Interviews
Roundtable – Continent 8’s Leaders and Legends
The Continent 8 Leaders and Legends series has been running for several years now, bringing together some of the industry’s biggest names to share their thoughts, insights and experiences on the hottest trends of the moment. The latest Leaders and Legends took place at the KPMG Gibraltar eSummit and saw heavyweights Shay Segev (Chief Executive Officer at DAZN), Joanne Whittaker (Chief Executive Officer at Betfred), Edo Haitin (Chief Executive Officer at Playtech Live) and Vaughan Lewis (Chief Strategy Officer at 888 Holdings) take to the stage to discuss a wide range of topics from the review of the UK Gambling Act to the future of retail in an increasingly digital world.
Moderator:
Micky Swindale – Partner, Global Gaming Team – KPMG
Panellists:
- Edo Haitin – Chief Executive Officer – Playtech Live
- Vaughan Lewis – Chief Strategy Officer – 888 Holdings
- Shay Segev – Chief Executive Officer – DAZN
- Joanne Whittaker – Chief Executive Officer – Betfred
MS: What changes do you expect to see as a result of the UK government’s review of the Gambling Act? What impact might tighter restrictions have on the market and how are you preparing for them?
JW: We just need to know what is coming. The review is hanging over us and we just need to be able to move on as an industry. We are agile, we evolve. We have heard some of the expected changes around slot stake limits, enhanced affordability checks, the levy and so on but until we know exactly what changes are coming, it is hard to properly prepare. Of course, as a business, we are trying to get ready for what is to come. I think initially there was a bit of panic, but we have got passed that now. We had a significant hit on retail when the FOBT legislation came in a few years ago, but we survived that and when I talk to Fred, he always says these legislative changes come in cycles. So, we are watching, we will respond, and I hope that we are given time to implement the technology changes that will be required. But right now, it’s just a case of wait and see.
VL: I think getting the line right as to where gambling tips over from personalisation, enjoyment and the promotion of great products and offers into something that becomes exploitative is the really challenging area that the review of the Gambling Act is trying to address. For us, we just want clarity about what are the standards that we need to meet. Once operators have that clarity, we then back ourselves to be able to provide a great player experience but with high levels of safety and within the standards set. At the moment, we are not clear on what standards we are trying to meet so our hope is that through the review process we get that clarity. Once any changes from the review have been implemented, we can then refocus on delivering the best player experience.
EH: Coming from the provider side, my perspective is perhaps a bit different. I believe that it is in the product to solve issues around responsible gambling and affordability and to deliver the right player experience. This also needs to be done in a way that the regulator can see that the player is doing so within their affordability. So, it is our responsibility as a provider to give our operators the products to do this. On the flip side, and especially as a big provider, I do feel for smaller businesses as the bar for entry into the market is being set even higher. So, regulators should bear in mind that there are companies making their first move that do need clarity and guidance as to what is expected of them.
ML: All jurisdictions, including Gibraltar, are having to quickly adapt to market changes. But what makes Gibraltar such an appealing jurisdiction to companies such as DAZN?
SS: We recently announced that DAZN would be going into betting with the launch of DAZN Bet and that we would be using Gibraltar as the hub for that. Having personally been based in Gibraltar for the last ten years I have found the jurisdiction to be amazing both in terms of the government’s support for the industry and the infrastructure it has provided, as well as the ability to establish a business here. It is also highly respected in terms of its regulatory framework and standards, and the talent that can be accessed here is second to none. This made it a very easy decision for us to set up DAZN Bet in Gibraltar.
MS: As the industry continues to grow, we have seen a real wave of M&A activity crash over the sector. With no sign of these mega deals slowing down, is now the right time for smaller businesses to position themselves for a takeover? And what makes for an attractive acquisition target?
VL: We are not seeing any slowdown in the trend of mega transactions. We have been through multiple waves of M&A and deals just keep getting bigger and bigger. We just closed a £2bn transaction but that now seems relatively small. Just before Christmas, Flutter undertook a £2bn acquisition and didn’t even have an investor call to explain it, it’s kind of like a bolt-on for them now. And then a few weeks ago you have the MGM takeover of LeoVegas, which it called “bite-size”. We are definitely in a new phase of the industry where these huge businesses have been created and significant value has been generated, and that is starting to really drive the M&A cycle.
At the medium and smaller end, we are still seeing a lot of activity. These transactions often have one or more characteristics that they share including unique products and content that you just can’t get elsewhere or that you can’t create quickly enough, market access, media convergence and other attributes that drive outsized value. This is where the future focus of M&A will be.
MS: The big four operators now account for more than 50% of the UK market share, so these companies can leverage the advantages of scale. But what impact does this have on consumer choice?
EH: We are an entertainment business, and the future of entertainment cannot be controlled by big companies. We see today that the biggest entertainers in the world are individuals that pick up their smartphones and cameras and stream videos on YouTube to tens of millions of followers. That makes them the big force in entertainment. I understand why companies undertake M&A and want to drive scale, but will this stop other businesses from entering the industry, I don’t think so. The nature of entertainment is so fluid that what is popular now will be different in five years’ time and we will most likely consume it differently. Once you work with video and content, you really pay attention to this and when we look at the market and what is in front of us, we see our immediate rivals but also those on the sidelines of the industry. Consolidation might block the immediate entry for some companies, but I do not believe that it will block the variety and versatility of the products that are offered to players.
SS: I think we might also see consolidation between industries with new experiences coming in. Where betting and gaming were perhaps seen as unethical just a few years ago, big businesses from outside of the sector are undoubtedly now looking at it. I think the US opening up has changed perceptions, too. For example, ESPN and Disney have indicated they are considering betting as a potential market for them to explore.
MS: The industry is expanding internationally with new jurisdictions embracing licensing and regulation all of the time. But with most taking a state-by-state or province-by-province approach, just how tough is it for operators to be truly global?
VL: If you were to ask all operators and suppliers if you could wave a magic wand and have harmonised rules across the world, I think the vast majority would say that is the dream scenario. It would enable us to really focus on product innovation and development, player protection and ultimately creating a much better consumer experience rather than having to spend time tailoring the platform for each market. We are one of the few operators that have a global, scalable platform that can run in multiple jurisdictions, but we have to tailor that to each market. If you look at the US, the investment we have to put into each state to meet the local tax and disclosure regulations sucks up a lot of time and diverts resources away from other areas that could be much more productive in terms of making great products and really looking after players. The more we can move towards standardised approaches, especially in the area of player protection, the better it will be for all stakeholders.
EH: Any company that wants to enter regulated markets such as the UK really needs to have a strong compliance team in place. This team is not there to scare you but to give you direction when it comes to developing products within the guidelines set. For us, one of the biggest challenges in the US is that we have to create a dedicated studio in each of the states that we enter based on the Wire Act of 1961. At the time I couldn’t understand why we could not just build one studio, but now we are up and running I see it as a good barrier to the competition. Really, you need to embrace regulation and understand the meaning behind it, even if you do not agree with it. For us as a live casino provider business, having to create a studio in each of the states we target is not optimal. But if you can understand the playground you are in and cater to that culture, it is possible to succeed.
MS: In all of our talk about online, are we losing sight of the land-based punter? Is it true that once they have gone online, they will never come back to retail betting?
JW: During Covid, it was a real fear for our business. Our retail shops were forced to close which saw our online business grow significantly but now restrictions have been lifted we have seen retail fully bounce back. We are really pleased with how the high street is performing and we can see that our customers are enjoying the betting shop experience and especially the social element. Long may that continue.
SS: You can’t ignore that betting shops are more part of the past than the future of the industry. I do think there is an opportunity to reinvent the betting shop experience, which some operators are doing with things like self-service betting terminals. There is something there but, clearly, it is not on the rise and consumers are transitioning to digital. That said, there is room to create something synergistic between retail and online.
JW: I agree there will not be new betting shops coming but at the turnover level customers are returning and they want to come to the shop. Our digital business has normalised, but we are in a much stronger position than we were pre-Covid. There is a place for the high street; I believe in SSBT and omnichannel but customers still want to come into the retail environment. We are also seeing this in other territories. In our US business, the retail performance is strong in the casinos where we have partnerships and in South Africa, we have a significant retail presence, too, although it is a very different retail offering with a much bigger footprint with 30-40 tills. I understand the importance of digital, but retail will survive.
VL: As an industry, we do not do a great job of standing up and talking about the value of the products we are selling. Retail is back to where it was post-pandemic because people love it, and they go to the shops because it is a fun thing to do. It is similar to the convergence of media and online, so long as we are providing something of value to consumers then that’s great. I think we should be proud of the service and entertainment we provide and for me, retail betting still provides a huge amount of enjoyment for customers. Betting shops never really went away, they just had to close due to the pandemic and they remain a core part of the industry.
EH: I’m going to take the middle ground here. Retail is back and I think part of the reason why players are enjoying going to betting shops is that it was taken away from them for a long time. But I do agree with Shay that reinventing betting shops is an important thing. This includes self-service and other experiences that will drive people to retail as well as online. As a live provider, we are often asked if we are cannibalising land-based by my answer is always no. We are an extension of the business, and I don’t believe we can really replace the experience of going to a casino.
Powered by WPeMatico
Filipe Senna, sócio da Jantalia Advogados e secretário-geral da Comissão de Direito dos Jogos e Apostas da OAB/DF, analisa a recente decisão no Brasil de bloquear plataformas de mercado preditivo como Kalshi e Polymarket.
Ele argumenta que a medida reflete um passo regulatório necessário para sanar ambiguidades legais em um segmento que se situa entre ferramentas informativas, sistemas de apostas e derivativos financeiros, reforçando a necessidade de coerência e tratamento igualitário nos mercados regulamentados em constante evolução do Brasil.
Por Filipe Senna
O bloqueio de plataformas de mercado preditivo como Kalshi e Polymarket no Brasil, a partir de medida do Conselho Monetário Nacional (CMN) e de orientação da Secretaria de Prêmios e Apostas (SPA), é juridicamente consistente e segue a mesma lógica já aplicada a operadores de apostas ilegais.
A decisão não nasce de um impulso restritivo, mas da necessidade de preservar a coerência de um mercado que passou a ser regulado de forma mais clara nos últimos anos.
Embora essas plataformas se apresentem como instrumentos de leitura da opinião pública, sua atuação prática vai além do caráter informacional.
Parte relevante dos produtos ofertados se aproxima, e em alguns casos se equipara, às apostas de quota fixa reguladas pela Lei nº 14.790/2023. Eventos esportivos disponibilizados nesses ambientes replicam dinâmicas semelhantes às chamadas bolsas de apostas, o que torna difícil sustentar uma distinção material entre um modelo e outro.
Há ainda um segundo ponto sensível. Algumas dessas plataformas oferecem instrumentos que se assemelham a derivativos financeiros, com ativos vinculados a preços de mercado.
Por operarem fora do país, não se submetem às exigências da Comissão de Valores Mobiliários. O resultado é uma assimetria regulatória relevante, na qual empresas estrangeiras competem em condições mais favoráveis do que operadores que seguem as regras brasileiras.
Nesse cenário, o bloqueio cumpre uma função de proteção institucional, ele resguarda tanto o mercado de apostas quanto o mercado financeiro de distorções concorrenciais.
Empresas que atuam no Brasil com autorização precisam cumprir obrigações rigorosas, que incluem recolhimento de tributos, políticas de prevenção à lavagem de dinheiro e mecanismos de proteção de dados.
Permitir que outras operem à margem dessas exigências compromete a isonomia do sistema.
A medida também tem caráter indutor. Caso essas plataformas desejem atuar no país, deverão se adequar ao enquadramento jurídico correspondente ao tipo de produto que oferecem.
Se a atividade se assemelha a apostas, deve seguir a regulação das bets. Se se aproxima de instrumentos financeiros, deve observar as regras aplicáveis a esse mercado. Trata-se de um princípio básico de organização econômica em setores regulados.
Não há violação à livre iniciativa. No ordenamento brasileiro, a liberdade econômica convive com a necessidade de cumprimento de regras, especialmente em atividades que envolvem risco financeiro e impacto social.
A atuação estatal, nesse contexto, busca garantir que a concorrência ocorra em bases legítimas, sem favorecimento indevido a quem opera fora da jurisdição nacional.
Existe, de fato, um componente informacional nesses ambientes. Mercados preditivos podem oferecer sinais úteis sobre expectativas coletivas.
O problema surge quando esse elemento convive com estruturas que reproduzem a lógica de apostas ou de produtos financeiros de alto risco.
Nesses casos, o usuário deixa de interagir apenas com informação e passa a assumir riscos típicos de jogos de azar ou de operações especulativas.
Um exemplo ajuda a ilustrar essa fronteira. Há mercados em que o participante precisa prever, em intervalos de 5 (cinco) minutos, a variação de ativos como o Bitcoin.
A dinâmica, embora apresentada como preditiva, se aproxima mais de jogos de azar ou de mecanismos semelhantes às antigas opções binárias, cuja natureza sempre esteve associada ao risco elevado e à ausência de proteção adequada ao usuário.
Diante dessa zona cinzenta, a postura adotada pelo regulador é prudente. Interromper a atividade permite aprofundar o debate, definir critérios mais claros e evitar que lacunas normativas sejam exploradas.
Só a partir dessa delimitação será possível discutir, com segurança jurídica, eventual regulamentação futura para esse tipo de plataforma.
O objetivo final é preservar um ambiente econômico equilibrado, em que inovação e livre iniciativa possam coexistir com regras claras. Sem isso, o risco não é apenas jurídico, mas também de credibilidade de todo o sistema.
Filipe Senna
Sócio do Jantalia Advogados e Secretário-Geral da Comissão de Direito dos Jogos e Apostas da OAB/DF. Autor do livro ‘A Regulação da Sorte na Internet’
The post A necessária contenção dos mercados preditivos no Brasil appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
Filipe Senna, Partner at Jantalia Advogados and Secretary-General of the Gaming and Betting Law Commission of the OAB/DF, analyzes the recent decision in Brazil to block predictive market platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket.
He argues that the measure reflects a necessary regulatory step to address legal ambiguities in a segment that sits between informational tools, betting systems, and financial derivatives, reinforcing the need for coherence and equal treatment within Brazil’s evolving regulated markets.
By Filipe Senna
The blocking of predictive market platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket in Brazil, following a measure by the National Monetary Council (CMN) and guidance from the Secretariat of Prizes and Betting (SPA), is legally sound and follows the same logic already applied to illegal betting operators. The decision does not stem from a restrictive impulse, but rather from the need to preserve the coherence of a market that has become more clearly regulated in recent years.
Although these platforms present themselves as tools for gauging public opinion, their actual operation goes beyond an informational function. A significant portion of the products offered approaches—and in some cases is equivalent to—fixed-odds betting regulated under Law No. 14,790/2023. Sporting events made available in these environments replicate dynamics similar to so-called betting exchanges, making it difficult to sustain a material distinction between one model and another.
There is also a second sensitive issue. Some of these platforms offer instruments resembling financial derivatives, with assets linked to market prices. Because they operate outside the country, they are not subject to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The result is a relevant regulatory asymmetry, in which foreign companies compete under more favorable conditions than operators that comply with Brazilian rules.
In this context, the blocking fulfills an institutional protective function: it safeguards both the betting market and the financial market from competitive distortions. Companies operating in Brazil under authorization must comply with strict obligations, including tax payments, anti-money laundering policies, and data protection mechanisms. Allowing others to operate outside these requirements undermines the system’s fairness.
The measure also has an inducing character. If these platforms wish to operate in the country, they must adapt to the legal framework corresponding to the type of product they offer. If the activity resembles betting, it must follow betting regulations. If it approaches financial instruments, it must comply with the applicable rules for that market. This is a basic principle of economic organization in regulated sectors.
There is no violation of free enterprise. In the Brazilian legal system, economic freedom coexists with the need to comply with rules, especially in activities involving financial risk and social impact. State action, in this context, aims to ensure that competition occurs on legitimate grounds, without undue advantage for those operating outside national jurisdiction.
There is, in fact, an informational component in these environments. Predictive markets can provide useful signals about collective expectations. The problem arises when this element coexists with structures that replicate the logic of betting or high-risk financial products. In such cases, users no longer interact solely with information but instead assume risks typical of gambling or speculative operations.
An example helps illustrate this boundary. There are markets in which participants must predict, in 5-minute intervals, the variation of assets such as Bitcoin. Although presented as predictive, the dynamic is closer to gambling or mechanisms similar to the former binary options, whose nature has always been associated with high risk and insufficient user protection.
Faced with this gray area, the regulator’s stance is prudent. Suspending the activity allows for deeper debate, clearer criteria to be defined, and prevents regulatory gaps from being exploited. Only after such delimitation will it be possible to discuss, with legal certainty, any future regulation for this type of platform.
The ultimate goal is to preserve a balanced economic environment in which innovation and free enterprise can coexist with clear rules. Without this, the risk is not only legal, but also related to the credibility of the entire system.
Filipe Senna
Partner at Jantalia Advogados and Secretary-General of the Gaming and Betting Law Commission of the OAB/DF (Brazilian Bar Association, Federal District chapter). Author of the book ‘The Regulation of Luck on the Internet’.
The post The necessary containment of predictive markets in Brazil appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
Rafael Brunati y Celso Basílio, abogados de Silveiro Advogados especializados en mercados regulados, derecho corporativo y derecho de la competencia, analizan las recientes medidas adoptadas por el Consejo Monetario Nacional (CMN) de Brasil y la Secretaría de Premios y Apuestas (SPA/MF), así como su impacto en la industria del iGaming y las apuestas deportivas.
En este artículo, examinan cómo el nuevo marco regulatorio redefine los límites entre las apuestas, los instrumentos financieros y los modelos emergentes de mercados digitales, al tiempo que refuerza la Ley N.º 14.790/2023 como pilar central de la regulación del sector.
Por Rafael Brunati y Celso Basílio
El conjunto de medidas adoptadas recientemente por el Consejo Monetario Nacional (CMN) y la Secretaría de Premios y Apuestas del Ministerio de Hacienda (SPA/MF) representa un nuevo capítulo en la consolidación regulatoria del mercado brasileño de iGaming y apuestas deportivas.
Más que una respuesta puntual a los llamados mercados predictivos, las iniciativas señalan un intento más amplio de reorganizar los límites entre apuestas autorizadas, instrumentos financieros y actividades consideradas irregulares en el país.
La Resolución CMN N.º 5.298/2026 prohibió la oferta y negociación de derivados vinculados a apuestas, eventos deportivos, juegos en línea y temas políticos, electorales, culturales o de entretenimiento sin referencia económico-financiera.
En la misma línea, la Nota Técnica SPA/MF N.º 2.958/2026 encuadró las plataformas de mercados predictivos como explotación ilegal de apuestas de cuota fija, lo que derivó en el bloqueo de decenas de plataformas por parte de la Anatel.
El movimiento refuerza de manera clara la centralidad de la Ley N.º 14.790/2023 como marco regulatorio exclusivo para la explotación de apuestas de cuota fija en Brasil.
En la práctica, el gobierno ha comenzado a delimitar con mayor precisión quién puede operar en este mercado y bajo qué condiciones.
Las plataformas que buscaban posicionarse como mercados financieros, contratos de eventos o estructuras tecnológicas alternativas pasaron a ser tratadas materialmente como operadores de apuestas.
El mensaje regulatorio es directo: si el producto compite por el mismo público, utiliza una lógica económica similar a las apuestas y conlleva riesgo asociado a eventos futuros, tiende a quedar dentro del perímetro regulatorio de la SPA.
Desde la óptica regulatoria y de competencia, esto genera un efecto relevante para los operadores autorizados.
Las empresas que invirtieron en licencias, cumplimiento normativo, prevención de lavado de dinero, integridad deportiva, políticas de juego responsable y estructura regulatoria dejan de competir con plataformas que operaban al margen de estas exigencias mediante encuadres jurídicos alternativos. Se produce así un fortalecimiento indirecto del valor económico de la licencia regulatoria otorgada por la SPA.
Al mismo tiempo, este fortalecimiento viene acompañado de un aumento significativo de las obligaciones operativas y de cumplimiento.
Las recientes medidas también reabren un debate importante sobre los límites regulatorios de las llamadas betting exchanges y los modelos peer-to-peer.
La propia Nota Técnica SPA/MF N.º 2.958/2026 reconoce que la negociación entre apostadores y la existencia de precios dinámicos no desnaturalizan necesariamente la condición de apuesta de cuota fija. Esta interpretación es relevante porque acerca los mercados predictivos a las estructuras de bolsas de apuestas ya previstas en la Ley N.º 14.790/2023.
Este punto podría abrir espacio, en el futuro, para modelos regulados de betting exchange en Brasil, siempre que estén dentro del perímetro autorizado por la SPA.
Sin embargo, la regulación operativa de este formato aún no ha sido desarrollada por la autoridad, lo que mantiene un nivel importante de incertidumbre para los operadores interesados en innovación de producto.
Desde otra perspectiva, las medidas también tienden a generar una intensa judicialización. Existen debates relevantes sobre los límites de la competencia del CMN para restringir ciertos tipos de derivados, sobre la actuación interpretativa de la SPA respecto a los mercados predictivos y sobre el bloqueo de plataformas sin orden judicial.
Independientemente del desenlace de estas disputas, lo cierto es que el mercado brasileño de iGaming y apuestas deportivas entra en una nueva fase.
La lógica regulatoria deja de centrarse únicamente en la autorización formal para operar y pasa a incorporar de forma más intensa temas como integridad financiera, protección de usuarios vulnerables, gobernanza de datos, trazabilidad de pagos y supervisión operativa continua.
El sector continúa creciendo, pero ahora dentro de un entorno significativamente más sofisticado —y más exigente. Para los operadores autorizados, esto representa simultáneamente una barrera de entrada para competidores irregulares y un aumento relevante en los costos de cumplimiento. En un mercado cada vez más regulado, la diferencia competitiva tiende a depender menos de la capacidad de ofrecer apuestas y más de la capacidad de operar con seguridad regulatoria, integridad operativa y rápida adaptación a las nuevas exigencias del Estado.
Rafael Brunati, abogado en las áreas de Derecho Societario, Contratos, M&A y Private Equity, así como del sector bancario en Silveiro Advogados, es graduado en Derecho por la Universidad Presbiteriana Mackenzie, posee un LL.M en Derecho Societario por INSPER y es miembro de la Comisión de Derecho Bancario de la OAB/SP.
Celso Basílio, abogado en las áreas de Mercados Regulados, Telecomunicaciones, Contratos y Derecho de la Competencia en Silveiro Advogados, es máster en Derecho por la FGV Derecho SP, posee un LL.M en Derecho de los Contratos por INSPER y es graduado en Derecho por la Universidad Presbiteriana Mackenzie.
The post Nuevas reglas del CMN y SPA reorganizan el tablero del iGaming y las apuestas deportivas appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
-
Central Europe7 days agoTipico Casino Enters into Partnership with Holstein Kiel
-
Adjarabet7 days ago
Octoplay launches in Georgia with Adjarabet
-
bet3657 days ago
Evoplay adds bet365 to its Brazil operator lineup
-
Latest News7 days ago
PRAGMATIC PLAY SETS UP SHOP WITH MR NULL’S WICKED WARES
-
Canada7 days ago
Playson expands North American reach with Mohegan Digital partnership
-
Armenian Parliamentary Committee on Economic Affairs7 days ago
Armenia to Implement Strictest Gambling Regulations to Combat a Massive Surge in Addiction
-
game launches7 days ago
Spinomenal releases 3 Magical Genies slot with Hold & Hit bonus
-
Canada6 days ago
Analysis flags World Cup 2026 stress test for Canada’s patchwork betting rules
