Bet9ja

About Bet9ja

Prediction markets aside, the absence of crypto on a federal level may have some drag on the regulated industry, especially in the iGaming and sports betting space.

Younger patrons are increasingly familiar with crypto, but the lack of regulatory adoption in the regulated space can push bettors to offshore or unlicensed platforms, most of which do accept it. At the ICE Barcelona conference in 2025, a panel of international sports betting CEOs lamented the fact that they were barred from adopting crypto, while their black-market competitors were not.

A report released in June by payment provider Paysafe said the percentage of online sports bettors who dabble in crypto is 64%, more than double the US average of 30%. Crypto deposits are only legal in two states, Wyoming and Colorado, but crypto withdrawals are not legal anywhere – 85% of respondents said they would welcome withdrawals as an option, Paysafe said.

How to play Bet9ja

The regulator of gambling in New Zealand announced on Friday that the funds returned by operators will be directed towards community organisations.

Under Section 106 of New Zealand’s Gambling Act 2003, a class 4 licence holder, also known as a “corporate society” by the regulator, “must apply or distribute the net proceeds from class 4 gambling only to or for an authorised purpose specified in the corporate society’s licence”.

The DIA worked directly with class 4 gambling operators (commonly known as pokies trusts), and discovered ‘widespread issues’ such as cases where money that should have been available for community grants was instead spent on society expenses, such as the purchase of additional gaming machines.

How to play Bet9ja

“These were serious breaches by Dabble. Wagering providers must have robust systems in place to protect people who have chosen to self-exclude,” Lidgerwood added.

Tabcorp Holdings Limited, one of Australia’s largest wagering and media companies was also fined more than AU$2.7 million earlier this year. ACMA clarified that Tabcorp had violated telemarketing and spam regulations over a 16-month period. 

It had sent over 217,000 marketing emails and SMS messages within a 16-day window to customers who had explicitly unsubscribed. ACMA regarded the volume and timing of these messages as significant enough to warrant enforcement action.