Massachusetts rejects DraftKings launch proposal
DraftKings asked Massachusetts to reconsider vote on sports betting launch date. (photo by DraftKings)
A couple of things to note during the over six-hour meeting are:
According to Massachusetts Gaming Commissioner Executive Director Karen Wells, the Investigations and Enforcement Bureau (IEB), led by Director Loretta Lillios, has finished going through all of the 29 submitted Scoping Surveys.
“I just liked to comment that I really want to compliment Director Lillios and her whole team,” said Wells on the video. “These Scoping Surveys were just received last week and they just went through all of them. And they have all the materials ready to go. That is an astronomical feat and they are doing a tremendous job. I could be more impressed by Loretta and her whole team. Not only for the organization, but for the execution, so that’s incredible Loretta.”
Currently, Bay State sports bettors may be able to legally wager on the NFL Playoffs in January, but it appears online players will have to wait until March Madness.
During Thursday’s meeting, Massachusetts Gaming Commission’s Madam Chair Cathy Judd-Stein, the Commission received a letter from DraftKings asking the Commission to reconsider our vote on retail sports wagering to launch at the end of January and our online wagering to start at the beginning of March. And to allow retail and mobile operators to go live at the same time. This letter came to us and was directed to all of the commissioners.
“I don’t think we need to revisit this,” Commissioner Bradford Hill said. “I think we had a very good conversation back when we voted on this. Following research regarding a staggered launch, I feel very comfortable that what we did was the right thing to do.”
This sentiment was echoed on the video by fellow Commissioners Eileen O’Brien, Nakisha Skinner and Jordan Maynard.
Maynard; however, added, “I am concerned about the equity issues that exist… I want to be clear. I do believe that if we open this matter back up, it could change timelines completely. It could actually create a bigger problem for an applicant that wants to start by March. We could go past the March date if we’re not careful. For those reasons I would rather stick with what we did during those many, many hours of debate and we’re we fell. But I am concerned about equity issues. I am concerned about giving somebody a leg up. I will work with my fellow Commissioners if you’re interested in finding ways to level the playing field after everyone is operating.”