The Arkansas Racing Commission today approved regulations that will allow Arkansas casinos to offer sports betting online, other than on-site only. The vote was unanimous.
The audience that makes the rules has been governed through efforts through national betting corporations to replace regulations and give them the ability to get a higher percentage of the profits if they enter into agreements to supply platforms to casinos.
The regulations now go to the Legislative Council for review, where lobbying efforts will continue In this case, some of Arkansas’ largest lobbyists, including the state Chamber of Commerce and the hotel lobby, supported the regulations as presented. take a position at the end of January.
Most of the discussion focused on the resistance of national betting companies, such as DraftKings and MGM, to a rule specifying that 51% of the house’s net profits are held through Arkansas casinos. National bookmakers retain 85 to 95% of net betting revenue. they argue that they deserve it because their marketing skill increases the profits of casinos and gambling.
The Commission noted that most of the individual comments on the regulations come from messages opposing the expansion of the game in a crusade organized through a devoted lobthrough. John Burris, a lobthroughist of a national bookmaker (DraftKings, FanDuel and BetMGM are among the operators hoping for a market share), such equivalent weight will be given to those who have signed a form letter generated through a representative who is applying for the national bookmakers.
In comments and questions, the commissioners seemed receptive to Oaklawn Park’s arguments that awarding the majority of sports betting profits to outdoor operators, the state conceded well to outdoor interest, where the state casino amendment specifies that the game will have to be operated by entities in Arkansas.
Carlton Saffa, Saracen Casino’s representative at Pine Bluff, said national corporations had implicitly criticized the experience of local operators by describing their platforms as “top-notch,” as if the platforms evolved through the casinos themselves (which some predict) might not be.
National bookmaker lobbyists argued that there were legal issues over a state rule on profit-sharing and said no other state set a profit limit, but Saffa noted that there are payment specifications in many laws and that casinos already have profit-sharing agreements on slots. which give 80% of the profits to the casino. And he said bookmakers fighting the Arkansas rule, who said they wouldn’t be able to operate in Arkansas if casinos kept 51% of revenue, were willing to settle for a 51% payout in New York to operate there.