Oklahoma is one of 12 states without legalized sports betting in the U.S. But out of those 12 states, they’ve expressed the most interest in setting up sports betting in Oklahoma. We mean places like California and Texas have failed miserably to get something going. So too has Oklahoma — but its failures aren’t due to votes or unsupportive bills. It’s due to internal strife between the governor and tribes.
Well that strife is showing zero signs of being narrowed. In fact, if the latest quotes are any indication, the gap between both sides has only widened. Let’s take you into what’s transpired as of late.
Everyone — and we mean everyone — had something to say when the Supreme Court chose not to hear a case challenging sports betting in Florida. This happened over the summer, and we’ll spare you the full details aside from the fact the Florida tribe, the Seminoles, earned the right to offer betting across the state. Not only in-person, but online too. The latter was what was being challenged but the Seminoles won and can now take in bets online, even if bettors aren’t on tribal land when the bet is placed.
Many in the industry believe the Florida ruling would serve as a precedent for other states, including Oklahoma. In the Sooner State, tribal casinos are prevalent. They have the exclusive right to offer Las Vegas-style casino games. However, that hasn’t been opened up the Oklahoma sports betting scene yet for reasons we’re about to explain.
But first, let’s hear from Oklahoma Indian Gaming Association Chairman Matthew Morgan. He spoke openly about what the Florida case represented in their own state. Here’s his direct quote:
“While this decision does not directly affect the potential for sports betting in Oklahoma, it should remind us all of what may be possible when governmental leaders sit across the table to work toward respectful, lawful, and solution-oriented agreements.”
Hone in on the last phrase about government leaders being “respectful” and “lawful.” Folks, that’s a nice way of telling Oklahoma lawmakers to stick it where the sun doesn’t shine. But more than anyone else, Morgan’s quip is directed at Oklahoma’s governor, Kevin Stitt.
Stitt Remains Central Figure In Oklahoma Sports Betting Fight
Usually when a state governor comes out in favor of sports betting, that’s a good thing. Stitt is as pro-betting as any governor we’ve seen across the country, and we’ve seen a lot. He has endless quotes about his desperate desire to legalize it, but we can reference the Oklahoma governor’s website. Right on there, Stitt laid out his vision for legalization:
“The Governor’s plan, which would allow Oklahomans to place in-person bets at gaming sites operated by federally recognized tribes, would protect tribal investments in brick-and-mortar facilities. The plan would also allow Oklahomans to place bets on their mobile devices on a sportsbook licensed by the state. Additionally, the plan protects Oklahoma’s student-athletes by prohibiting prop betting and bets on individual student-athlete performance.”
The website shares a few more details, including a 20 percent tax on mobile operators, but only 15 percent for retail sportsbooks in these tribal casinos. Moreover, mobile wagering would be allowed anywhere — not just on tribal land.
And there lies the issue, folks. Oklahoma tribes want the exclusive right to offer sports betting. They believe this is guaranteed in its compact with the state that allows them to take in bets in the first place. Stitt obviously disagrees, and maybe he should. Here’s a quote from him this past April after yet another sports betting legalization bill failed to materialize:
“I’ve studied what other states have done, and there’s 35 other states that have a sports betting system, and so we can see exactly how that’s set up.”
Big Money is in Mobile Betting
If Stitt is a student of the game as he claims, he knows the big money is in mobile betting. You can go from state to state, and almost all of them except Nevada, bets are coming from mobile apps at around a 96-97 percent rate compared to retail bookies. Bettors want to bet, but they want to do so via their phones and not be obligated to do it on tribal land.
In that case, why not let the tribes also offer mobile betting and not commercial operators like DraftKings or BetMGM? Here again, it appears Stitt has done his homework, he knows most casinos don’t have the money or chops to create a good gambling app. That’s not to disrespect them either, but building a well-functioning app is a tech skill, which most tribes don’t have unless you’re the Florida Seminoles (and that’s because they print more money due to the Hard Rock brand than the average tribe).
Oklahoma tribes don’t have the same luxury as the Seminoles, who are one of the few recognized tribes in Florida. That makes it easier to sign their compacts and own the sports betting market. In Oklahoma, there are a whopping 38 federally-recognized tribes. This only creates market fragmentation and no one’s big enough to invest big time into a sports betting product.
All this is to say we see both sides of the argument, we really do. Stitt gets the business side of legal sports betting, while tribes certainly have their rights in the court of law. This battle feels like a game of chicken. Which side will be the first to budge? Only time will tell.
