RandBall: Sports betting coming to western Wisconsin, raising stakes for Minnesota

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
62,856
Reaction score
20,351
Points
113
per RandBall:

Minnesotans have been making the trek south to place legal bets since a sports book opened in 2019 at the Diamond Jo Casino just across the Iowa border.

Soon, they will be headed east as well.

Wisconsin's St. Croix Chippewa Tribe and Governor Tony Evers amended their gambling compact in late December, paving the way for sports betting at the Turtle Lake Casino — located about 75 miles from downtown Minneapolis and even closer to some Twin Cities suburbs to the north and east.

A 45-day review process from the U.S. Department of the Interior, considered a formality, is almost over — meaning the book potentially could be open for the Super Bowl.

I talked about the news and what it might mean for Minnesota on Tuesday's Daily Delivery podcast.

www.startribune.com

Sports betting coming to western Wisconsin, raising stakes for Minnesota

Final approval of sports betting at Turtle Lake Casino, about 90 minutes from downtown Minneapolis and closer to some Twin Cities suburbs, is imminent.
www.startribune.com www.startribune.com

Go Gophers!!
 


The real boom for sports betting will be online.

If sports betting is legalized in MN, will the hard-core gamblers drive to a sports book, or will they be sitting home watching the game and placing prop bets on their phones?

I know Bally's has indicated they see that as the long-term vision - being able to broadcast a game and promote in-game betting.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
The real boom for sports betting will be online.

If sports betting is legalized in MN, will the hard-core gamblers drive to a sports book, or will they be sitting home watching the game and placing prop bets on their phones?
Click to expand...
For the leagues, this is more about the casual gambler than the hard cores (who are likely betting already). The amount bet ($10 vs. $10,000) is less relevant to the NFL or MLB than the number of bettors, figuring that anyone betting on a game is going to follow it closer regardless of the amount at stake. The hope is that the casual fan will watch more games if they have action on them and the casual $10 bet people are not going to drive to a casino an hour away to place those bets. The objective is to get to a phone-based app allowing convenient pre- and in-game wagering.

From what I have heard, the implementation in Minnesota would likely require in-person casino wagers during an initial "ramp up" period and then eventually allow remote betting after making an in-person deposit. The remote betting might be individually based (i.e. app based on your phone or other device) or could be limited to specific locations at kiosks sort of like an ATM. Lots of conflicting interests with the bands and various moral objections to gambling expansion. Some of that breaks down along typical R vs. D lines, but some of it is more nuanced.

In the end, the people want it, the professional sports leagues want it and it's a potential revenue stream for the state, so it seems likely to happen. Since it's going to be a process to get to the app based remote wagering, might as well get started as soon as possible.
 

Nice write-up @2nd Degree Gopher !

I'm good with it. All I ask is that two reasonable slices be carved off: one for public schools, and one for treatment of problem gambling.
 



2nd Degree Gopher said:
For the leagues, this is more about the casual gambler than the hard cores (who are likely betting already). The amount bet ($10 vs. $10,000) is less relevant to the NFL or MLB than the number of bettors, figuring that anyone betting on a game is going to follow it closer regardless of the amount at stake. The hope is that the casual fan will watch more games if they have action on them and the casual $10 bet people are not going to drive to a casino an hour away to place those bets. The objective is to get to a phone-based app allowing convenient pre- and in-game wagering.

From what I have heard, the implementation in Minnesota would likely require in-person casino wagers during an initial "ramp up" period and then eventually allow remote betting after making an in-person deposit. The remote betting might be individually based (i.e. app based on your phone or other device) or could be limited to specific locations at kiosks sort of like an ATM. Lots of conflicting interests with the bands and various moral objections to gambling expansion. Some of that breaks down along typical R vs. D lines, but some of it is more nuanced.

In the end, the people want it, the professional sports leagues want it and it's a potential revenue stream for the state, so it seems likely to happen. Since it's going to be a process to get to the app based remote wagering, might as well get started as soon as possible.
Click to expand...
Please do correct me if I'm wrong (I probably am), but isn't getting this passed a little more complicated because of the casinos fighting against it? I was always under the impression that they didn't want to cut into their slot machines/blackjack/other games.
 

Gophers1992 said:
Please do correct me if I'm wrong (I probably am), but isn't getting this passed a little more complicated because of the casinos fighting against it? I was always under the impression that they didn't want to cut into their slot machines/blackjack/other games.
Click to expand...
I think that your first sentence is true, it is far more complicated than it might otherwise be due to their opposition.

As to your second sentence, the way I have heard the objection voiced has more to do with the fact that they don't want to cede any new part of legal gambling to anyone else rather than a specific concern that sports betting, in and of itself, will reduce other forms of casino gambling which they now control. The conventional wisdom, right or wrong, seems to be that sports gambling revenue won't be very large compared to their other revenues sources. They do fear, however, that if we allow mobile sports betting, then the next step might be expanded mobile gaming of other forms (e.g. video poker or slots in bars) and that would harm their casino revenues.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
I think that your first sentence is true, it is far more complicated than it might otherwise be due to their opposition.

As to your second sentence, the way I have heard the objection voiced has more to do with the fact that they don't want to cede any new part of legal gambling to anyone else rather than a specific concern that sports betting, in and of itself, will reduce other forms of casino gambling which they now control. The conventional wisdom, right or wrong, seems to be that sports gambling revenue won't be very large compared to their other revenues sources. They do fear, however, that if we allow mobile sports betting, then the next step might be expanded mobile gaming of other forms (e.g. video poker or slots in bars) and that would harm their casino revenues.
Click to expand...
Makes sense, thank you!
 



Despite being a more liberal state.....Minnesota always seems to be behind on these things. Look at how long it took for Sunday liquor sales to be approved. But legalized sports betting (along with legal marijuana sales) will happen. Just depends on how long it takes for the congress members to pull their heads out of their asses.

Personally....I think it would be cool to have. But I really don't care all that much. While it may not be legal....there are numerous offshore books for online betting.
 

there has been speculation that - at least to start - any new "sports book" operation would be done at an existing Indian casino.

the tribes provide a lot of campaign contributions, so they have a lot of pull in the legislature.
 

stocker08 said:
Despite being a more liberal state.....Minnesota always seems to be behind on these things. Look at how long it took for Sunday liquor sales to be approved. But legalized sports betting (along with legal marijuana sales) will happen. Just depends on how long it takes for the congress members to pull their heads out of their asses.

Personally....I think it would be cool to have. But I really don't care all that much. While it may not be legal....there are numerous offshore books for online betting.
Click to expand...
Spot on, we are always years behind everyone else.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom