Florida Gambling Control Commission Issues Directive Against Three DFS Operators

The Florida Gaming Control Commission (FGCC) took a decisive step against three prominent Daily Fantasy Sports (DFS) operators on January 31. Betr, PrizePicks, and Underdog Sports were each served with a directive demanding their exit from the Florida market within 30 days to avoid potential legal ramifications. This move followed the issuing of cease-and-desist letters to the same three DFS sites in September, citing their engagement in fantasy sports games, notably pick'em style games, which some state regulators liken to unlicensed sports betting.

Legislative Efforts Underway

A significant backdrop to this unfolding situation is the legislative activity aimed at potentially exempting these operators from the clutches of Florida's gambling regulations. This legislative session, concluding on March 8, has been marked by efforts to navigate a legal path favorable to DFS operators. A representative from PrizePicks disclosed, "We can confirm that we have reached a negotiated resolution with the FGCC to cease operating our current contests on March 1st." This negotiated ceasefire underscores the complex interplay between regulatory bodies and emerging digital betting platforms in the state.

The Impact of Exiting Florida

The enforced exit from Florida is not a minor setback for Betr, PrizePicks, and Underdog. Given that legal digital sports betting in Florida is confined exclusively to Hard Rock Bet, which only introduced its sports betting app in late 2023, there's a glaring market opportunity for fantasy sports games. Yet, the reason why similar fantasy games by giants like DraftKings and FanDuel have not attracted similar regulatory scrutiny in Florida remains opaque.

The Seminole Tribe's Gaming Monopoly

In Florida, the Seminole Tribe holds a significant sway over the gambling landscape, maintaining a monopoly over most house-banked table games. Their gaming privileges significantly expanded in 2021, although this expansion was not without controversy. A dispute between the Seminole Tribe and Governor Ron DeSantis over the "hub-and-spoke" approach to sports betting—whether it contravenes the federal Indian gaming statute—is currently pending appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. It's also essential to note that Hard Rock Bet, the Tribe's online sportsbook brand, reentered the online betting arena in December, further densifying the state's sports betting ecosystem.

Regulatory Actions Beyond Florida

The regulatory challenges for DFS operators don't halt at Florida's borders. On Thursday, the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration issued cease-and-desist letters to Underdog Sports and PrizePicks. The crux of the matter in Arkansas mirrors concerns in Florida—both sites were accused of providing "unlicensed sports betting" services. Regulatory Administrator Trent Minner made it clear: "Arkansas is not 'wide open.'" A notable point of contention in these cases is the accessibility of the games to users under the age of 21, raising concerns about underage gambling.

Florida's Murky Stance on DFS

Florida remains one of several U.S. states where the regulatory stance on DFS is nebulous at best. A 1991 opinion from then-Attorney General Robert Butterworth suggested that fees associated with fantasy sports contests could be deemed gambling. This interpretation, offered 16 years before the launch of the first DFS website, has cast a long shadow over the industry's operations in Florida. Despite this, DFS platforms have continued to serve Floridian enthusiasts, caught in a legislative limbo, with lawmakers debating various proposals to legalize and regulate the industry. To date, no proposal has successfully passed through either legislative chamber.

The unfolding saga in Florida and beyond underscores the delicate balance between innovation in digital sports gaming and the regulatory frameworks designed to govern gambling. As legislative and legal battles continue to shape the landscape, operators like Betr, PrizePicks, and Underdog find themselves navigating not just market opportunities, but a complex web of state-level legal challenges.