MGM and Caesars shun prediction markets over licence risks

MGM Resorts International and Caesars Entertainment said they would stay out of prediction markets, concluding that the potential gains did not justify the risk to their gaming licences.

Casino.org first reported Oct. 1 that MGM CEO Bill Hornbuckle and Caesars CEO Tom Reeg set out that position at the Global Gaming Expo in Las Vegas. Both companies cited the uncertain regulatory treatment of event contracts and the consequences that a state regulator could impose on their existing casino, sports-betting and iGaming operations.

MGM had considered entering the sector in early 2025, potentially through its BetMGM joint venture. It abandoned the idea after the Nevada Gaming Control Board cautioned that offering sports event contracts could jeopardize MGM’s licences.

The board’s position reaches beyond activity within Nevada. It has said that a licensee offering event contracts, or forming similar partnerships, in Nevada, another state or tribal lands could face suitability reviews or further discipline. The board regards contracts on sports, elections and pop-culture events as wagering under Nevada law, irrespective of whether they are listed on an exchange regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Nevada permits sports and other event contracts only when the provider holds a nonrestricted gaming licence with sports-pool approval and meets other state sports-wagering requirements. The board’s warning followed similar notices issued in Ohio and Michigan.

Reeg said Caesars’ presence across multiple states made the exposure too great. Caesars and MGM together operate 17 integrated resorts on the Las Vegas Strip, while the two companies also operate four of Atlantic City’s nine Boardwalk casino properties. New Jersey has taken a firm position against event exchanges.

The companies’ existing online betting businesses also give them much to protect. By gross gaming revenue market share, BetMGM ranks third and Caesars fifth among US online sportsbook operators. The evidence of enforcement risk includes Arizona, where at least one operator previously lost a sports-wagering licence after entering event-contract trading.

Reeg also challenged the rules governing the products by referring to a yes-or-no contract on whether Caesars would be acquired in 2026. “There was nowhere in their rules that said I couldn’t place a bet,” he said, adding that he probably could have traded the derivative himself. He compared the sector’s expansion with the early years of daily fantasy sports, before states established clearer rules.

Hornbuckle questioned why some prediction platforms allow participation from age 18, when the cited minimum age for casino gambling and sports betting is 21. That difference has become part of the wider dispute over whether event contracts should be treated as federally regulated financial products or gambling subject to state rules.

As reported in September, Rep. Steven Horsford used G2E to press Congress for clearer federal limits on prediction-market gambling, arguing that sports-related contracts packaged as financial products undermine state and tribal authority.

Nevada’s conflict with prediction-market operators began in March 2025, when the state sent Kalshi a cease-and-desist letter. Kalshi sued and won a preliminary injunction in April that allowed it to continue operating temporarily; Crypto.com and Robinhood also sued after receiving Nevada cease-and-desist letters. Federal district courts in Nevada and New Jersey have held that the Commodities Exchange Act preempted state gaming rules governing Kalshi’s contracts, while a federal court in Maryland denied Kalshi a preliminary injunction against that state’s gaming commission.