zlacker

>>jimbob+(OP)
Maybe there could be some sort of identity based limit on how much anyone can gamble in a month?

Couldn't fully read the article though.

If betting wasn't allowed it would be significant income loss for sports teams as well. Maybe you might think that they don't need that much money, but that is subjective.

>>mewpme+e9
How do sports teams derive income from this? Is it just in the sense of increased viewership and the possibility of sponsorships from the gambling companies? As far as I understand they do not get any money from sports gambling directly and are mostly not allowed (through internal ethics rules) to do any gambling themselves.

>>andrew+Rc
I live in a smaller country and all sponsors pretty much are betting companies. These sponsors by far are most lucrative compared to your usual brands exactly because of how much they make from betting. Other industries wouldn't be able to pay as much for sponsorship since due to not so large viewership they wouldn't gain all of it back.

Negatives aside if you are fine with the losses it could be viewed a bit like donating to the football clubs.

Larger football clubs could be fine taking pay cuts etc, but there would likely be many smaller clubs that can't pay their players on the pro or semi pro level any longer.