FanDuel rejects calls to shut down VIP program, responding to Congress reps over personalized video for bettor

Dig Deeper

The Backstory

VIP scrutiny moves from customer service to Capitol Hill

FanDuel’s refusal to shut down its VIP program marks the latest escalation in a dispute that began with a single personalized video and has widened into a broader test of how U.S. sportsbooks manage their highest-value customers. The operator’s response to members of Congress keeps the program intact while defending it as a customer-service function governed by the same safeguards that apply to all users.

The controversy centers on Terry Thompson, a former FanDuel VIP customer who alleges in litigation that the company exploited his gambling addiction. Thompson says he placed $18.5 million in bets and lost more than $1.5 million while developing a gambling problem tied in part to microbetting. His case gained wider attention after reports that a FanDuel VIP manager arranged a personalized video from Philadelphia Phillies star Bryce Harper in 2024.

The episode prompted Sen. Richard Blumenthal and Reps. Paul Tonko and Valerie Foushee to ask FanDuel whether VIP staff use rewards, celebrity content or other incentives to retain customers who may be trying to slow or stop gambling. The lawmakers also pressed the company on whether users on losing streaks receive targeted promotions. FanDuel’s answer, as reported in the current article, leaned on its responsible gambling systems rather than accepting the premise that VIP structures present distinct risks.

A Cameo-style greeting became a regulatory flashpoint

The Harper video first drew attention because it sat between a private fan greeting and a gambling-related customer retention tool. In the 21-second clip, Harper greeted Thompson and his son, thanked Thompson for his support and said the message had been arranged by Thompson’s FanDuel VIP manager to make Thanksgiving “extra special.” FanDuel reportedly obtained the message through Cameo, the celebrity video platform.

That distinction matters because personalized greetings may not fit neatly within traditional advertising rules. A conventional sportsbook ad can be reviewed for required disclosures, audience targeting and restrictions on athletes promoting betting. A bespoke message sent to one customer through a VIP manager is harder to classify. The Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board said it was reviewing the matter after the video surfaced, adding a state-level regulatory layer to what had initially been a private lawsuit. The board’s review followed reporting on how the personalized celebrity greeting raised questions about gambling promotion rules.

There has been no public evidence that Harper knew about Thompson’s alleged gambling addiction or the intended use of the video. Harper also was not named as a defendant in Thompson’s case. Still, the incident landed at an uncomfortable intersection for leagues, teams, players and sportsbooks: athlete likeness, gambling partnerships and the treatment of customers whose betting behavior may show signs of harm.

Baseball’s betting ties complicate the response

The lawmakers did not limit their inquiry to FanDuel. They also wrote to Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association seeking details on policies that govern player relationships with betting operators. Their questions reflected concern that league rules may not have kept pace with the more personalized marketing methods available to sportsbooks and their VIP teams.

MLB’s current collective bargaining framework reportedly permits players to enter promotional agreements with betting operators as long as their name, uniform number or likeness is not used to promote wagering on baseball games. The Harper episode tests the edges of that approach because the message did not appear to promote a specific bet or baseball wagering product. Its alleged function, according to critics, was to strengthen a sportsbook’s relationship with a valuable customer.

The letters to MLB and the union came as the MLBPA was reportedly considering changes to restrictions during negotiations over a new agreement. Blumenthal, Tonko and Foushee asked for responses by Aug. 24, underscoring how athlete participation in gambling-adjacent promotions has become a congressional concern. Their inquiry into MLB’s rules following the Bryce Harper FanDuel video placed the league’s commercial model under the same scrutiny as sportsbook conduct.

That scrutiny is sharpened by MLB’s broader embrace of betting partnerships. BetMGM and MGM Resorts International recently renewed multiyear agreements with the league, keeping BetMGM’s sports wagering brand across MLB Network, MLB.com and other digital platforms. The arrangement also maintains MGM Resorts’ status as MLB’s exclusive integrated resort and casino partner. The renewed MLB partnerships with BetMGM and MGM Resorts show that gambling is no longer peripheral to the sport’s business strategy.

Data, engagement and the pressure to personalize

The Harper dispute is not occurring in a static marketplace. Sports betting businesses are investing heavily in real-time data, segmented customer experiences and tools designed to keep fans engaged during games. MLB itself has deepened ties with the betting data economy through a long-term extension with Sportradar, which includes the league taking an equity stake in the sports technology company.

Under that deal, Sportradar will exclusively distribute MLB’s ultra-low-latency data, media content and audiovisual content across hundreds of sportsbooks and media companies through 2032. The companies also plan to collaborate on AI-driven products using player tracking data to create immersive, hyper-personalized fan experiences. The MLB equity stake in Sportradar illustrates how leagues are not just licensing data to betting markets but sharing in the upside of products built on deeper engagement.

That evolution creates tension for regulators and lawmakers. The same personalization that can improve a fan’s experience can also make gambling products more persistent and harder to avoid for vulnerable users. VIP programs sit at the center of that tension because they are built around differentiated service, direct contact and individual customer knowledge. FanDuel says its VIP customers operate under the same rules and safeguards as other users. Critics argue that the business purpose of VIP treatment is to increase loyalty and activity among customers who may already be betting at high levels.

FanDuel points to safeguards as critics question the model

FanDuel has tried to frame responsible gambling as a core product function rather than a compliance add-on. Its “Play with a Plan” campaign promotes tools such as spending dashboards, loss limits and deposit alerts. The company has said the program is based on behavioral research and aims to make responsible gambling tools more intuitive. It also said usage of its responsible gambling program rose 41% year over year before the campaign’s launch.

The company’s customer protection strategy includes Real-Time Check-In, a machine learning-backed feature that uses deposit data to prompt customers in real time across sportsbook, racing and casino products. FanDuel has also linked the work to parent company Flutter’s Positive Impact Plan, which includes substantial annual investment in responsible gambling. The operator’s “Play with a Plan” responsible gaming campaign gives it a public framework for arguing that it is investing in prevention and early intervention.

Lawmakers and advocates are challenging whether that framework is enough. Tonko has argued that the industry’s responsible gaming model shifts responsibility to consumers while allowing operators to continue profiting from addictive products. In the VIP context, that criticism is more pointed: If an operator can see rising bet sizes, reversed withdrawals, deposit patterns or expressions of distress, lawmakers want to know what obligation it has to reduce contact rather than maintain a premium relationship.

The stakes extend beyond one sportsbook

The outcome of the FanDuel inquiry could influence how regulators view VIP programs across the U.S. online betting market. If lawmakers conclude that personalized service creates incentives incompatible with responsible gambling, they could press for new disclosure rules, restrictions on celebrity or athlete greetings, limits on VIP rewards or clearer duties to intervene when customers show signs of harm.

Sports leagues also face reputational risk. MLB and other leagues have built lucrative relationships with sportsbooks while maintaining that integrity systems and responsible gambling controls can manage the risks. The Harper incident shows how easily a player’s image can become part of a gambling controversy even without evidence of wrongdoing by the player. That may push unions and leagues to narrow what athletes can do for gambling companies, particularly in private or personalized formats.

For FanDuel, the immediate issue is whether its explanation satisfies lawmakers who already appear skeptical. The broader issue is whether the industry can defend a model that combines high-value customer programs with increasingly personalized engagement. As sports betting matures, the debate is shifting from whether gambling should be legal to how far operators, leagues and athletes can go in keeping bettors connected.