's also worth noting that some sportsbooks (the more well established ones like Caesars and Pinnacle) do limit all players equally. That's because the do as you say and act like a marketplace to pair up both sides of the bet. The problem with entertainment books is that they often pick a side on the bet so each side is not equally balanced. An attempt to maximize potential profits for themself instead of the traditional strategy to minimize their risk.
    - francisofascii 3y ago
      Those situations where the book picks a side are interesting. Do you have any insight on how those situations arise? To me they must find a big difference between what their internal model says, and what public perception says, and so they create a point spread in the middle to lure the better into the taking the less favorable side.
CSMastermind 3y ago
Those who have not watched the Wendover Productions video on Sports Betting in America definitely should: https://youtu.be/Pm5bTZRhncY?si=rh-7RO8_nqPT5_PH https://youtu.be/Pm5bTZRhncY?si=rh-7RO8_nqPT5_PH
JumpinJack_Cash 3y ago
Sports betting and poker are the only financial type bet that are not influenced by politics or other people in general. On the stock/bond/commodities/real estate market you need to not only predict what will happen but also predict when and if other people will realize what is about to happen and when/if they'd trade accordingly. In sports betting you only have to study the starting pitcher and the relief vs the other team hitters, or the matchups in a NFL game. Horse races are all about the horses and their health and conditioning etc. It's liberating for somebody who wants to make a financial bet to just think about those things as opposed to trying to predict the behavior of billions of people that move the prices of stocks.
WendyTheWillow 3y ago
I'm glad this is getting looked at; it's a common and annoying scam for companies to claim large "free money" sums that are not actually US dollar equivalents (exchangeable for off-platform goods). I honestly don't even necessarily mind some loopholes, but it's gone too far. DraftKings should settle, apologize, and adjust/eliminate such promotions. After all, these promos are not in their business' critical path, so just come up with some other thing.
gist 3y ago
ft link and archive.is link doesn't work for me but I found this: https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3wkgg/the-lawyer-who-took-on-big-tobacco-is-now-fighting-an-online-sports-betting-giant https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3wkgg/the-lawyer-who-took-o... It's a bit click bait since they are targeting draftkings not 'sports betting'

178 points by donsupreme 3y ago

zoklet-enjoyer 3y ago

Sounds like a straightforward deal, not sure why he's suing.

starwin1159 3y ago
agree
gs17 3y ago
It doesn't sound straightforward to me. I saw the ads and assumed it would be credit and require a deposit of near the size of the bonus to be kept for X days and maybe bet at least once, but needing to risk $25k on bets you're very likely to lose (I honestly can't remember if 1-3 means 0.25 or 0.75 probability, or neither, but even 0.75 is going to be hard to keep) wasn't expected. I'm sure it's all there in the fine print when you go to sign up, but the ads pretty much just yell at you "we're giving you free money to gamble with!".
- zoklet-enjoyer 3y ago
  I never saw the ads, but I have gambled on a couple of online casinos that use crypto, and that was how their bonuses worked. It was pretty easy to hit the targets. If you bet the same $200 ten times then you're at $2,000 gambled. I don't know anything about sports betting, so maybe that's different.
  - gs17 3y ago
    >It was pretty easy to hit the targets. If you bet the same $200 ten times then you're at $2,000 gambled. Yes, gambling is easy, as long as you win.

h2odragon 3y ago

oo. Bad move. Tobacco companies killed people in a theoretical, impersonal, non-contact manner. Some of the folks in the gambling industry have direct experience with impediment elimination.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jdewerd 3y ago
If Big Tobacco is full of spooky masterminds, why were we able to virtually eliminate smoking in the USA?
- verdverm 3y ago
  Vaping, or e-cigs, is on a strong upward trend in the US. The statistics are alarming
  - lstodd 3y ago
    Mmm.. so a giant reduction in bad health outcomes is alarming? How so? I'd remind you that those same big tobacco companies fight vapes tooth and nail. You might ask yourself - why do they do that.
    - verdverm 3y ago
      I thought Big Tobacco is buying up the vape companies? Some cursory searching seems to indicate this is their preferred move. > You might ask yourself - why do they do that > giant reduction in bad health outcomes is alarming We are separating cigarette use from vapes. My "alarming statistics" is only for vaping. Cigarettes were down before vapes gained popularity. So since their introduction, health outcomes are becoming worse, would you not agree? In other words, it is not substitution at play, rather there was a reduction and now a new increase from vaping.
      - lstodd 3y ago

Twirrim 3y ago

https://archive.is/s3k80 https://archive.is/s3k80

seydor 3y ago

I think social media should go first.

huytersd 3y ago
Anyone under 18 should not be allowed on social media. I would even take it a step further and say no smart phones till you’re an adult at 18.
- kyrra 3y ago
  This is hard, as was talked about 8 months ago here (and other threads): "Utah is first US state to limit teen social media access" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35307647 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35307647 "PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35786086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35786086 Utah passed an age based access to social media, but that means that websites need to effectively do a KYC on all users to determine their age.
  - seydor 3y ago
    we should start with public campaigns , like they did with cigarettes. mandatory warnings and bans on advertising such media.
- wincy 3y ago
  I think Apple Watch with cell service is an excellent compromise. Gives my kid freedom to go around the neighborhood and visit her friends without having access to apps and all that smartphones bring.
  - kyrra 3y ago
    Phones can do that today, with things like Family Link: https://support.google.com/families/answer/7103340?hl=en https://support.google.com/families/answer/7103340?hl=en Or there is a purpose-built phone for people that don't want to figure it out: https://gabb.com/ https://gabb.com/

the_jeremy 3y ago

TL;DR for clickbait title: > The lawsuit outlined how DraftKings advertised a bonus for first-time users of “up to $1,000” through a range of social media, third party, TV and radio promotions. But in order to ever receive $1,000 in additional bets, customers had to make a $5,000 initial deposit, risk $25,000 in real money within 90 days and bet on events with odds steeper than 1-3, according to the lawsuit. The bonus would also be paid out only in non-withdrawable credit. The case has not yet gone to trial.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
skippyboxedhero 3y ago
That is an aggressive promo strategy for anyone unfamiliar with the industry. The big problem with bonuses is that they are so easy to exploit so books end up having to do stuff like this. European operators have long worked out how to run these promos but, unsurprisingly, DK is struggling without that knowledge. A lot of native-US books seem to be like this. Clueless.

_factor 3y ago

It amazes me that sports betting is allowed to persist as is. It’s an addictive hobby with similar detriments to addictive substances, yet advertising to children is ok. If you go to Europe, you’re probably familiar with betting parlors. They shittify any town they take over, filling up with lonely men losing their money. Online just hides it a little better.

Clubber 3y ago
>It’s an addictive hobby with similar detriments to addictive substances, yet advertising to children is ok. We lost that battle when states introduced lotteries. Government gambling.
- gs17 3y ago
  Do lotteries advertise to children in your state? I guess scratch-off game designs are bright and colorful, but here in TN the ads on TV/radio are largely angled at adults.
  - Clubber 3y ago
    Yes, we have commercials and billboards and convenience stores with big billboards saying they sold a winning ticket. I don't really buy the argument that if advertising is bright and colorful, it's distinctly targeted to children. Most advertising is bright and colorful. The only decent argument from the smoking / vape wars was Joe Camel because he was a cartoon character, but I didn't know who Joe Camel was until I was ad adult. I think the advertising to children because it contains non-unusual ________ argument is pretty weak. If you mean advertise where children would be able to see it, absolutely, all over the place.
- afiori 3y ago
  Lotteries (gevernmental or not) and sport betting are worlds apart in term of societal damage
  - wincy 3y ago

burningChrome 3y ago

I was never into fantasy sports betting, especially after the FanDuel/DraftKings insider trading scandal it was pretty obvious there were a LOT of people playing both sides in order to make huge money. The entire industry (AFAIK) is still completely unregulated, so this kind of "insider trading" is perfectly legal. This story about DraftKings bonus play just confirms they're tilting the table in their favor more than a few percentage points to gain an advantage. They're looking for addicts or suckers to hand over large sums of money with little or no chance of winning anything. In case anybody is interested: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-fantasy-sports-employees-used-insider-info-to-bet/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-fantasy-sports-employees... An employee with one of the companies, DraftKings, admitted last week to inadvertently releasing data before the start of the third week of N.F.L. games. The midlevel content manager later won $350,000 at rival site FanDuel that same week, the Times reported.

skippyboxedhero 3y ago
...insider trading like what? With fantasy sports, they controlled the game so could use pick rates. With sports betting, it is one of the most liquid markets in the world with billions traded every week. Sports books definitely use liquidity to set their lines, but 99.9% of the bets they take are uninformed bettors who aren't going to move the market..that is how they make money. And the books in the US have very little to no staff setting lines, they just work out what margin/risk they want to take and then add that onto current market prices...that is it. They aren't betting against you, you are betting against the market, they are taking a commission. The reason why they are doing the bonus stuff is because they are the most exploited part of the market. I live in the UK, when these bonuses were a bigger part of bookmakers promo strategy I knew people who made a living from them (I will leave it up to you to work out how). Most bookmakers deploy a more careful strategy these days, this clearly wasn't a careful promo that they decided to try and make up with onerous T&C...not a good idea (this is, unfortunately, the way things are going).

ck2 3y ago

If they do as well as they did with Big Tobacco it will be a massive failure other than giving themselves a huge paycheck. $50 BILLION in tobacco product sales and 46% profit margin last year (Coca-Cola has 26% profit margin in comparison) And all those payouts to the states that were supposed to help people, all those extra taxes to discourage smoking? Well all that money went to other pet projects because no law was ever made how it should be used.

Daishiman 3y ago
The absolutely drastic reduction of smoking says otherwise.
- bequanna 3y ago
  I personally think that has more to do with state taxes raising prices and young people choosing vape over traditional tobacco.
- lp0_on_fire 3y ago
  I'd argue the drastic reduction of smoking is the result of a culture shift around the activity (better education) and governments banning it from public spaces, not lawyers suing Philip Morris.
  - jurassic 3y ago
    Educational programs aren’t free, though. The tobacco industry was forced to spend billions paying for these programs as part of the master settlement in 1998. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_Master_Settlement_Agreement https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_Master_Settlement_Ag...
  - comrh 3y ago
    The "better education" part is directly funded from tobacco lawsuits.
  - plussed_reader 3y ago
    I'd posit that legal actions provide lubricant for shifts in social consensus. We could probably argue chickens and eggs for awhile though.

bentt 3y ago

This makes me so happy. To see sports betting corrupt ESPN in real time is so sad. Advertising of sports betting should be as legal as advertising of cigarettes.

MavisBacon 3y ago
100%. it's insane the lack of regulation around sportsbook advertising, considering we all know gambling to be potentially habit-forming and potentially life ruining- there's a reason support groups for gamblers are widely available. It's absurd to me that University of Colorado was willing/able to sign a deal with PointsBet to advertise on campus for $1.6M plus $30 for each user signup (likely to be a student)
- bentt 3y ago
  Money is a hell of a drug. This is why regulation is the only answer.
  - plutoh28 3y ago
    But what do we do when the ones writing the regulations are on the money drug?!
    - bentt 3y ago
      Yeah that's the tricky bit, isn't it.
- hnrodey 3y ago
  20 years ago, credit card companies could setup on college campuses to offer silly "rewards" to students that applied for the credit card. Pretty sure that was banned many years ago now. But if you're asking "how does this happen???" it's because a) much money is involved and b) it's novel.

imjonse 3y ago

Tangential: one of Romania's main investigative journals, part of the Swiss Ringier group had just fired its main editors and around 20% of their staff last week, over their reluctance to stop investigating and writing about the local betting industry. The explanation was cost-cutting as the printed edition is no longer profitable, but the journalists claim otherwise, having written extensively about the gambling industry which is a potential advertising partner.

plutoh28 3y ago
I imagine if you’re ok with exploiting desperate gamblers for profits you’re also probably fine with bribing whoever to maintain those profits. Money is a helluva drug

neuromanser 3y ago

Esports betting is the wild west frontier, targetting kids. It's one of the trifecta of biggest stains on professional Counter-Strike, along with Saudi and UAE money and weapon skins gambling. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JT17l53Fkj0&pp=ygUWaG91bmdvdW5nYWduZSBnYW1ibGluZw%3D%3D https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JT17l53Fkj0&pp=ygUWaG91bmdvdW5.... Edit: Vast majority of CS tournaments are structured into two phases, "groups" and playoffs. Losing a match in groups means falling through into the "lower bracket", one Major tournament (ESL Pro League) even has three brackets. This leads to many "upsets" as the top teams play the opening matches against much lower-ranked opponents half-asleep, and then march through to (semi-)finals through the lower/lowest bracket. This effect was clearly demonstrated in a recent tournament with no second chances (Gamers8), where every underdog got eliminated in the first round. i don't bet on CS because of the unpredictability enabled by bracketing, but anyone could have made a shit ton of money by betting on the higher-ranked teams in the first round of Gamers8. I'm convinced the bracketing is a result of collusion between tournament organizers and bookmakers, their major sponsors.

jimbob45 3y ago
Can you even bet with CSGO skins anymore? Once CSGOLounge went down, it seems like that scene died off for the most part.
- neuromanser 3y ago
  The wepon skin-gambling part lies strictly with Valve and the $2.50 key mechanic, with a minor but vital support from popular commentators like Chad "SPUNJ" Burchill. You can unlock a skin that sells for six digits; you will (99.9999999%) unlock a skin that sells for $0.17... And Valve will take 30% of that sale.
  - Ekaros 3y ago
    If we do away with that. Maybe we should also ban Magic The Gathering and like. After whole one ring serialized card it is pretty clear that whole thing is just an unregulated lottery...

jjice 3y ago

The sports betting craze is really interesting to me. I'm from upstate NY and I remember when it got legalized I didn't think much about it. Let people do what they want. I won't play because I don't gamble. Then when I was hope for the holidays and every man I knew from my home town that was near my age was doing it. They'd watch a basketball game only to see if their 8 leg parlay would hit. Whatever app they were using even listed your all time wins/loses (probably legally required) and _all_ of them had all time loses over $500 and it had only been legalized a few months prior. It's just a drain on the average person, the same was cigarettes are. I struggle with the freedom for personal choice to do what you want vs the collective better situation we get to form for ourselves as a society by banning these things, but I think I'm just leaning more towards the latter now. On the other hand, I think weed and alcohol should be legal, despite it affecting people's lives in negative ways, but the majority if their users are completely normal people. This is such a tricky subject to me and I guess I'll just stop rambling now, but I am interested in what other people thing about societal restriction for a better group vs personal freedoms.

lend000 3y ago
The difference is that cigarettes directly affect people around you via secondhand smoke, which is a clear externality. The real problem with sports betting is the immoral anticompetitive behavior of the gambling companies, which kick any "smart" money with too high of win rates off of their platforms. And that means that the gambling platforms aren't just platforms allowing the spreads to be set by users, but also active participants trying to use their own predictions to gamble against their users or tweak the spread, essentially double dipping.
- ecshafer 3y ago
  If someone is addicted to gambling, they make some bets and lose losing their rent money leading to eviction. And that person has a children. Are those children not affected by gambling?
  - jonfw 3y ago
    If we take impact on your own family has an externality, then all behaviors have externalities. I could easily spend enough of my time and money playing golf to negatively impact my loved ones. An externality generally refers to the general public

hospitalJail 3y ago

The issue isnt a single gamble. The issue is that gambling companies were able to use their tricks to create addiction. Sad stuff, no idea the solution. Might be worth teaching people in 10th grade health class brain science on addictions.

deaddodo 3y ago
Honestly, I wish they would tackle loot crates first. Obvious gambling mechanic that gamifies people's wallets for exorbitant cashouts. Whether they publish the odds or not.
- Ekaros 3y ago
  I never understood how gacha games and loot boxes are allowed in first place... Or why people spend money on them... Whatever you say about CS and TF2, at least there is some after market, even if it is just in-store credit...
- WorldMaker 3y ago
  I feel like if they did that the whole videogames industry might topple like a house of cards. There was a pinball prohibition in America where lawmakers decided all pinball looked like gambling whether gambling was involved or not and so they just banned all pinball machines and it took decades to undo the damage those laws did. I fear that if lawmakers started trying to pin down what in videogames was gambling and what wasn't, especially to crack down on "loot crates", who knows where they'd stop. A lot game mechanics look like loot crates. (On top of that, so much of the videogames industry is funded by things like loot crates today. The big budget games don't have their big budgets in 2023 without their parent companies out whale hunting with some terrible mobile game or another. There are more players on mobile devices spending more money than anywhere else in videogames.) Publishing odds and making sure that "real money can go in, but real money can't come out" were the contest laws that in part came out of compromises when pinball prohibition ended. They seem to be the best regulations we've come up with so far. They definitely don't feel sufficient to stop some of the worst offenders, but I would imagine any intelligent attempt to "tackle" loot crates would have to start with enforcing and beefing up those regulations rather than to start with bans.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

dirtybirdnj 3y ago

Sports betting is a black eye on one of the few "wholesome" parts of society left. We are tribal animals and at least sports lets us exercise some of that with a relative level of "don't kill each other" civility. I'm particularly annoyed at the superimposed ads on hockey boards. They are hugely distracting and make it difficult to watch the game. A game entirely dependent on following a small moving item onscreen. You're going to tell me that flashing / animated graphics don't make it hard to follow the action / puck? You know THE ENTIRE REASON PEOPLE ARE WATCHING?! Ads on jerseys and helmets is a slippery slope. It's been nice to see the NFL resist this pressure but the NHL sweaters and lids with logos are starting to look like european leagues. The incessent drumbeat of sports betting along with content about the game is disgusting. Gambling used to be a vice now it's just part of everyday life. It's another situation where the UX of the activity is hugely degraded, and the people doing it just. don't. give. a. fuck. I cannot have any compassion for the people that drive the enshittification of our lives.

donmcronald 3y ago
I hope Gretzky and McDavid starring in gambling ads has put some kind of cosmic curse on the Oilers so they never win a cup. Shame on both of those loser sellouts.

parrot987 3y ago

Echoing another comment, one huge problem with the current sports betting market is banning/limiting winners. I started prop-odds.com to help the more mathematically inclined gamblers take advantage of mispriced odds or let them build and backtest their own models. So while it's actually not too difficult to beat the book, the challenge comes from evading their detection and getting banned.

francisofascii 3y ago
I do find this annoying, but to play devil's advocate, it is supposed to be just entertainment. The question is who is losing money when you find an edge like that? Is it the sportsbook? Or is it poor souls (The fools) on the other side of those bets? Probably a bit of both. To some extent, the sportsbooks is simply acts as a marketplace to pair up two sides of a bet, and taking a cut. In all honestly though, if they set limits, fine, but they should set the same limit for everyone. I am intrigued by your web site, I have to say.
- parrot987 3y ago
  Yes, you have a point. The "soft-books" (FanDuel, DraftKings) use the justification of being a form of entertainment as the reason to limit players. Fair enough, I have no personal issue with that. As for who is losing money, I think you're also correct about that. Both the sportsbook and losing bettors will subsidize the "sharp bettor". It's also worth noting that some sportsbooks (the more well established ones like Caesars and Pinnacle) do limit all players equally. That's because the do as you say and act like a marketplace to pair up both sides of the bet. The problem with entertainment books is that they often pick a side on the bet so each side is not equally balanced. An attempt to maximize potential profits for themself instead of the traditional strategy to minimize their risk.
  - francisofascii 3y ago
    Those situations where the book picks a side are interesting. Do you have any insight on how those situations arise? To me they must find a big difference between what their internal model says, and what public perception says, and so they create a point spread in the middle to lure the better into the taking the less favorable side.

CSMastermind 3y ago

Those who have not watched the Wendover Productions video on Sports Betting in America definitely should: https://youtu.be/Pm5bTZRhncY?si=rh-7RO8_nqPT5_PH https://youtu.be/Pm5bTZRhncY?si=rh-7RO8_nqPT5_PH

JumpinJack_Cash 3y ago

Sports betting and poker are the only financial type bet that are not influenced by politics or other people in general. On the stock/bond/commodities/real estate market you need to not only predict what will happen but also predict when and if other people will realize what is about to happen and when/if they'd trade accordingly. In sports betting you only have to study the starting pitcher and the relief vs the other team hitters, or the matchups in a NFL game. Horse races are all about the horses and their health and conditioning etc. It's liberating for somebody who wants to make a financial bet to just think about those things as opposed to trying to predict the behavior of billions of people that move the prices of stocks.

WendyTheWillow 3y ago

I'm glad this is getting looked at; it's a common and annoying scam for companies to claim large "free money" sums that are not actually US dollar equivalents (exchangeable for off-platform goods). I honestly don't even necessarily mind some loopholes, but it's gone too far. DraftKings should settle, apologize, and adjust/eliminate such promotions. After all, these promos are not in their business' critical path, so just come up with some other thing.

gist 3y ago

ft link and archive.is link doesn't work for me but I found this: https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3wkgg/the-lawyer-who-took-on-big-tobacco-is-now-fighting-an-online-sports-betting-giant https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3wkgg/the-lawyer-who-took-o... It's a bit click bait since they are targeting draftkings not 'sports betting'