Both of Ohio’s amended gambling regulations are still under scrutiny and must go through the state’s Common-Sense Initiative office and the legislative Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review before they can be finalized. The proposals are expected to appear before the Ohio Casino Control Commission (OCCC) later this year for final approval.
Ohio, known for its strict advertising and marketing rules, is on the brink of tightening its regulations even further. The OCCC has recently voted to prohibit gambling companies from offering promotions as part of a “non-gaming, consumer transaction.” This rule specifically targets consumers under the age of 21, which is the legal age for gambling in the state.
For instance, under the new rule, a company like Fanatics Sportsbook would be unable to offer promotions to high-school students buying team merchandise. This move aims to ensure that gambling promotions do not inadvertently target minors. Additionally, the regulation would extend to ban promotions to those listed on voluntary or non-voluntary exclusion lists—individuals recognized for having gambling problems or other “vulnerable individuals.”
In parallel developments, regulators in Massachusetts are contemplating similar amendments to their rules, indicating a broader movement within the industry to tighten restrictions around gambling promotions.
The Ohio regulator is also progressing towards expanding its requirements for integrity monitoring. Currently, integrity monitors are mandated to focus on identifying “unusual” or “suspicious” gaming activities. However, the proposed amendments would require independent integrity monitors to “collect and analyze information to identify integrity concerns.” Essentially, the new rules call for proactive measures, where the monitors are tasked not just with flagging suspicious activities but actively seeking signs of such behavior.
One critical element of the discussion surrounding the integrity monitoring rule change is how to facilitate situations in which athletes can anonymously report their concerns.
. The framework aims to provide a safer environment for whistleblowers to flag potential issues without fear of retaliation. The discretion on how this information will be shared ultimately lies with the executive director of the OCCC.
In related news, the Michigan Gaming Control Board’s (MGCB) director, Henry Williams, addressed participants during the board’s monthly meeting, urging them to stop implying that the board aims to “shut down businesses like Chuck E. Cheese and Dave and Busters.” Williams’ remarks came in light of recent concerns expressed by the MGCB over Dave & Busters’ proposal to allow legal-age customers to wager against friends while playing games at the venue.
The adult amusement company is considering a model where loyalty members over the age of 18 can bet against each other through its app. This peer-to-peer betting environment is being developed by Lucra, a gamification software company. The proposal would involve users placing real money bets against each other, raising concerns amongst regulators.
Nevada regulators have already informed Dave & Busters that such betting activities are not allowed. Meanwhile, Illinois lawmakers had considered a similar prohibition, although the proposal did not reach a final vote before the legislative session concluded.
As Ohio’s regulatory landscape shifts, stakeholders within the gambling industry are closely watching these developments. Nicole Macedo contributed additional insights to this unfolding story. The coming months will be crucial as Ohio’s amended rules undergo further examination, and their final approval could set new precedents for gambling regulations both within and beyond the state.
