Latest News
Kambi Group plc extends partnership with Kindred Group and gains ability to prepay convertible bond
New contract continues successful partnership until 2026 while Kambi meets requirements to prepay convertible bond previously issued to Kindred
Kambi Group plc and Kindred Group have agreed a three-year extension to its sportsbook partnership after signing a new agreement up to the end of 2026. In addition to the contract, Kambi’s strong financial performance has seen it meet specific conditions required to prepay, at its own discretion, a convertible bond previously issued to a wholly owned subsidiary of Kindred.
The new agreement, which will take effect after the completion of the current contract which runs until 1 January 2024, continues the successful partnership first established in 2014 following Kindred’s decision to spin-off its sportsbook arm, Kambi, now the world’s leading sports betting technology and services provider.
As part of the spin-off, Kindred was issued a €7.5m convertible bond in Kambi, however, having satisfied certain financial performance criteria set out in the bond agreement, Kambi now has the option to prepay the full loan amount and exit the bond agreement at any time of its own discretion. Upon the prepayment of the convertible bond, Kambi will no longer be required to seek prior consent for certain events and will eliminate the prospect of Kindred converting the bond into shares, which would have given the operator a controlling influence over Kambi. This ensures Kambi and its shareholders have complete control of the company’s strategic direction.
As well as the continuation of a long and successful partnership, the contract provides security to both Kambi and Kindred throughout the extended term. The contract provides Kambi with a baseline guarantee of revenue, with Kindred committed to a minimum revenue contribution of €55m across 2024 to 2026. Meanwhile, Kindred will be guaranteed Kambi’s technology and services as it aims, over time, to leverage Kambi’s increasingly modularised offering to pursue its own platform strategy. As communicated by Kindred, from 2024 the operator seeks to reduce its reliance on Kambi and rebalance its use of proprietary and third-party products, with Kambi’s technology to remain an integral part of Kindred’s sportsbook offering.
The contract extension comes as Kambi continues to build on its market-leading differentiation capability by further modularising its technology and services to give operators greater scope to create unique sports betting experiences. In doing so, Kambi is strengthening its ability to attract and retain a select group of top-tier partners that increasingly demand a hybrid approach to technology. This approach is reflected in Kambi’s contract extension with Kindred and central to Kambi’s strategy of developing best-in-breed functionality.
Kristian Nylén, Kambi CEO and Co-founder said: “Kambi and Kindred continue to enjoy a fantastic relationship and this contract extension, which sees Kambi commit to providing Kindred with our modularised technology and services until 2026, enables this form of symbiotic partnership to further develop and best support the evolving strategies of both companies.
“The financial security and change of control protection granted by this new agreement, as well as the control we have gained over the convertible bond, place Kambi in a strong position as we enter our next chapter of global growth and take a significant step towards us becoming the key enabler for visionary operators in regulated markets across the world.”
Henrik Tjärnström, CEO Kindred Group, commented: “I’m very pleased that we have secured a continued collaboration with our long-term partner Kambi to supply us with high-quality technology and trading services for the coming five years. This agreement is an important building block in our long-term strategy to transform Kindred into a product driven company with a sustained dedication on customer experience, and we are excited to continue to work closely with Kambi to evolve the partnership.”
Powered by WPeMatico
bets
Sports Betting, E-cigarettes and the Illusion of Prohibition
The debate over banning online betting in Brazil is resurfacing at a sensitive moment in the public discourse, marked by simplistic solutions to complex issues.
In this article, Thiago Iusim, founder and CEO of Betshield Responsible Gaming, analyzes the parallels between the electronic cigarette market and the ‘Bets’ sector, highlighting how attempts to eliminate an activity by decree tend to push it into informality.
According to him, the Brazilian experience shows that prohibition does not eliminate markets — it merely reduces the State’s ability to control them and increases risks for consumers.
Brazil has seen this movie before.
There is a magic solution that always seems to return to public debate, especially in election season, whenever an issue becomes politically inconvenient: ban it.
The logic is seductive. In the political narrative, the issue disappears. In real life, it simply moves elsewhere.
E-cigarettes make that point painfully clear.
Vapes have never been authorized in Brazil. They have been officially banned since 2009. In theory, they should not exist. In practice, they are everywhere, sold through social media, messaging apps, marketplaces, street vendors, and small retail shops, with no sanitary controls, no effective oversight, and no real guarantee of origin.
Prohibition did not eliminate the market.
It only eliminated the possibility of surrounding that market with rules.
A recent CNN report on the surge in e-cigarette seizures helps show the scale of the problem. Brazil did not get rid of vapes. It simply pushed the market into an environment where the state lost the capacity to control it.
The state banned it. Organized crime applauded.
That experience helps explain the current debate around online betting in Brazil.
Bets existed long before Law 14,790/2023. For years, Brazil lived with an active market operating online and from abroad, with no local tax collection, no regulatory oversight, and no effective consumer protection tools.
The activity did not emerge because of the law. The law emerged because the activity already existed.
Regulation was the rational response. It was the way to bring an already existing market into a controllable framework, with licenses, concession fees, user identification, anti-money laundering requirements, advertising rules, and player protection mechanisms.
And yet, just eighteen months later, public debate is once again flirting with the same simplistic solution applied to vapes: the fantasy that prohibition would make the activity disappear.
By now, Brazil should know better.
In the case of betting, the country had chosen a different path: regulate in order to control. Protect consumers. Protect the broader economy.
To now return to prohibition as a response to a market that already exists would be more than a regulatory mistake.
It would be a historical contradiction.
Or perhaps simply the most comfortable expression of a certain kind of public moralism that would rather push an activity into the shadows than acknowledge its existence.
In political discourse, prohibition can sound like victory.
In practice, it often functions as morally comfortable packaging for rushed and politically convenient decisions.
This is nothing more than electoral fantasy. And this time, no one will be able to say they did not know how the story would end.
Thiago Iusim
Founder and CEO of Betshield Responsible Gaming
The post Sports Betting, E-cigarettes and the Illusion of Prohibition appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
Bichara e Motta Advogados
Los nuevos desafíos de la industria del iGaming en 2026
The post Los nuevos desafíos de la industria del iGaming en 2026 appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
Bichara e Motta Advogados
The iGaming Industry’s New Challenges in 2026
In an exclusive article for Gaming Americas, Udo Seckelmann, partner in the Gambling & Crypto department at Bichara e Motta Advogados, examines how the Brazilian iGaming market has entered a new phase of maturity following BiS SiGMA South America 2026.
Moving beyond regulatory expectations, the industry now faces real operational, political, and economic pressures, raising critical questions about sustainability, enforcement, and the balance between growth and consumer protection in one of the world’s most dynamic betting markets.
BIS SIGMA 2026 made it clear that the conversation around Brazil’s betting sector has fundamentally changed. The industry is no longer being discussed as a future opportunity shaped by regulatory expectations, but as a functioning ecosystem already subject to real-world pressures. With the framework in force and operators active, the focus has shifted to how the market actually behaves under regulation — and where that framework is being put to the test.
This shift was evident both in the quality of the discussions and in the profile of participants. In past editions, much of the debate focused on the ideal regulatory framework, taxation, and market entry strategies. In 2026, the focus moved toward more sophisticated — and, in many ways, more challenging — topics: regulatory implementation, enforcement, and the balance between growth and consumer protection.
An additional element that permeated many discussions was the recent hardening of political discourse toward the sector. Statements from the President suggesting the potential elimination of the regulated betting market, as well as initiatives in Congress aimed at broadly restricting betting advertising, reveal legitimate concerns about negative externalities but also a concrete risk of public policy being shaped in a way that is disconnected from the newly established regulatory reality.
The criticism here is not directed at the concern for consumer protection — which is undoubtedly essential — but rather at how this debate has been conducted. Prohibitive or overly restrictive measures, particularly in the field of advertising, tend to produce adverse effects already observed in other jurisdictions: reduced channeling capacity toward the regulated market, the strengthening of illegal operators, and a weakening of consumer protection mechanisms themselves.
In this context, advertising should not be viewed solely as a risk factor, but also as a public policy tool. It is through advertising that licensed operators can differentiate themselves from unregulated entities, communicate responsible gambling practices, and operate within auditable parameters. Disproportionate restrictions, in practice, reduce the visibility of those subject to regulation while simultaneously expanding the space for those operating outside it.
Moreover, the instability of political discourse — especially when it flirts with prohibition scenarios after years of efforts to structure a regulated market — creates significant legal uncertainty. Investments made based on a recent regulatory framework are reassessed, compliance costs increase, and the appetite of new entrants tends to decline. Ultimately, this undermines not only the development of the sector but also government revenue and the original regulatory objectives pursued by the Government.
Another key topic discussed during the event was the impact of increased taxation — particularly following the rise in the Gaming Tax — on the competitiveness of the regulated market. There is a legitimate concern that an overly burdensome environment, combined with severe advertising restrictions, may create an economically unviable scenario for licensed operators, once again encouraging migration to the unregulated market.
Another highlight of the event was the debate surrounding the role of technological intermediaries — including market makers in emerging segments such as prediction markets. The expansion of these models raises important regulatory questions: to what extent are existing frameworks sufficient to accommodate these innovations? And when will it be necessary to move toward specific regulatory regimes, potentially under the oversight of authorities such as the securities regulator?
A comparison with previous BIS SIGMA editions clearly demonstrates the sector’s growing maturity. If Brazil was once seen as a major promise, it is now a complex reality that requires fine-tuning and institutional coordination. The agenda has shifted from market opening to governance — now under much more intense political and social scrutiny.
Finally, one aspect that deserves particular attention is the increasing professionalization of all stakeholders involved. Operators, regulators, service providers, and even the broader public debate have evolved significantly. There is now a clearer understanding that the success of the Brazilian market depends on its credibility and long-term sustainability.
Udo Seckelmann
Partner in the Gambling & Crypto department at Bichara e Motta Advogados
The post The iGaming Industry’s New Challenges in 2026 appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
-
Akshat Rathee6 days agoManish Agarwal Joins NODWIN Gaming Board as Non-Executive Director
-
AGCO6 days agoPlatipus Gaming secures Ontario supplier licence
-
Bally’s Intralot6 days agoBally’s Intralot Signs New Contract with British Columbia Lottery Corporation
-
Caesars Digital5 days agoRubyPlay partners with Caesars Entertainment in Ontario to advance North American expansion
-
Africa5 days agoTaDa Gaming joins inaugural iGaming AFRIKA Summit in Nairobi
-
Aviator5 days agoSPRIBE Wins Interim Injunction in Brazil – Court Orders Betnacional to Immediately Cease Unauthorized Use of “AVIATOR”
-
Amazons’ Wonders4 days agoSYNOT Games Enters into Partnership with Bulgarian Operator BETVAM
-
Blueprint Gaming5 days agoBlueprint Gaming adds pots mechanic to Cash Strike with Triple Action Cash Strike



