CA has been swamped with ads for these.

26 seems to allow sports books in Indian casinos.
27 allows online sports betting and gives 10% of profits to tribes and the homeless.

Does anyone have an opinion?

Bump

I thought the federal government did not have the authority over Tribal land ? If they can have Poker, slots and table games why not a sportsbook?

Its absurd that these props are going to have the highest ad dollar spend of all time for any propositions.

My previous comment was wrong.

Interestingly that sports betting is a state issue now.

Prop 26 will allow only tribal casinos to have sports betting. Prop 27 will allow online with a % going to California tribes. Whichever gets more votes will be the winner. So it will either be 26 or 27.

This will be a mess after voting.

I thought so too, but then I recalled the abortion they call roulette in California.

So....is online poker even affected in CA? What do you think about 27 JayKon?

I don't play online, as I prefer to play live.

The problem I have with 27 is that it might pull money out of the poker economy. Not worried about it with 26, as Vegas has had sports books next to the cardrooms since before the likes of Stu Unger.

The other issue I have is who is supposed to get the money for the homeless and what are they planning to do with it exactly. Sounds ripe for (at best) mismanagement.

27 does not work as you or their ads claim. They are indeed obligated to give 10% to the homeless and tribes but are allowed to take promotion money not from their bottom line but charge it entirely against that 10% share. So if they make $1 billion and spend $100 million on promotions they get the same $900 million as if their promotion cost was $0 and the tribes and homeless have their cut reduced from $100 million to $0. It's a scam.

That is what one of the ads said.

I find it funny the ads don’t talk about what it really is, legalizing online sport betting. This distraction about homelessness is just confusing. The opposing sides are simply fighting for what is best for their pocketbooks.

If you want to legally bet spots online in California you vote yes on 27. If you want it to remain illegal and the bookies’ server to be in Costa Rica you vote no.

My reading of the proposed statute differs from Polarbear. It is 10% total bets - expenses (including fed taxes) and promotions (e.g. sign up bonus). So essentially state taxable income. Paid monthly to the the newly created state regulatory body. That entity will cover its expenses first and then 85% to addiction/homelessness and 15% to non gaming tribes.

It is should also be noted that the new regulatory body will attempt to enforce illegal betting by levying a 10% penalty on individuals who use illegal platforms to bet.