Nigel Eccles Betting on Crypto with BetHog
Nigel Eccles has witnessed and contributed to some of the gaming industry’s most transformative phases. Renowned for co-founding FanDuel, Nigel has embarked on a new venture in the crypto gaming industry with crypto outfit BetHog. In a candid discussion, Nigel reflects on past ventures, legal battles, and the future of the market, offering insights into why some ideas have failed while others thrive.
PEER-TO-PEER BETTING
We begin our interview on the pitfalls of peer-to-peer betting. In the early 2000s, Nigel helped relaunch Flutter as a betting exchange – a concept that has never really worked since and one he recently described on X as a ‘recurring bad idea in the gambling space.’
“One product that is definitely a bad idea is facilitating person-to- person betting between friends. Why do you need it? If I want to have a bet with a friend, I just have a bet with the friend. If they don’t pay me, then they’re not really a friend!”
While betting with strangers may work better, Eccles expressed scepticism about its widespread utility:
“Most people who want to have a bet do so on a big market like who’s going to win this game… very few want to bet on something that’s not covered by the books. Te person-to-person aspect, with the difficulties in getting the right bet size, simply doesn’t offer enough value.”
Tis distinction, Nigel surmises, underlines the industry’s shift toward more scalable, organised betting systems.
DAILY FANTASY SPORTS
Reflecting on the trajectory of daily fantasy sports, Eccles believes there are comparisons with what DFS went through in its early stages and what sweepstakes is now. He noted that the early years of DFS, starting from 2009, were marked by rapid growth despite regulatory hurdles:
Discussing the pressures and uncertainties in the high-stakes world of getting DFS legalised across the US, Eccles offered a rare glimpse into the personal challenges faced by industry leaders:
“I don’t think anyone who builds a multi-billion-dollar company will tell you it was fun. Tere were good moments and, in its way,
29
“If we look at DFS from when we launched in 2009 to 2016, this is a category that’s grown very quickly, it doesn’t really have any regulation, and you’ve got lots of established operators who are all saying this is illegal. Tat part of the story is the same. Te question is where does it go here? Do they become more accepted?”
Eccles highlighted how successful lobbying efforts were pivotal in legitimising DFS – efforts that enabled laws to be passed in 22 states within three years, ultimately paving the way for nationwide legal sports betting. However, he questions whether the sweepstakes model could replicate that success:
“Te real similarity between sweepstakes and DFS was that the law wasn’t totally clear as to what was permitted and what wasn’t. For DFS games of skill were permitted but games of chance were not. One key distinction, however, is when we were challenged by State Attorney General’s about the legality of DFS we were prepared to fight it in court. In fact, we took a case all the way to the New York court of appeals and won.
“Will they go down the same path as DFS? I don’t know. A lot will be down to the operators. We invested tens of millions of dollars to get this to happen and a lot of our time to pass it. Are sweepstakes going to do that? I’m not close enough to it to say.”
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 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180
