The regulatory body also issued further information regarding the parties that fall into any of the three categories stipulated:
1) A sports wagering operator is licensed by the Board to operate sports wagering, a mobile sports wagering system or an interactive sports wagering system, through the provision of an interactive gaming or sports wagering platform, on behalf of sports wagering certificate holder.
2) A sports wagering manufacturer builds, rebuilds, fabricates, assembles, produces, programs, designs, sells, leases, offers or otherwise makes modifications to any authorised sports wagering device or associated equipment for use or operation in this Commonwealth for sports wagering purposes.
3) A sports wagering supplier provides, distributes or services any authorised sports wagering device or associated equipment for use or operation in this Commonwealth for sports wagering purposes, that is not otherwise required to be licensed as a sports wagering manufacturer or, provides risk management services or integrity services to a sports wagering certificate holder or sports wagering operator.
This follows moves made by the PGCB last month, after responding to urges and implementing temporary regulations, Kevin O’Toole, the board’s Executive Director, stating: “In the coming months, we expect to regularly ask the Board for approval of additional temporary regulations that will move us toward a launch of this new gaming initiative”.
In relation to the regulations, it was also detailed that several parties had their own input regarding the governing of sports betting, amongst which were Penn State University, Harrah’s, Penn National Gaming, Pittsburgh Pirates Baseball Club, Major League Baseball, the PGA Tour, the National Basketball Association, and the National Football League.
Source: GMB
