USA BetComply
near future and will not change until these legislators find a need to adopt it. It will be seen on how long will these states will continue to hold off on adopting iGaming especially in light of a new US administration that is looking to cut wasteful federal subsidies to these states in the upcoming years which may cause them to revisit iGaming. As for the future of land-based gaming in the US in states
that currently do not offer it, states such as Texas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina, are to ever to allow for land based casinos to exist, then there would be another big explosion of land based gaming that would occur. Texas would have the potential to be one of the top three
markets or the biggest market due to the sheer size of the state and the number of cities with a large populations. Until then Nevada will always be the king of revenue generation due to the sheer number of casinos in the Las Vegas area. Every year, In many of these states, there is always been
scuttlebutt of new legislation that would allow for land based casinos but in many instances, they seldom materialise into any proposed legislation to be voted on and approved. As for the future of sports wagering in the US states that
currently do not offer it such as Texas, Oklahoma, California, Missouri, Minnesota, South Carolina and Georgia, if ever to offer it, then there would be a huge gold rush of new operators to enter the market due to size of these states, especially California and Texas. Tese states have the potential to be the
“As for the future of land-based gaming in the US in states that
currently do not offer it, states such as Texas, Tennessee, Kentucky,
Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina, are to ever to allow for land based casinos to exist, then there would be another big explosion of land based gaming
that would occur. Texas would have the potential to be one of the top
three markets or the biggest market due to the sheer size of the state and the number of cities with a large populations.”
number one and number two in revenues. Of course, in many of these states, every year, there is always discussion of new legislation that would allow for sports wagering but in many instances, they seldom materialise into any proposed legislation to be voted on and approved. As for the future of iGaming, with so few markets that have
“If states like California, Texas, New York, Florida ever adopt it [iGaming], they would be the top markets for revenue generation due to their sheer size and population. In many of these states, every year, there is always discussion of legislation that would allow for iGaming to be adopted but in many instances, they seldom materialise into any proposed legislation to be voted on and approved."
64
adopted it already (seven in total), there is a great potential for growth in this segment. If states like California, Texas, New York, Florida ever adopt it, they would be the top markets for revenue generation due to their sheer size and population. In many of these states, every year, there is always discussion of legislation that would allow for iGaming to be adopted but in many instances, they seldom materialise into any proposed legislation to be voted on and approved. In general, tribal and commercial land based gaming is the
biggest generator of gaming revenue in the US. It will remain this way for the foreseeable future with Nevada, Pennsylvania, and New York being the top generators of this revenue. Tere will be modest growth in this segment. Sports wagering will still be the second generator of revenue
in the US but in the upcoming years, but expect to see the gap between sports wagering and land based gaming revenues close as more players migrate towards sports wagering. As for iGaming, until more states adopt iGaming, the
revenues generated will continue to lag behind their sports wagering and land based casino counterparts. Tis segment will grow the fastest of the three sectors once the legislation is adopted.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140
