If you wanted a perfect snapshot of the post-PASPA world, this week delivered it. We saw a legacy institution, the NCAA, finally bow to the inevitable reality
If you wanted a perfect snapshot of the post-PASPA world, this week delivered it. We saw a legacy institution, the NCAA, finally bow to the inevitable reality of legalised betting with a landmark rule change. In the very same week, the future of what a “bet” even is continues to be fought over in courtrooms, with prediction market Kalshi now battling regulators on multiple fronts. It shows an industry grappling with both its present and its future simultaneously.
In a move that officially closes the book on a bygone era, the NCAA has approved a rule change that will allow student-athletes to bet on professional sports. Let’s be honest, the previous blanket ban was an idealistic, unenforceable policy that was completely out of step with modern America.
This is a monumental, pragmatic shift. The new rule maintains a strict prohibition on betting on any collegiate sports (their own or others) and, crucially, on betting on any event involving their own university. But by permitting wagers on the NFL, NBA, and other pro leagues, the NCAA is finally acknowledging that its athletes are adults who live in a world where betting is a mainstream activity. The focus now shifts to education and enforcing the lines that truly matter for integrity, rather than pretending they can ban it all. It’s a sensible, if long overdue, step into the 21st century.
The battle to define the future of wagering is getting intense. Prediction market operator Kalshi, which argues its products are commodities, not bets, is facing a regulatory onslaught. This week, it was revealed that Nevada regulators are demanding the release of Kalshi’s internal communications, a move that takes their dispute from a policy debate to a full-blown legal brawl.
They are clearly digging in for a fight, not just defending their turf. We also learned that a crucial hearing is set for later this month in Kalshi’s lawsuit against Ohio regulators, who have tried to block them from operating. This “war on two fronts” against powerful state regulators will have massive implications. If Kalshi wins, it could create a federally regulated path for wagering products that completely bypasses state-by-state gambling laws. If they lose, their entire business model is in jeopardy.
It didn’t take long for the chickens to come home to roost. Following the government’s decision to give local councils new powers to block betting shops, we saw one of the first high-profile examples this week. The Gloucester council has rejected a proposal for a 24/7 gambling facility, a decision that would have been much harder for them to make under the old rules. This is the new reality for retail operators in the UK: the local council planning meeting is now just as important, if not more so, than the Gambling Commission’s licensing process.
This week was all about drawing lines. The NCAA drew a new, more realistic line for its athletes. Regulators in Nevada and Ohio are trying to draw a very firm line around Kalshi. And in Brazil, operators are lobbying hard to influence exactly where that crucial line between a viable, legal market and a thriving black market will be drawn.
It’s a reminder that for all the innovation and commercial ambition in our industry, the ultimate power still rests with those who write the rules. The game is global, but the rulebooks are getting thicker everywhere you look.
