BetMGM boss decries prediction markets during earnings call
BetMGM CEO Adam Greenblatt’s tone grew particularly emphatic during the company’s third-quarter earnings call when he raised the subject of prediction markets. “The competitive environment remains intense,” he said, thanks to what he called “unregulated and illegal operators offering sports betting.”
Consequently, Greenblatt said, BetMGM was emphasizing iGaming and de-prioritizing online sports betting in OSB-only markets. Even so, he praised BetMGM for “another quarter of controlled, disciplined execution.
“We have meaningfully reduced marketing in OSB in Q3,” Greenblatt said, “and have seen handle growth despite the prevalence and growth of prediction markets.”
Queried about the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s apparent ban on iGaming products for prediction markets, Greenblatt emitted an audible sigh. “What an interesting question,” he replied. “If anything, the risk has been stayed for some time.”
He called the CFTC move merely “cosmetics in pursuit of survival,” expecting a favorable Supreme Court ruling next year. However, “to the extent prediction markets survive, it’s a matter of time before casino-like products emerge in some other form.”
Greenblatt also stressed BetMGM’s consistency of market share despite the incursion of event contracts. He noted that it remained at 8% of OSB and 20% of iGaming. “We have been able to retain market position while spending a lot less,” he noted.
“There has been no change in prediction market spend,” Greenblatt continued. “Prediction markets continue to spend heavily. It’s a testament to our marketing strategy” that BetMGM was retaining share.
Also, BetMGM was said to be “looking for unexplored areas that have been less heavily impacted by the prediction markets. We will find a way.”
Turning to sports, the post-World Cup environment, Greenblatt said, was a greatly improved one. “We haven’t seen returns this favorable sine the back end of last year.”
July had been “strong” for BetMGM, while August and September were “solid,” Greenblatt reported. He added that he was pleased with the NFL season.
Chief Financial Officer Gary Deutsch reported that the first four weeks of the professional football season had been favorable to BetMGM, although high winnings for the books could be “suppressive” of handle. Week Five of the NFL season, he added, had not been so auspicious for the house.
Handle rose 3% during the third quarter, as player engagement and value were said to have remained active, particularly at the upper end. In addition, “September saw strong registrations among high-value customers,” Greenblatt remarked.
BetMGM executives reaffirmed their full-year revenue and cash-flow guidance. “We remain laser-focused on delivering sustainable profit growth and EBITDA,” the CEO said. Added Deutsch, “we’re in good shape to meet the guidance.”
Greenblatt said that the third quarter had seen higher-than-expected first-time depositors. He added that he was encouraged by the early results from Alberta, which went live in July. Key performance indicators from that Canadian province were, Greenblatt said, better than those in Ontario at a comparable period.
Greenblatt also expressed pleasure with the launch of the Game of Thrones iGaming product in the United States. The BetMGM exclusive was, he said, “our most successful game launch.” He also hailed the inception of live-streamed slot games in New Jersey.
In addition to a US$50 million dividend to MGM Resorts International and Entain, BetMGM also paid out US$18 million in parent fees during the third quarter. Greenblatt opined that “those payments demonstrate the continued cash-generating nature of the business.”
“The competitive environment has been really challenging,” Greenblatt allowed, saying that promotions remained elevated in iGaming in general and Alberta in particular. He did not think that was sustainable.
Greenblatt said he expected BetMGM’s focus to shift to marketing and retaining players. Praising moderation in promotions, he emphasized keeping legacy players over gaining new ones.
Although iGaming had decelerated in August, Greenblatt characterized that as an outlier. He was happy, he said, with September’s momentum.
Nevada remained a prime catchment area for BetMGM, Greenblatt said, generating thousands of first-time depositors on a weekly basis “and I see no slowdown in that rate of acquisition. In isolation, it is not our largest source of traffic through the myriad channels that are available to us.”
David McKee is an award-winning journalist who has three decades of experience covering the gaming industry.
Dig Deeper
Related stories
The Backstory
Prediction markets move from side issue to strategic threat
BetMGM’s latest earnings commentary lands after more than a year in which prediction markets shifted from a regulatory curiosity to a core competitive concern for U.S. sportsbook operators. Chief Executive Adam Greenblatt has increasingly framed event-contract platforms as sports betting competitors operating outside the state-by-state gambling rules that govern BetMGM, DraftKings, FanDuel and other licensed operators.
That position has hardened over successive calls. In April, Greenblatt used BetMGM’s first-quarter update to argue the company was facing elevated acquisition costs from “new sports betting companies” presenting themselves as prediction markets. As BetMGM criticized prediction markets during its first-quarter earnings call, he cast the issue as a states-rights dispute likely to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court and said BetMGM was aligned with state attorneys general who oppose the products.
The escalation matters because prediction-market operators are not merely offering a different user interface. Their defenders say they are listing federally regulated event contracts, while state gaming regulators and licensed betting companies argue many of the products look and function like sports wagers. That distinction determines whether operators must pay state gaming taxes, follow local licensing rules and maintain the consumer-protection systems required of sportsbooks.
For BetMGM, the issue is both legal and economic. The company says it cannot compete on identical terms with businesses it views as avoiding the costs of regulation. Greenblatt’s repeated references to “unregulated” rivals reflect a broader industry argument: If event contracts are permitted to capture sports betting demand without state gaming oversight, the regulated model could face pressure on tax revenue, marketing efficiency and licensing value.
A profitability push shapes the response
BetMGM’s sharper tone also reflects the stage of its own business. After years of investment by MGM Resorts International and Entain, the joint venture has been emphasizing profitability, cash generation and more selective growth. In early 2025, executives acknowledged that losses had widened the previous year, but said the business had improved its underlying economics and was moving toward sustainable returns.
During that February investor update, BetMGM executives said the company was rebuilding momentum despite wider losses. Greenblatt described the company as an iGaming leader, pointed to $2.1 billion in 2024 revenue and guided investors toward $2.4 billion to $2.5 billion in revenue for the following year. The call also made clear that BetMGM would pursue higher-value players rather than chase marginal volume in every market.
That shift became the foundation for its response to prediction markets. Rather than match what executives characterized as irrational spending, BetMGM began reducing marketing in online sports betting-only jurisdictions where returns were weaker. Management said it would invest where it had stronger advantages: iGaming, omnichannel players tied to MGM’s land-based casino network and premium customers whose lifetime value justified acquisition costs.
The strategy has allowed BetMGM to present restraint as a competitive strength. Executives argue that its market share has held even as prediction platforms spend aggressively, and that its higher-value customers are more durable than casual bettors drawn by promotions. That message is important to investors because the company’s long-term targets depend less on raw handle growth than on disciplined customer acquisition, cross-sell to casino products and improved cash flow.
iGaming becomes the defensive core
BetMGM’s pivot away from lower-return sports betting markets has elevated iGaming as the center of its growth case. The company has repeatedly described online casino as its anchor business, supported by branded slot content, live-dealer products and loyalty links to MGM Resorts. That emphasis predates the latest prediction-market dispute, but the competitive pressure has made it more pronounced.
In July, after a second quarter lifted by soccer and basketball wagering, BetMGM said World Cup engagement helped offset a tougher sports betting environment. Greenblatt said the World Cup had meaningfully expanded soccer fandom and driven player activity during a seasonally quieter period. At the same time, he said the company was scaling back marketing in lower-return online sports betting states and focusing on players it was committed to retaining.
The company’s product roadmap has followed that logic. BetMGM has leaned into exclusive and branded casino titles, including Game of Thrones, The Price Is Right, Friends, Wizard of Oz and Wheel of Fortune games. It has also invested in live-dealer studios, an area executives have described as one of the fastest-growing segments in U.S. iGaming. Those products are designed to deepen engagement among existing users and create reasons for customers to remain within BetMGM’s ecosystem rather than migrate to lower-friction rivals.
This explains why Greenblatt’s criticism of prediction markets often sits alongside praise for iGaming performance. If sports event contracts siphon price-sensitive or promotion-driven sports bettors, BetMGM is betting that regulated online casino can provide a more profitable base. The risk is that prediction-market operators eventually expand into casino-like structures, a possibility Greenblatt has flagged as likely if the current model survives legal scrutiny.
Regulators, courts and states frame the stakes
The legal backdrop remains unsettled, which is why BetMGM has treated the issue as a long-running strategic risk rather than a short-term promotional challenge. The company has said state regulators warned licensees against participating in sports prediction markets, including through letters that raised the prospect of serious licensing consequences. That places operators such as BetMGM in a difficult position: entering the category could threaten state licenses, while staying out could leave market share exposed if prediction platforms keep expanding.
By October, BetMGM’s position had become explicit. In a third-quarter call, Greenblatt said BetMGM would not enter prediction markets while regulators opposed them. He argued sports prediction markets were effectively illegal sports betting under current law, lacking consumer protections and bypassing state taxes. He also said the company was not seeing meaningful degradation in its own handle trends, suggesting early prediction-market growth was concentrated in states without legal sports betting.
That geographic point is central to the policy debate. Prediction markets can appeal to customers in states where sports betting has not been legalized, creating pressure on lawmakers who have been slow to authorize wagering or iGaming. Greenblatt has said that pressure could accelerate digital gambling legislation in large untapped markets, including California, while also keeping attention on states such as Virginia, Indiana and Washington, D.C., as more plausible near-term iGaming prospects.
For states, the stakes are fiscal as well as regulatory. Licensed sportsbooks pay taxes, fund responsible-gambling programs and operate under local enforcement regimes. If comparable sports products migrate to federally framed contracts, state gaming agencies risk losing both oversight and revenue. For tribal operators, the concern is also sovereignty and exclusivity, particularly where compacts grant tribes specific rights over gaming activity.
Cash generation raises expectations
BetMGM’s complaints about prediction markets have unfolded as its financial profile improved. The company has moved from heavy investment and losses toward distributions to its parents, reinforcing management’s claim that the business can generate cash while absorbing competitive pressure. That makes the prediction-market issue more consequential: Investors are evaluating whether the new profitability trajectory is durable or vulnerable to regulatory arbitrage.
In a later year-end update, BetMGM executives described a “transformative” year marked by profit and distributions. Greenblatt said iGaming remained the powerhouse of the business, while online sports betting handle rose despite lower marketing spending and a smaller player base. The company also highlighted stronger Nevada performance, helped by online sign-ups and MGM’s physical casino footprint.
Those gains support BetMGM’s argument that it does not need to chase every customer at any cost. Management has repeatedly said it wants fewer, higher-value players who stay longer and cross over between sports betting, online casino and MGM’s loyalty network. That model depends on the continued integrity of state-regulated channels and on iGaming expansion into additional jurisdictions.
The current article fits into that arc. Greenblatt’s latest remarks are not an isolated outburst but the continuation of a campaign to define prediction markets as unlawful competitors, preserve the value of regulated licenses and justify a more selective sports betting strategy. BetMGM is telling investors it can hold share, spend less and grow cash flow. The unresolved question is whether courts and regulators will leave prediction markets as a contained nuisance or allow them to become a broader alternative to state-regulated gambling.
