NCPG addresses controversy, talks about products that are functionally gambling

• The NCPG has issued a new statement on its involvement with prediction markets
• The organization said that it was adamant about addressing gambling-related harms, and that prediction markets were a source of that
• The NCPG added that it will continue to work on tackling these harms, but would not involve itself with the legal debate surrounding the issue

The National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) has sought to address the recent controversy over its acceptance of a donation from Kalshi, a prominent prediction market platform, to fund responsible gambling and research into gambling-related harm.

NCPG addresses prediction market controversy

The issue stemmed from the fact that Kalshi and other prediction market platforms argue that their products do not constitute a form of gambling. At the same time, the industry has taken issue with the donation, arguing that the NCPG has gone against everything licensed gambling bodies stood for.

Michigan and Ohio have already left the NCPG, accusing the organization of breaching its commitment to responsible play and protecting consumers from bad gambling practices. Massachusetts has similarly warned that the relationship is on rocky terms.

Now, the NCPG is seeking to address what is widely regarded as controversy and hopes to make things up with gaming regulators across the United States. NCPG Board President Derek Longmeier released a strongly worded comment on prediction markets and the organization’s approach to the gambling-related harm that is associated with them.

"Prediction markets have moved rapidly to a mainstream product used by millions of Americans. Regardless of how prediction markets are currently legally defined, NCPG believes it is functionally gambling and can expose consumers to many of the same risks and harms associated with traditional gambling," Longmeier said.

The statement, however, reiterated a position that the NCPG has long maintained - the organization was neutral on whether prediction markets should be legal. However, the NCPG was not neutral on its core focus of efforts - reducing gambling-related harm wherever it emerged.

Longmeier argued that the NCPG’s main mission remained unchanged. When it came to event contracts, the organization was purely interested in helping people who are experiencing financial, emotional, and relationship consequences as a result of prediction markets.

"The harm is not theoretical, and we cannot wait to act," Longmeier said, commenting on the harm that emanates from the prediction market sector.

"NCPG exists not to litigate whether prediction markets or other emerging activities meet a legal definition of gambling, but to prevent and reduce gambling-related harm wherever it occurs," Longmeier added.

NCPG is neutral on what is gambling - but takes adamant stance on reducing harm

The board president reminded that the NCPG has always been fully accountable for the donation it has received and that it was impartial in its decision regarding the donation received by Kalshi, choosing to use the money to advance understanding of harm markers and address those instead.

"We welcome engagement from gambling companies, sports leagues, prediction market platforms, financial-services organizations, regulators, policymakers, consumer advocates, researchers, community organizations, and prevention, treatment, and recovery professionals to advocate for and build real consumer protections such as responsible-engagement tools, self-exclusion options, age verification, clear risk disclosures, and direct lines to help," he added.

Ultimately, the goal remains the same - stay ahead of harm and create minimum standards for entities offering gambling and functional gambling products, Longmeier said, a nod to the fact that prediction markets are very close to gambling, no matter what the current legal framework says.

Image credit: Unsplash.com