Some GSPs, including Pragmatic Play, decided to leave the vertical in America. Potential legal liabilities and litigation costs were major factors behind this decision.
Sometimes, the cost of some opportunities in terms of risk isn’t worth it. That’s what Pragmatic Play decided when leaving the vertical in America.
Back when the decision happened in 2025, America was seeing major volatility in the regulatory landscape for sweepstakes operations.
Eventually, after the big markets of California and New York shut down, some states remained fair game.
However, large operations need to take extra care. Lawsuits are about money, and state-level prosecutors don’t go after GSPs that don’t have the deep pockets to eventually pay for potential penalties and other forms of financial liabilities derived from courts.
The Names That Attract Legal Problems
Lawsuits, especially in America, are also influenced by media and politics. It’s not uncommon for prosecutors and judges to eventually run for seats in Congress or state legislatures.
So not only do they tend to go after big names, but also the companies that can eventually pay for whatever wrongdoing is claimed in a lawsuit.
Suing Stake, Evolution, or Pragmatic Play companies and their peers in terms of size can be effective, while going to court against smaller operators (especially those incorporated offshore), or small studios from foreign jurisdictions is below the radar, as government authorities might win in court, but never see a penny.
Moreover, if the names aren’t easily recognized by the press, those lawsuits draw less attention.
Scrutiny over GSPs and operators isn’t uniformly spread across the industry, just like it happens in any industry or economic activity.
So risk management at the shareholder and decision-maker level needs to be mindful of the size of a company, whether it is a listed company, and what the legal risks are according to how their brands are perceived in America and globally.
Leave a Reply