State of Interstate Online Poker is Stuck
The configuration of the United States online poker market is confusing. Moreover, it is tough for online poker operators to navigate. Thus, one dozen years after the first individual state legalized online poker, the base numbers are discouraging:
- Only eight states have legalized online poker.
- Only five states have operated state-regulated online poker.
- Only four states currently offer state-regulated online poker.
- One state has only one online poker operator that hasn’t had competition in a decade.
- Six states have signed the multi-state liquidity agreement.
- Only two sites have operated multi-state online poker.
- Three states have yet to issue a single online poker license.
The US market is what it is. And it’s tough to consistently try to shine a positive light on a country that was, once, the largest segment of the global online poker industry. The current state of US online poker is acceptable because it’s better than nothing.
Why the Low Numbers?
There are two primary reasons that online poker in America has experienced such slow growth and, sometimes, regression.
There is no lobbying organization that works actively to encourage states to legalize online poker or to encourage the federal government to legalize online poker. While the Poker Players Alliance (PPA) once embraced that role, the poker industry as a whole did not support its efforts over time, and it finally had to cease operations. Poker Central, which now operates as PokerGO, did purchase the PPA’s assets, the only achievement of the renamed Poker Alliance was the naming of a person to lead it. Nothing more came of it, except that Poker Central obtained a mailing list of more than one million names and contacts of people interested in poker.
Almost every state that has legalized online poker did so under the umbrella of legalized igaming that included online casinos and, sometimes, sports betting. Nevada was the only state that legalized interstate poker only. The other states that accepted poker but really wanted the significant revenue that would come from non-poker igaming. Online casinos bring in the bulk of igaming revenue for states. Thus, efforts to improve online poker are low priorities.
Improvement Options
Building on the reasons that online poker growth in America – in the post-UIGEA and post-Black Friday market – has been so painfully slow, there are ways to change this.
First, companies that operate online poker in America and see its potential – currently PokerStars, BetMGM, and WSOP – should allocate some staff to help educate lawmakers. Whether in the form of a lobbying group or simply as a public service, they could use their internal statistics to demonstrate:
- That poker is more a game of skill than chance, vastly different from casino games.
- That poker is beloved across all demographics, and online poker breaks through barriers in live poker, such as physical and geographic inaccessibility, gender discrimination, and racial disparities.
- That poker winnings have changed lives and launched careers.
- That liquidity is the key to online poker growth and significant revenue generation.
- That igaming complements land-based gambling, and cross-promotion works.
Second, influential poker news outlets could focus more on positive stories that emanate from online poker. Not only can articles bring people’s stories to life, they can then be sent to lawmakers, casino executives, and groups like the American Gaming Association that advocate for casinos but not igaming operators.
What States Offer State-Regulated Online Poker?
Currently, there are eight states that allow for their gambling regulators to license online poker operators, though only several of them have issued licenses:
- Nevada: 1 company in operation (WSOP)
- New Jersey: 3 companies in operation (WSOP, PokerStars, BetMGM)
- Delaware: 0 operating but 1 licensed (Run It Once via Rush Street Interactive)
- Pennsylvania: 3 companies in operation (WSOP, PokerStars, BetMGM)
- Michigan: 3 companies in operation (WSOP, PokerStars, BetMGM)
- West Virginia: 0 operating, 0 licensed
- Connecticut: 0 operating, 0 licensed
- Rhode Island: 0 operating, 0 licensed
Nevada started with two companies – WSOP and Ultimate Poker – but the latter folded many years ago. Another site, Real Gaming, still appears to have a license through South Point Casino but never garnered a player pool and has not operated in years.
Delaware was one of the first three states in the new US online poker market with WSOP-affiliated site on an 888poker platform. The state’s three racinos operated skins on this platform, but its license expired in 2023. Run It Once won the new contract to take over the online poker offering in Delaware, but it has yet to launch.
West Virginia, Connecticut, and Rhode Island have yet to find any online poker applicants because their individual markets are small and not able to produce a return on any company’s investment.
What States Signed MSIGA?
The Multi-State Internet Gaming Agreement, more often referred to as MSIGA, has been the vehicle through which the states can create liquidity. States whose governors sign MSIGA can then work with their regulators to share their player pools across state lines, creating liquidity.
Currently, the list of MSIGA participants consists of:
- Nevada
- Delaware
- New Jersey
- Michigan
- West Virginia
Their individual participation in the multi-state process is where it gets complicated.
Nevada and Delaware signed MSIGA in 2014. They shared their player pools on the 888poker platform, except Delaware players could not compete for WSOP bracelets or titles alongside their fellow players in Nevada. This had to do with the branding of the site and official WSOP affiliation, or lack thereof.
In 2017, New Jersey signed on to MSIGA. Since WSOP was the only site in two of the three states in the agreement, it was the only one to benefit from it. Again, WSOP connected its sites across the three states, but Delaware players could still not compete for WSOP bracelets.
In 2022, Michigan’s governor signed the Multi-State Internet Gaming Agreement. This was a big step because it marked the first opportunity for operators like PokerStars and BetMGM to join their sites across state lines. PokerStars pushed quickly to prepare, and it launched its Michigan-New Jersey combination on the first day of 2023.
As of May 2024, BetMGM indicated that it was preparing to connect its Michigan and New Jersey sites, but it had not done it yet. WSOP also gave subtle signs that it was almost ready to connect Michigan to New Jersey and Nevada – Delaware was out when its 888poker contract expired – but had not done it by the start of the 2024 World Series of Poker in Las Vegas.
In late 2023, West Virginia joined MSIGA. However, the state has yet to issue any online poker licenses, so there are no sites that can connect with West Virginia yet.
Which States are Missing from MSIGA?
Connecticut and Rhode Island have not indicated any interest in attracting online poker operators or signing MSIGA.
Pennsylvania is the most obvious missing link in the online poker chain, however, as it has been a part of the US online poker market since lawmakers expanded the state’s gambling market in 2017 to include various forms of igaming. The market itself was slow to evolve, as PokerStars launched in late 2019, and WSOP and BetMGM did not follow until the summer of 2021. Meanwhile, the state’s regulator has evaded the liquidity topic or blamed its delay on various complications.
State Representative George Dunbar took it upon himself to try to solve the MSIGA issue. To get the ball rolling, he knew that the Pennsylvania igaming law needed a slight amendment to specifically allow it to “enter into interactive reciprocal agreements.” Dunbar introduced a bill – HB.2078 – this year to do just that. Further, it would create a mandate that Pennsylvania sign MSIGA.
As of the end of May, however, the bill has not moved forward in the Pennsylvania legislature.
Unknowns
There is much the public does not know about the status and future of online poker in the US. This is due to an extreme lack of transparency on the part of the regulators and operators in the space.
State gaming regulators are not known for their openness with information. For example, Nevada does not reveal online poker revenue because, per the law, there are fewer than three operators in the market. Michigan does not comment on operators that are working on liquidity but have not completed processes. And Pennsylvania has long avoided answering questions about the topic of liquidity.
Most operators, perhaps due to the highly competitive nature of the small market, do not tip their hands. The only reason that some poker media has reported on BetMGM’s effort to connect Michigan to New Jersey is a leak from a source. The operator itself has not yet commented officially. And WSOP is known for its lack of transparency. In this case, the WSOP couldn’t avoid letting it be known that it was working to connect Michigan, as it never announced summer WSOP bracelet events for its online sites, not even within a week of the summer action set to start.
The exception has been PokerStars, which has been the first to market in Michigan and Pennsylvania and the first to connect Michigan to another state. Its representatives have been open with the media.
