The road to obtaining a license has not been easy as MGM Springfield officials have faced delays and tough questions from regulators.
This happened because the company missed an essential charging deadline last month. It also faced a lack of approval two weeks ago as the Massachusetts Gaming Commission moved key votes to a different date.
And while the regulator voted unanimously to approve the company’s application for sports betting authorization, Monday’s hearing appeared to be attended by MGM officials and lawyers to defend the company’s request. 온라인카지노
Throughout the hearing, regulators focused only on the issues facing the company now, including lawsuits facing casinos, disappointments revealed by Springfield politicians last week, and the relationship between MGM Springfield and BetMGM, a subsidiary of MGM Resorts International.
These questions have been raised because both companies are subsidiaries of MGM Resorts International and BetMGM has separately applied for sports betting licenses.
At the hearing, the regulator’s commissioner, Nakisha Skinner, said: “Given that BetMGM will play an important role in operating the casino’s direct sportsbook, we reviewed how MGM Springfield will ultimately retain control of its operations.
“It’s hard for me to imagine a scenario where I have different concerns about BetMGM as a category 3 [mobile] tethered candidate and as a vendor. There are all the issues that we need to be concerned about regarding Category 3 applications, and I think it’s a huge issue in MGM Springfield’s role as a vendor.”
In a related development, Jed Nosal, an attorney for MGM Springfield, said, “BetMGM is just a service provider for MGM Springfield’s sports betting business, which is completely controlled by the casino. This is similar to the relationship between MGM Springfield and the company operating slot machines.
“MGM Springfield and MGM Resorts International and all the participants in front of you prove themselves to be fit. They are suitable, and the Commission can proceed with this application based on the existing suitability of the applicant and their participants. And that is not only what is required for the application, but also in relation to the review in accordance with the regulations.”
The rest of the questions concerned the policy of sharing sponsor data between MGM Springfield and BetMGM, and then the rest of the hearing moved on to a simple enforcement session that was not accessible or visible to the public.