It’s been widely understood that due to the wording of the proposal, land-based casino companies would get the rights to one digital licence per company instead of one per location. This interpretation of the initiative was not attractive to the state’s existing casino operators. Many operate two or more physical locations in Missouri.

According to the initiative language:
b. The commission shall offer not more than one mobile license to operate sports wagering in this state to each qualified applicant that is:
(1) an owner of an excursion gambling boat located in this state or a sports wagering operator operating on behalf of each such owner, provided, however, that not more than one sports wagering operator shall be permitted to operate under such mobile license on behalf of any entity, or group of commonly owned or controlled entities, which owns, directly or indirectly, more than one excursion gambling boat located in this state;

But when asked how the MGC interprets the language, a commission spokesperson e-mailed iGB the following reply:

“Under the Proposed Constitutional Amendment 2, the Missouri Gaming Commission is authorized to grant a mobile license to operate sports wagering to each qualified applicant that is “an owner of an excursion gambling boat” in Missouri. See Article III, Section 39(g)4(b)(1). Consistent with the advice of the Missouri Attorney General, and upon further review, the Commission’s position is that the language of the Proposed Amendment allows for a mobile license for each excursion gambling boat in Missouri.

“We remain committed to ensuring a well-regulated industry that benefits consumers, operators, and the State alike.”

5 companies own a total of 12 casinos

The proposal also allows for two stand-alone mobile licences and one per professional sports team. All of the state’s pro teams — the NFL Kansas City Chiefs, MLB Kansas City Royals and St. Louis Cardinals, NHL St. Louis Blues and the National Women’s Soccer League Kansas City Current — support the initiative. Amendment 2 was born of St. Louis Cardinals CEO Bill DeWitt III’s frustration at the general assembly’s inability to legalise.

Caesars and Penn Entertainment each own three physical casinos in Missouri. Affinity Interactive, Boyd Gaming and Century Casinos each own two. Bally’s owns one but, should another gambling initiative pass, it hopes to add a second.

Caesars and Penn, in particular, had the most to lose if the initiative is interpreted as one licence per entity. Caesars funded a “no” on Amendment 2 campaign with more than $14 million. But in mid-October, it pulled $1 million worth of planned advertising. The MGC did not indicate what the timing of its decision — or the attorney general’s — was. But it would seem consistent with Caesars’ decision to pull back that the commission shared its interpretation with casino operators last month.

Richest initiative campaign in history

Campaigns for and against the proposal are the richest in state history. DraftKings and FanDuel have staked the “Winning for Missouri Education” campaign with $40.7 million. The total for both sides is about $55 million.

Other than Caesars, land-based casino operators were sitting on the sidelines despite the possibility that they would get fewer licences than had previously been proposed in legislation. Missouri lawmakers have been considering legal betting since 2018, but the issue has been fraught. Senator Denny Hoskins, who is running for secretary of state, has wanted wagering tied to regulating video gaming terminals. But legalising those machines is a non-starter for the casino industry, which says they cut into revenue.

Should Missouri voters legalise, the state will be the only one in the US to approve a state-wide gambling expansion in 2024. The proposal is one of two about gambling in Missouri. Voters will also consider Amendment 5. That would allow for a 14th land-based casino licence, this one on Lake of the Ozarks. Bally’s has already submitted a bid for the location.