mark cuban

Mark Cuban Tells Politicians "Good Luck" Getting Rid of Fantasy Sports

Says death of fantasy sports industry greatly exaggerated.

|

Mark Cuban threw some serious shade at politicians who want to ban fantasy sports in a USA Today opinion piece published this week. The Dallas Mavericks owner and host of Shark Tank argued that the popular game of skill wasn't going anywhere despite reports predicting the industry's demise.

Cuban notes in his column that he's investing in two fantasy sports operations as proof of his belief that the industry will continue to thrive and grow. He says the movement of fantasy sports legislation in states like California, Indiana, Virginia, and Florida will clarify gaming laws that will further establish the legitimacy of the daily fantasy sports industry. 

Cuban writes:

"There may be naysayers and more people who try to restrict access to fantasy games. Here's what I have to say that: Good luck. Good luck standing in the way of the entire sports-loving population that enjoys the camaraderie that comes with playing fantasy sports. Good luck telling these folks that they are criminals for doing something that is its own American national pastime. And good luck telling us that we are incapable of deciding for ourselves what hobbies we can participate in."

Cuban's sentiments reflect the inherent hypocrisy embedded in America's sports gambling laws.

"Since the early days there's been two different competing feelings in America. One is that people like to gamble so let them do it," says David Schwartz, director of the gaming research center at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. "The other one is well, everybody except for me can't really handle gambling."

These competing feelings have often resulted in confusing and complicated rules when it comes to gaming policy. Just take a look at New York, where Attorney General Eric Scneiderman is investigating DraftKings and FanDuel for being a "massive, illegal gambling operation" much akin to a lottery. But in New York the lottery is legal—as are other forms of state-sponsored gambling including horse racing and Indian casinos. 

This isn't the first time Cuban has voiced support for fantasy sports. In January, he was the keynote speaker at the Fantasy Sports Trade Association Winter Meeting in Dallas, TX. You can watch part of his speech and learn about the fantasy sports debate in the Reason TV video below: 

Advertisement

NEXT: Donald Trump Wants an 'Insider' as His Nominee, Brian Sandoval Possible SCOTUS Nominee, Leland Yee Going to Jail: P.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I suppose that reports of the industry’s death were exaggerated, then.

  2. These are the people who want to register our guns

    1. In the military, losing a gun is a serious offense that will get you fucked up. Among law enforcement, they are completely nonchalant about it. You see, if you lose a gun in a place where your life is in danger and that weapon can be used against you, it’s a big deal. There’s also accountability in the military as it’s not unionized. There’s some mild incentives or pressure with regards to lower units to conserve costs. A unit doesn’t like shelling out money for some idiot who loses their weapon.

      1. “”In the military, losing a gun is a serious offense that will get you fucked up. Among law enforcement, they are completely nonchalant about it. You see, if you lose a gun in a place where your life is in danger and that weapon can be used against you, it’s a big deal.”

        If you’ve never seen it – one of greatest of Akira Kurosawas many very great films is Stray Dog, which is based around a new-detective having his gun pickpocketed from him, and his shame and horror as it is then used in a series of crimes which he feels morally responsible for.

          1. Yes, most Eddie Murphy vehicles are based on Kurosawa films.

        1. Also Johnnie To’s PTU, only in that case his gun was stolen after being beaten by triad members…

      2. The military’s approach is in my opinion pretty stupid. They act as if a 9mm Beretta is a nuclear warhead. There has to be a happy medium between holding people accountable for money vs acting as though the loss of a weapon available to the public is a national security threat.

    2. Over a thousand badges? Comforting.

      1. Open up, Crusty! Search warrant.

        *flashes plastic badge in peephole*

      2. Makes you wonder if all these “cops” we give such a hard time to around here are really cop, eh?

        1. My first thought was that the easiest way to avoid most of the security theater we have in this country would be to flash a DHS badge.

      3. Badges? We don’t need no stinkin’ badges!

        1. I’d have though somebody would have posted that in under 17 minutes.

          1. Damn…was about to hit submit, but figured I’d better check first.

            1. Badges? we don’t need no stinkin’ badges.

              Doesn’t matter when I thought of posting it, it’s original to me and that’s what counts.

              1. Badgers? We don’t need no stinkin’ Badgers!

                /Big Ten fan

    3. ThisIsTheTruth
      39 minutes ago

      So when these “invalidated” credentials are flashed in the face of a law abiding citizen by some criminal how is he/she to know they are “invalid”.

      That’s easy – cops don’t flash credentials. They don’t knock either.

      wallym
      10 minutes ago

      Just another example of incompetence in the federal government under Barack Obama.

      *sigh* Yes – because the DHS was a shining example of efficiency and accountability under Bush and will be again once we get the right ‘Top Men’ in charge again.

    4. “If a credential holder loses or has their credentials stolen, the holder must report the incident to their supervisor and credential issuance office immediately,” spokesman Justin Greenberg said. “Once the incident has been reported, this information is entered into appropriate DHS and law enforcement databases, which disables use of the lost or stolen item.”

      Obviously this is why we need ‘Smart Guns’.

  3. You know what other Cuban said, “Good luck”?

        1. Or is it 84? (If you count both the squirrels and the, umm, things we are actually looking at.)

    1. Razor Ramon

      1. Go Doyers!!

    2. Silly egould310, cigars can’t talk!

  4. It’s impossible to kill online gambling. You can’t restrict it on a state by state basis, and there’s no national ban going into place. So, really, you may kill one company that offers it. But another will spring up. If not here in America, than on a foreign server. These political hacks are braindead and looking in the wrong direction for their usual handouts.

    1. “It’s impossible to kill online gambling.”

      That’s never stopped them from trying before.

  5. “Look, people are having fun. Let’s either tax the shit out of what they are doing or ban it.” – nanny state politician

    1. But the time and money they spend having fun could be spent worrying about Soshul Justus! Check your privlij!

      1. Columbus ’81

    2. Even this place wasn’t really giving much support. When the controversy began the general response on this site was “as long as the commercials stop” and “I knew something was shady about it”. Probably should have announced gays are being forbidden from fantasy gambling.

      1. That you Tony….dead thread-fucking AGAIN?

  6. “Since the early days there’s been two different competing feelings in America. One is that people like to gamble so let them do it,”

    But what happens when they start betting the house and children?!

    BANKRUPTCIES WILL RISE!

    1. Fanduel is running a special this week, deposit one child into your account and they will match it!

      1. The purchasing power of a Honduras child ain’t what it used to be.

        1. The serious child investor has moved on to the Indonesian Tyke. Although some swear that the Byelorussian Brat is on the rebound.

          1. Nope. Short the Brat. Trust me.

    2. If I want to sell my child to pay off a gambling debt, I really don’t see what business it is of yours.

  7. Dear colleagues,

    a good friend of mine says “i really like this Matt Taibbi guy”.

    I’ve havent read taibbi since… oh, 2010 or so. But last i checked he’s just the slightly more amusing and literate version of Mark Ames same progressive media-hack thing.

    Remind me = what’s the most horrible thing taibbi ever wrote?

    I just wanted to provide my buddy a counter-example to his recent “better writing”, the example of which was his recent article about trump (which i’ve still not read)

    My own view is that Taibbi is readable, but his politics are generally sort of bone-stupid boilerplate proggy stuff. Am i missing anything?

    1. The only thing I took from that article is that Trump wants to keep the little brown people out, but let in Eastern European super models who will do anything for a buck. What kind of schmuck wouldn’t get behind that?

      1. Yet another idea Trump has stolen from Ali G.

    2. I’ve seen some of his derp posted here before but yeah, been a while.

    3. He famously wrote about women wanting to be raped. However, I think he has written good pieces on the banking crisis. He’s also really smug , not that smart , and not that witty.

      1. ‘” smug , not that smart , and not that witty.”

        Yeah, that’s been my impression. I thought his stuff was funny back in the late-90s/early 2000s when i read eXiled Online. I lost track of him for a while and saw 1-2 pieces during the Bush admin which were Ok. But the few things i’ve seen from him at Rolling Stone sound like boilerplate proggy moaning about the Koch Bros and Corporations. With some vulgar humor and hamhanded literary flourishes.

        1. GIL,

          My impression regarding Matt Taibbi is similar to my impressions about many of us who have otherwise cogent arguments to support whatever views we’ve arrived at/the positions we hold (that is, until we find ourselves having to choose between what we want/need to believe and the deliberative processes from which we arrived at our principles).

          I doubt that helps you in your effort to find an article by Mr. Taibbi to share with your associate (articles for which I briefly looked), but I thought it worth writing.

          Unrelated: Thanks again for introducing me to the Cyanide and Happiness videos. Have you watched “The Depressing Episode”?

          1. “Thanks again for introducing me to the Cyanide and Happiness videos.”

            Sadly, that wasn’t me. I think Jesse was the first to reference my favorite bit, which was the Tri-Gendered Pyrofox thing

    4. The two men, of course, are polar opposites in just about every way ? Sanders worries about the poor, while Trump would eat a child in a lifeboat ? but both are laser-focused on the corrupting role of money in politics.

      Both propose “revolutions” to solve the problem, the difference being that Trump’s is an authoritarian revolt, while Sanders proposes a democratic one. If it comes down to a Sanders-Trump general election, the matter will probably be decided by which candidate the national press turns on first: the flatulent narcissist with cattle-car fantasies or the Democrat who gently admires Scandinavia. Would you bet your children on that process playing out sensibly?

      1. Then there’s this completely made up gem:

        Nine out of 10 times in America, the candidate who raises the most money wins.

        Only, it’s actually right around 50%. But who needs facts?

        1. In 2 candidate races? So…there is zero correlation with money.

          I’d like to see a link to that if you have it. That is a good piece of knowledge.

        2. My stat was off, but study on the subject:
          http://pricetheory.uchicago.ed…..rs1994.pdf

          Also covers some of the history of other studies.

          Spending by incumbents has little to no impact on election results based on the larger body of research, bit iffier if it influences the challengers (Levitt above arguing it really doesn’t):
          https://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/0472099213-ch8.pdf

          1. Thanks

      2. “the difference being that Trump’s is an authoritarian revolt, while Sanders proposes a democratic one.”

        Well, he only lied about Sanders, so one out of two….
        sucks.

        1. +1 lamb and 2 wolves voting for dinner

          1. You like Indonesian food too?

        2. I’m not sure what would be anti-democratic about Trump, if he wins in a democratic election…

      3. Sanders worries about the poor, while Trump would eat a child in a lifeboat ? but both are laser-focused on the corrupting role of money in politics.

        Hahahahahahahahahahaha! Sanders would eat a child in the lifeboat. Trump would just admit ‘fuck it, we need food and he couldn’t fight back’. Sanders would whine that he was eating the child because ‘he needs his strength for the revolution comrade’.

        Democrat who gently admires Scandinavia.

        And Cuba, and China, and the Soviet Union, and Cambodia, and . . .

    5. Trump is no intellectual. He’s not bringing Middlemarch to the toilet.

      Wah? George Eliot is toilet reading. That is sexist Mr. Taibbi

  8. Mark Cuban Tells Politicians “Good Luck” Getting Rid of Fantasy Sports

    Challenge accepted.
    /.Gov

    1. They’ll give it all the money and violence they can muster for a few decades and when that doesn’t work, they’ll double down. Rinse, repeat.

      1. “It’ll work this time, we swear. Those internet nerds can’t be tougher than Al Capone or Pablo Escobar? Problem solved.”

        1. ‘Those internet nerds can’t be tougher than . . . what do you mean my credit card has been declined?’

    2. If you like your quarterback, you can keep him.

  9. I wish Mark Cuban had been the one to pull a trump and run for office. He cold be equally as aggressive, over the top, alpha male, but seems to have more of a head on his shoulders..

  10. OK wow that jsut makes a ll kinds of sense. Wow.

    http://www.Anon-Net.tk

    1. I’m getting worried about anon-bot. He’s getting less and less coherent lately.

      Daisy, daisy, give me your answer do…

  11. OT: I pulled the money quote, but feel free to RTFA for context

    http://www.tampabay.com/news/t…..wn/2266755

    “The vast majority of us were willing to take that risk and not back down in the face of three Tea Party bloggers sitting in their underwear in their basements in Ruskin,” Buckhorn said. “That’s not leadership.”

  12. On this Sandoval thing (assuming it has any legitimacy)

    I need to learn more about Sandoval, but IF he is good on 1A and 2A, I’m in pretty strong favor of letting him sail through (barring some really awful stance on something else).

    Trump will likely be the R nominee. He will likely lose. I’ll take a good justice on 1A and 2A over a Hillary nominee any day, and it’s not even remotely a close call. I don’t give a single fuck whether it is fun to stick it to Obama. That’s petty ass shit — there are more important things on the line.

    1. Is it possible that your chief enforcer is simply interested in unlocking the “Seat 2 Supremes” achievement at any party costs?. Also he gets to have attention back right in the middle of the primaries…he seems a vain creature

      1. Maybe. Maybe this all a smoke screen. Maybe he honestly thinks the Republicans will block what looks to most of the country like a gift nomination and that the D’s can use it in the general. Maybe Sandoval is bad (from an R perspective) on social issues. Maybe he is just an all around shitty candidate for liberty despite (because of?) the letter next to his name.

        Need to learn more. But that won’t stop me from making pronouncements about completely hypothetical scenarios!

    2. Need moar info.

      But the odds of O appointing him are slim, IMHO.

      1. HA! No way he is a nominee. None. Anti-amnesty? Supports Obamacare lawsuit?

        Believe me, I wish he would. Pro 2A, pro 10A, pro school choice, pro charter schools, sunset licensing and advisory boards? I could take the anti-amnesty and wishy-washy stance on abortion for all of that (assuming he means any of it).

        But IF Obama got high and actually nominated this guy, blocking him might be the stupidest thing the R’s have ever done, bar none.

          1. Please be wrong.

            “But IF Obama got high and actually nominated this guy, blocking him might be the stupidest thing the R’s have ever done, bar none.”

            I can imagine the establishment’s thoughts. “The grassroots think they can outderp us with Trump! Oh wait ’till they see us fuck shit up!”

      2. I would take him in a second over anything Hilary or Trump would nominate (Judge Judy?), but the Republicans would certainly not vote for him because of his abortion record. That’s almost their main issue

    3. THIIIIIIIISSSSS

  13. Mark Cuban for president!

  14. My friend’s sister in-law makes $55 /hour on the computer . gy She has been out of a job for nine months but last month her income was $13390 just working on the computer for a few hours.visit that site….

    ——— http://www.alpha-careers.com

  15. My friend’s sister in-law makes $55 /hour on the computer . gb She has been out of a job for nine months but last month her income was $13390 just working on the computer for a few hours.visit that site….

    ——— http://www.alpha-careers.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.