Blood Suckers

About Blood Suckers

They recommended banning direct marketing by operators and affiliates except for essential account or safety communications.

The committee also suggested a ban on inducements (free bets, sign-up bonuses) as these promotions stimulate betting activity and recruit new or lapsed customers.

Another point of contention was content marketing and influencer promotions. The Lords committee advised treating this as advertising and, if a full ban were not immediately feasible, prioritising its prohibition.

How to play Blood Suckers

Many participants emphasised the need for clearer, timely and personalised information throughout every stage of their betting experience. This would include the presence of unobtrusive and empathetic staff at land-based venues. 

The study highlighted significant gaps between operator disclosures and genuine player comprehension.

The Commission’s investigation into what constitutes “informed choice” in gambling involved a multi-method approach. 

What is Blood Suckers?

New Jersey stakeholders are no stranger to the importance of a Supreme Court review. The state lost every case in the lead-up to the PASPA repeal, except for the one that mattered most in the end, and it could be the same in this matter as Kalshi has prevailed thus far in state court and the Third Circuit. Davenport’s petition cites that fateful PASPA ruling in its introduction.

“Just eight years ago, this court reiterated that ‘each state is free to act on its own’ in regulating sports betting,” the petition says. “But Kalshi has a different view. Kalshi bills itself as ‘the first app for legal sports betting in all 50 states’ and believes it can offer that legal sports betting without following the sports-gambling laws of any of those 50 states.”

In a statement, Kalshi spokesperson Dani Lever said the platform is “an open, nationwide, financial exchange” that “cannot be regulated by 50 different regulators”, per CDC Gaming.