Wildest Gambit

What is Wildest Gambit?

In January, Polymarket and Dow Jones announced an agreement that paved the way for event contract data to appear on various Dow Jones sites, including The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones also owns Barron’s, Investor’s Business Daily and MarketWatch, among other media properties.

Polymarket also has marketing deals with Major League Baseball (MLB), Major League Soccer (MLS), the NHL and UFC.

While the Polymarket/Yahoo Finance situation is one of the earliest examples of a severed relationship between a prediction market operator and a media entity, that doesn’t mean those “divorces” will permeate the two industries.

How to play Wildest Gambit

Clubs fear the measure will jeopardise revenue from betting company sponsorships. Corinthians (Esportes da Sorte), Palmeiras (Sportingbet), and São Paulo (Superbet) alone hold contracts worth BRL350 million annually with betting firms.

One concern is the measure might force clubs to host matches outside the city to maintain their advertising agreements.

Stakeholders have yet to determine their response to the bills, with educational campaigns and collective actions on the agenda. Coordination with political leaders in the city of São Paulo is also under way.

What is Wildest Gambit?

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.

IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”

This particular lawsuit involving Fox Financial, one of a growing list IPI is battling, centers on an arrangement the company made with a third party, Forson Holdings. That entity had leased property from Fox in 2016, but fell behind. IPI had signed as a guarantor of that lease agreement and, as such, was responsible for covering Forson in the event payments weren’t made. However, it decided it didn’t need to follow the terms of the contract.