FanDuel’s entry into prediction markets in the United States has reportedly sparked fresh tensions with Nevada gaming regulators, who pressed Flutter executives on their plans during a public meeting on Thursday.
This came less than 24 hours after FanDuel announced its partnership with derivatives marketplace CME Group. Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB) Commissioner Brian Krolicki quizzed Flutter’s private counsel Erica Okerberg and FanDuel’s Senior Vice President of Public Policy & Sustainability Cory Fox.
Under the agreement, FanDuel will allow users to place simple, fully-funded yes-or-no wagers on financial market events, beginning with trades for as little as $1. FanDuel customers in the US will gain access to straightforward event-based contracts focused on major financial and economic indicators. These include the S&P 500 index or gold prices hitting certain levels. Users will also be able to wager on outcomes of key economic indicators, including the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or Consumer Price Index (CPI).
FanDuel said its agreement would initially focus on commodities such as gold, oil, gas, and stock indices. However, when asked directly in Nevada, Okerberg confirmed that sports contracts were also “under consideration” in certain jurisdictions. “Of course, they are looking into and considering whether sports contracts might be something that could be offered in compliance with local laws,” Okerberg was quoted as saying, stressing that any operational decisions would be reviewed with the NGCB first.
Nevada’s legal battle with prediction markets
The regulator is currently fighting lawsuits with Kalshi, a leading prediction market operator, and Robinhood, which recently entered the event contract space. Krolicki noted that the NGCB is in “a very sensitive spot” given the ongoing litigation, emphasising that the board must balance its Gaming Control Act with overlapping federal oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
“To reconcile complying with federal and state matters, that’s not possible today,” Krolicki noted. “Your licensees here are important to us, but something’s out of the barn door already. There’s much at stake.”
Last week, Robinhood Derivatives filed lawsuits in US District Courts against the Nevada Gaming Control Board, the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement, and their respective attorneys general. Robinhood Derivatives claims that these state agencies are trying to block its federally regulated event contracts, which it argues fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The company is seeking court orders to stop the states from applying gaming laws to its contracts, asserting that these are not standard sports bets but federally approved financial instruments.
FanDuel not ruling out Kalshi
Adding to the tension, Flutter did not rule out a potential deal with Kalshi. Fox confirmed that FanDuel’s partnership with CME Group is not exclusive. Okerberg admitted Flutter had spoken with “lots of different people,” including Kalshi, and while no agreement exists today, “a future relationship has not been ruled out.” This acknowledgment raised eyebrows as Kalshi is already in direct conflict with Nevada regulators in court.
In June, Front Office Sports reported that Kalshi has begun exploratory talks with FanDuel. A partnership would have allowed Kalshi to move beyond its current binary model of simple yes/no contracts and into more traditional sports betting formats. “It’s only a matter of time until parlays, point spreads, over/unders, and eventually player props are available,” Front Office Sports had commented.
Nevada licence remains FanDuel’s priority
FanDuel does not operate online sports betting in Nevada. Instead, it provides information services and powers branding and oddsmaking for Boyd Gaming’s Fremont Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas. Okerberg clarified that Boyd Gaming would not be involved in the CME deal and insisted that Flutter’s Nevada licence “remains paramount and the company’s primary focus.”
Still, Krolicki pressed the issue, “It’s concerning when you’re walking up to the door, participating in these prediction markets when certain activities, if not the predominance of activities, are in conflict with this state and our Gaming Control Act,” he said. “Why should this not concern this commission today?”
The NGCB’s line of questioning went as far as asking Flutter which side it would choose if forced to decide between CFTC and Nevada oversight. Okerberg did not provide a definitive answer, instead assuring regulators that Flutter’s Compliance Committee would review any decision and consult with the board before launching new products.
NGCB Chair Jennifer Togliatti concluded the exchange by thanking Flutter for appearing and “talking through” the matter, joking that she appreciated the company’s willingness to discuss issues before resorting to federal litigation. Fox added firmly that FanDuel had “absolutely no intention to file suit anywhere.”
