.svg)
After holding several meetings regarding the unpopular practice of operators limiting winning sports bettors, Massachusetts regulators will now request specific data from its licensees related to the practice.
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) approved a staff proposal on Thursday (November 21) to issue a formal data request after expressing concern during recent discussions with industry experts, customers and operators about the transparency associated with being limited.
Carrie Torrisi, chief of the MGC’s sports wagering division, told commissioners that officials will draft the data request in such a way that a review and analysis of that data would show the commission the volume of patrons being limited.
The request would also seek data on whether, and to what extent, a correlation exists between a patron whose limits have been decreased and who exhibits winning behavior, as well as a patron whose limits have been increased or are being treated as VIPs and who exhibits losing behavior.
“We would anticipate getting a data request out in the coming weeks,” Torrisi said.
Once received, Torrisi said, regulatory staff “would review the data and determine whether additional data or clarifications are necessary and identify possible action for the commission”.
Torrisi said staff would then return to the commission with an update and possibly propose regulations.
“Such regulations might include things like requiring notifications to patrons who have been limited, implementing reporting or audit requirements regarding patron limits, or requiring clear and defined protocols and parameters around patron limits,” she added.
Commissioners Brad Hill and Eileen O’Brien said that sending Massachusetts' sportsbook licensees the data request was the right approach.
“We are going to be curious here and I look forward to what we learn,” said MGC chair Jordan Maynard.
The decision to seek data on limiting bettors stems from two roundtables recently held by the commission. Originally, the MGC planned to hold one meeting on the subject in May but only BallyBet appeared before the five-member commission.
During a second meeting in September, operators argued that, in the majority of cases, players are being limited for specific behaviors and are well aware that they have been banned, but responsible gaming advocates and others stressed that the transparency was still lacking.
Retail Sports-Betting Kiosks Unlikely To Rollout
On Thursday, commissioners were also presented with a feasibility study by Spectrum Gaming on the potential economic benefits or pitfalls of legalizing sports-betting kiosks in retail locations.
Any decision on whether to move forward would ultimately be decided by state lawmakers, but gaming regulations directed the commission to study the feasibility of retail sports-betting kiosks.
“When we first looked at this, I thought this might be a benefit for the small businesses in Massachusetts but as we got into this we found it would not be,” Joe Weinert, executive vice president with Spectrum, told the commission.
“The revenues aren’t there, the economic benefit is not there, yet the risk of increased social impacts are increased, and the regulatory burden is increased,” Weinert said. “We can’t rationalize the Commonwealth of Massachusetts doing this.”
Weinert said the convenience of digital wagering on a phone has overtaken any potential opportunity for retail kiosks to generate meaningful revenue in the state. He used Ohio as an example where sports-betting kiosks in 2023 accounted for $1.3m in gross gaming revenue from 892 retailers.
In contract, Ohio reported $914m, or 97.5 percent of total gross sports-betting revenue, from mobile wagering last year. Beside Ohio, retail sports-betting kiosks are in operation in retail locations Montana and Washington, D.C.
Matt Para, senior advisor with Spectrum, cautioned that “every kiosks location essentially is a casino”, requiring additional commission resources to regulate a new gaming vertical that will generate a relatively small amount of additional revenue.
In addition, the 120-page report cautioned that the integration of gambling kiosks in public spaces would shrink the number of gambling-free spaces for families and people in recovery, and it would increase youth exposure to gambling advertisements.
Marlene Warner, CEO of the Massachusetts Council on Gaming and Health, added Thursday that there would be a significant risk of minors gaining access to the kiosks given the limited resources of retail employees, as well as normalizing gambling for impressionable minors.
“I’m not surprised with what has come out of the report,” Hill said. “We have been hearing about people using their phones to place bets; 99 percent of the bets are done on a phone. A kiosk would just not make it in these [retail businesses].”
Hill admitted that he was one of the people who thought sports-betting kiosks would have been very helpful for the retail industry, but “it really isn’t the panacea that some thought it would be”.
“It’s just not the moneymaker that people think it is,” he added.
