In a recent development, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee has raised doubts about Crown’s assertion that it cannot afford to pay the AUD450 million ($301 million) fine imposed by AUSTRAC in a single payment. The fine was levied against the casino giant for numerous breaches of anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism laws.

Justice Lee Questions Crown’s Financial Predicament in Landmark Court Proceedings

During the court proceedings, Justice Lee emphasized that the penalty was already at the lower end of what would be considered an appropriate punishment for the company’s “absolutely egregious” misconduct, reported the Australian Financial Review. Crown’s suggestion to pay the fine over a two-year period would reduce its net present value to AUD406 million ($271.6 million) when accounting for interest rates.

Crown’s barrister, Philip Crutchfield, KC, claimed that the company “can’t afford to pay more than we’ve agreed.” However, Justice Lee expressed skepticism about the veracity of Crown’s financial predicament, noting the lack of substantial evidence beyond an affidavit from the company’s CFO, Alan McGregor. Justice Lee further highlighted the absence of cross-examination of McGregor by AUSTRAC, which hindered the verification of Crown’s claims.

Justice Lee emphasized the need for accountability and suggested that the lack of thorough examination of witnesses’ affidavits could undermine the honesty of their statements. He also raised concerns about the penalty’s failure to factor in the historical payment of dividends to Crown shareholders, suggesting that the penalties should be significant enough to discourage similar illegal activities.

In February, Justice Lee also criticized AUSTRAC for taking too long to bring the case against Crown to the court.

Crown’s Contrition Questioned as Justice Lee Weighs Options for Fine Approval

Justice Lee is expected to deliver his final decision on the afternoon of July 11. While he indicated his inclination to approve the fine, he also contemplated the possibility of appointing an independent party to assess Crown’s financial situation. Alternatively, he proposed allowing a payment plan but with provisions for Crown to pay earlier if its financial position improved.

Crown’s contrition was also called into question during the court proceedings. Although the company expressed remorse for its breaches and underwent a complete overhaul of its board and senior management, Justice Lee challenged whether the changes truly reflected a genuine state of contrition. He emphasized that contrition should entail a genuine change of mindset and not merely the replacement of individuals involved in the wrongdoing.

The outcome of this case will have significant implications for Crown and the gambling industry as a whole. At the same time, Australia is poised to implement significant changes to its gambling industry, with proposals for a national gambling regulator and a ban on all forms of gambling advertising.

The post Crown’s Claim of Financial Hardship Questioned by Federal Court appeared first on Keno Wizard.

Bally’s Corp. and IGT, two major gambling businesses with headquarters in America’s smallest but most densely populated state, had a chance to pitch their plan for online casino gambling in Rhode Island, but not every stakeholder in government the local gambling economy appeared to be happy about the prospect as proposed.

IGT is a familiar name to most seasoned casino gamblers in the US, but not everyone is aware of the fact that Si Redd’s Las Vegas-based company was acquired by and merged with the world’s largest lottery operator, GTECH – a company that posted over US$ 4 billion in revenue for 2022 or that Bally’s as we know it is not the Bally’s they may have known a decade ago. That company sprung from Twin Rivers (Rhode Island’s exclusive video lottery terminal casino game supplier with venues in Lincoln and Tiverton) and acquired the Bally’s name from Caesar’s a short time ago in relative terms.

The pushback comes from what might seem to be the most unlikely of places – the Rhode Island State Lottery (RILOT). Under the proposed bill, RILOT would have complete control of nearly every aspect of the proposed online casino gambling market in the state from the making of game rules to terms and conditions, and every regulatory duty normally associated with online casino gambling. The servers themselves would be located in one or both of Bally’s land-based casinos in the state.

IGT provides Bally’s with technology and machines to run its lottery casinos and sportsbetting applications in the state.

The Will of the People

Casino gambling and gambling expansion in the state were allowed under voter referendums in accordance with the state constitution, which as of today states:

“No act expanding the types or locations of gambling which are permitted within the state or within any city or town … shall take effect until it has been approved by the majority of those electors voting in a statewide referendum and by the majority of those electors voting in said referendum in the municipality in which the proposed gambling would be allowed.”

Furcolo said (formatting – source article): “While the Rhode Island Lottery believes there is a legislative path for authorizing iGaming, and is supportive of iGaming, it is the … Lottery’s position that the bill — as drafted — is likely unconstitutional and must be revised to conform with the authorization under the 2012 and 2016 Voter Referendums related to casino gaming.

IGT is Rhode Island’s exclusive supplier of lottery solutions such as traditional lottery, instant win tickets, video lottery terminals (casino “slots”), and internet lottery games in the state.

The company’s lottery contract was recently extended until 2043 guaranteeing IGT the exclusive right to provide those games and services for an additional 20 years.

More recently, Bally’s was approved by RILOT to continue its exclusive provenance of sportsbetting in the state for three years, in concert with and using the technologies of IGT.

More than Constitutional Issues?

According to a report in the Providence Journal, one of the problems raised at a Senate hearing was one of monopoly as the legislation under consideration would not allow competitive bidding for an online casino license tender. The legislation, as proposed, was written and delivered to state lawmakers by Bally’s Corp, IGT, or one of the consortium’s affiliates.

Another issue, the one at front and center is the ability of 18-year-olds to act as “gambling surrogates” or proxy bettors for other high school-aged residents even younger.

Rhode Island teens of 18 years or older are currently banned from purchasing or using alcohol, cigarettes, or recreational marijuana – but they are allowed to place sports bets. According to the Providence Journal article: “<this> has made them kingpins of sorts in high school gambling operations.”

It’s not always easy to parse what’s “really” being said in Rhode Island media as the state has an antiquated but fully democratic government in the republican form, but a labyrinthine and impossible for outsiders to navigate political system as well as a history of less than savory characters holding sway over many elements of power in the state. If those nuances, as well as other things about America’s oldest state, are not understood by readers, the media may falsely assume that readers outside of the state may know what is behind certain references.

One salient example is a statement made by former Sen. John Tassoni Wednesday night when he was speaking in the capacity of a Rhode Island Council on Problem Gambling board member. He told a Senate committee: “They were called ’10 percenters’ on Federal Hill,” while referring to 18-year-olds giving younger children access to gambling online.

The former Senator’s office was closed on Sunday as this article was written so we were unable to contact him for clarification. We find no history of the “obvious” assumption that teens “ran numbers” for bookmakers or any other guess at what nefarious nature a “teen ten percenter” would represent.

A snippet of RI history for context from WorldAtlas:

On May 4th, 1776, Rhode Island was the first colony to renounce allegiance to Great Britain and declare its independence. However, Rhode Island was the last state to ratify the United States Constitution. It finally did so on May 29, 1790.

Readers are welcome to do their own research on Federal Hill and its history to form a personal assumption about the former Senator’s reference. A cursory search revealed no reference to gambling for our researchers.

Former Senator Not Alone in Concerns

Rhode Island Lottery director, Mark Furcolo warned that the Senate bill (S948) is “likely unconstitutional” as it is currently written. The Journal states that even if that issue is put to rest, iGaming “is likely” to cannibalize state revenues from existing Lottery offerings. However, Bally’s addressed that issue in a Spectrum Gaming analysis prior to announcing the new legislation at a Chamber of Commerce dinner a couple of months ago.

It would appear to the casual observer that some of the “noise” rising up against the casino bill may come from competitors, as is understandably the case in a capitalist system that is supposed to be fair and free of monopolization.

A spokesman for the Sports Betting Alliance (a coalition that includes BetMGM, DraftKings, and FanDuel) reportedly asked why Rhode Island might join Delaware as the only state in the Union “whose residents would be limited to a single choice when it comes to iGaming.”

While the aforementioned businesses are all primarily sportsbetting operators, they also have casino components in some states that allow online casino gambling along with sportsbetting.

The spokesperson, Jon Mandel continued: “The result will be no different than mobile sports betting,” referring to the recent RILOT/Bally’s contract renewal of three years.

“Residents will continue to use the illegal market; <they will> drive into Connecticut; or <they will> wait until Massachusetts legalizes iGaming to then cross the border, to the benefit of that state, not Rhode Island.”

Is $210 Million Per Year in New Revenue Enough?

Mandelas purportedly backed up his argument by referring to stats from the first month the neighboring state, Massachusetts opened online sports betting in that state, beginning on March 10, 2023.

Mandalas stated: “GeoComply identified 1,761 instances of a Rhode Island resident first attempting to access a Massachusetts sports betting app in Rhode Island and then traveling to Massachusetts and successfully logging into an app.”

The Sports Betting Alliance argues: “Multiple iGaming operators will generate significantly more tax revenue for the state than if the state grants one company a monopoly.”

The Bally’s measure as written is expected to generate about $210 Million a year for state coffers based on its Spectrum Gaming analysis and report which was tendered along with the proposed legislation in February this year.

Source: Online gambling could bring $210m in revenue. Why is Rhode Island Lottery pushing back? Providence Journal, May 12, 2023

The post Rhode Island online casino bill questioned on constitutional and other issues appeared first on Keno Wizard.

The regulator’s executive director himself put into question the fact that an owner of the company is from Tel Aviv while others voiced concerns that the application review process was abnormally lengthy. Many are speculating that this could be the end for NeoGames’ Indiana license.

An Unresolved Issue is the Stumbling Stone

NeoGames is operational in The Hoosier State as a player account management (PAM) services provider for the Caesars Sportsbook. However, neither NeoGames nor Caesars has publicly addressed IGC’s concerns since the regulator’s meeting on March 9. During the meeting, it was made clear that the issue hasn’t been resolved in the three years since the application was first put forward.

What had happened, was that NeoGames received its temporary license three months after application, and the review process has basically been ongoing ever since, as a full license was never issued. The regulator’s current goal is to put forward a clear-cut action plan before June when NeoGames’ ongoing temporary license expires.

Thus, NeoGames’ permanent license is not only still elusive but it now seems even less likely it will ever be granted. Since the concerns that Indiana’s gambling regulator has with the company haven’t been resolved since the application, and the issue was raised yet again, there is still an option to move forward, however – at least in theory. It isn’t clear what NeoGames’ plans are, though.

Indiana’s Market is Preparing for Shifts

In the meantime, Indiana’s gambling market is having its own woes. Multiple analyses show that the most likely reason for January’s dip in betting handle was Ohio. As punters started flooding Ohio’s operations after the state went online, The Hoosier State reported $427.2 million in betting handle. The January 2022 results broke the $500 million mark, turning into a record success for the state.

Compared to December 2022’s $431.4 million, however, the January 2023 result wasn’t all that bad, marking only about a percentage point slide. This means that although Ohio did manage to allure many punters for its online launch, it can still be good news for the industry overall, as more players can now enjoy their favorite hobby.

Ohio’s January results were received well enough by many, though. As this was practically the first month of sports betting in the state, its $1.1 billion sports betting handle was extremely good news for the market’s outlook in The Buckeye State. Almost 99.1% of that was generated by mobile sports betting, leaving no doubt as to what the driving force for the state is.

It’s not a surprise, then, that out of the 33 states (plus DC) that have sports betting, 24 states (again, plus DC) offer mobile sports betting. Nebraska, Florida, and Maine are currently getting ready to implement sports wagers, and again – two of the three states are also going to launch online, with Nebraska being the one holding back.

The post NeoGames 2020 Indiana License Application Questioned appeared first on Keno Wizard.