Players’ unions, gambling firms, and professional sports leagues want officials to change the proposed Tennessee online sportsbook rules. Some parties critical to the proposed regulations include DraftKings, Major League Baseball, Caesars, the National Basketball Association, players’ unions for five pro leagues, the PGA Tour, and Facebook.

They gave their criticisms during the recent public comment period set by the Tennessee Lottery. Lawmakers approved sports betting in the state. However, there’s still no timeline for its implementation.

DraftKings and other gambling firms don’t want the proposed rule on parlays. According to the draft, it will be a loss if one of the events in the parlay is a tie. DraftKings told Bookie Pay Per Head Solutions that it was not a requirement in other jurisdictions. The rule will frustrate many players.

Proposed Tennessee Online Sportsbook Rules

Tennessee Online Sportsbook Rules Face Criticism

Caesars doesn’t want the rule that places a limit to annual payouts at 85 percent. The casino giant told a political forum that it was way below the industry standard. Also, it will place operators at a disadvantage.

The PGA Tour is concerned about the ban on wagers on occurrence determinable by a single person or play. The pro golf association is worried that it might prohibit bets on golf and other individual sports.

The Tennessee Lottery could make changes to the rules and vote on them during its next board meeting on February 19. Some groups thought that the licensing fees are too expensive. Also, Facebook wants assurance from the regulator that it doesn’t fall under lower-level licensing requirements. The social media’s concern came about because it allows gambling companies to advertise on its platform.

Players in Tennessee hopes that state regulators will make the proper changes to the proposed rules. At least, the state will have its sportsbook industry within the year. That’s not the case in New York, where the NY online sportsbook industry is non-existent.

Bookie Pay Per Head Service
0 0 votes
Article Rating