The NFL regular season is about to start in early September, but all eyes are on Super Bowl LX, the end of the journey. It will kick off on February 8, 2026, at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, California, where the San Francisco 49ers play their home games. And that’s pretty much all we know about it, for now. Who’s going to play at the halftime show? (Taylor Swift?) What epic TV commercials will be aired (and how much will 30 seconds of airtime cost?) are all unknown.

Another Super Bowl question that has sparked debate as the NFL season is about to kick off is how millions of US fans who want a piece of the action will back their favorite to win. Will they do it through sports betting, which is now legal in most US states, or will they buy event contracts, a new product that is exploding on the internet nowadays, with regulation and legality causing heated debates in courts across the country?

The partnership US betting powerhouse FanDuel announced with event-contract giant CME shows how the industry is trying to navigate an entirely different regulatory universe. The Super Bowl, being one of the largest betting events on the planet, will also determine how these two universes will collide or coexist.

Although many people think sports betting and events contracts are similar, they are two very different beasts.

A traditional sports bet is speculative and meant for entertainment, based on a zero-sum wager between the sportsbook and bettor. Although some bettors apply knowledge and strategy, it is considered gambling, with results being purely up to chance. At the same time, event contracts companies argue that their product has a legitimate hedging function that, although it bears risk, is considered investment risk undertaken for economic purposes.

When placing a bet with a sportsbook, the bettor’s relationship and risk are solely with the sportsbook, which manages the risks, sets up the betting lines, adjusts the odds, and pays out large wins or collects losses. Event contracts are traded between members of a community, facilitated by a centralized exchange platform that doesn’t take part in the trade but rather facilitates transactions between buyers and sellers. Whereas a bookmaker determines odds in traditional betting, event contracts on an exchange platform are priced by market demand.

A bet will typically be binary and held until it expires (or cashed out early). For example, you can bet on the Pittsburgh Steelers to win against the New York Jets in the first gameday of these two teams this season. You will then win or lose based on the odds that were offered when you locked the bet. Event contracts are tradable, and their pricing will fluctuate depending on market conditions. For example, you can buy a contract for “Joe Burrow to win season MVP” and sell it months later at a profit if his odds improve, or alternatively, offload it at a loss if Burrow gets injured and his odds diminish.

Another huge difference is how event contracts are regulated compared to traditional NFL betting. Since the US Supreme Court annulled PASPA (the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992), each US state can regulate its own sports betting market. The regulators’ primary focus is to ensure operator integrity, protect customers from fraud, and put in place mechanisms to prevent and treat problem gambling.

Event contracts are regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), a federal agency that is more focused on ensuring market integrity, preventing market manipulation, and protecting investors from a seismic market shift. It is rarely concerned with protecting individual investors from addiction and the prevention of loss from excessive trading.

The introduction of event contracts isn’t an evolution of sports betting. It is a big bang, representing the creation of an entirely new marketplace that operates under a different legal framework and a different set of values. Traditional betting lives in the sphere of entertainment and individual player protection, whereas event contracts exist in the world of investment and financial-market transparency and integrity.

The outcome of this regulatory debate will determine whether betting on the NFL and other major league sports will stay within the sportsbook space or expand into financial trading markets.

ACR Poker wrapped up its flagship Dual Venom tournaments, delivering over two weeks of big poker action and awarding more than $10 million in prize pools as players worldwide battled for massive payouts and coveted bounties.

The $8 Million NLH Venom drew 3,392 entrants across six Day 1 flights, pushing the prize pool to $8,480,000. The tournament concluded with Southern California resident David ‘IamYorFather’ Gonzalez, 54, claiming the NLH Venom crown after a fierce final table battle against elite opponents. The champion eliminated runner-up ‘ArkaduktusFrRM’, earning $665,163 and $45,000 in bounties.

“I’m still trying to process what just happened. Even days later it all seems so surreal. I was especially thrilled to be able to overcome being the short stack at the final table,” Gonzalez shared. “The money was a blessing because I have quite a few family members in need and this allows me to support them fully.”

Adding to the excitement, ‘sorka1975’ claimed the $500,000 top bounty, with ‘ArkaduktusFrRM’ ($210,000) and ‘AndreWard’ ($205,000) rounding out the top three mystery bounty winners.

ACR Pros kept the action buzzing throughout, with Chris Moneymaker firing up multiple bullets in the opening Day 1s, and Michael Loncar, Rob Kuhn, and Katie Lindsay earning their spots in Day 2. Fans can rewatch the final table action on ACR Poker’s Twitch channel, featuring Rob Kuhn and Drew Gonzalez.

Meanwhile, the $2 Million PLO Venom, tying ACR Poker’s biggest Omaha tourney ever, attracted 830 entrants and a $2,075,000 total prize pool. ‘FutureTrunks’ ultimately secured the first-place prize of $208,217, plus $146,250 in bounties.

“It was awesome to see such a solid turnout and fun atmosphere in both Venom tourneys,” said Moneymaker. “Huge congrats to the winners and everyone who hit those incredible bounties.” 

From Venom Fever to the Venom Vault, ACR Poker offered players hundreds of low-cost opportunities to win $2,650 Venom seats. One standout success came from ‘xGetxRektx’, who turned an $0.80 Venom Vault Key into an incredible $15,000 bounty and $6,500 cash prize.

While the Venom tourneys have concluded, ACR Poker is ensuring the action continues with more exciting tournaments approaching, including September’s Online Super Series XL, boasting a $50 million guarantee.

Rivalry Corp. (the “Company” or “Rivalry”) (TSXV: RVLY), an internationally regulated sports betting and media company, today announced financial results for the three and six-month period ended June 30, 2025 (“Q2 2025”). All dollar figures are quoted in Canadian dollars unless otherwise noted.

Q2 2025 marks Rivalry’s second full quarter operating under its restructured business model initiated in late 2024, centered on efficiency, improved player monetization, and deeper operational discipline. The Company’s results continue to demonstrate the impact of this shift, with record net revenue per player, reduced expenses, and a significantly narrowed net loss.

“We’ve rebuilt Rivalry into a lean, high-performance engine,” said Steven Salz, Co-Founder and CEO of Rivalry. “Player monetization is at all-time highs, the product is stronger than ever, and we’re doing more with less.”

Key Highlights

• Net revenue in Q2 2025 increased 24% sequentially to $1.6 million, up from $1.3 million in Q1 2025, despite a declining expense base and completely flat marketing spend.
• Operating expenses declined 62% YoY to $3.6 million, down from $9.5 million in Q2 2024, reflecting substantial cost reductions and improved operational focus.
• Net loss narrowed 59% YoY to $2.19 million, down from $5.37 million in Q2 2024, and improved sequentially from $2.99 million in Q1 2025.
• Average Customer Acquisition Cost payback across H1 2025 was approximately 1.5 months, reflecting improved funnel conversion, higher player value, and stronger retention – all achieved under constrained spend conditions.
• Run-rate monthly operating expenses remain approximately $600,000 USD, consistent with the Q1 2025 press release.

Adjusted Operating Metrics

As with Q1 2025, a meaningful portion of Q2 2025 expenses were non-recurring or non-operational, including annual audit costs, regulatory fees, and legacy vendor payments from prior periods. On a run-rate basis:

• Adjusted G&A expense¹ was $1.7 million, compared to the reported $2.5 million.
• Adjusted Technology and Content expense¹ was approximately $440,000, versus $854,000 reported.

These adjustments reinforce that Rivalry is operating increasingly closer to breakeven on a structural basis, with the Q2 2025 reported net loss largely a function of historical payables and costs from prior quarters.

Record Player Economics

Performance improvements continued in Q2 2025, with record-high player monetization across multiple dimensions. These gains were driven by an improving product, high value player segmentation, enhanced onboarding, retention, and engagement improvements across the platform.

• Net revenue per player increased 49% quarter-over-quarter, and was 210% higher than the historical average prior to the Q4 2024 transformation.
• Wagers per player rose 7% quarter-over-quarter, and nearly 300% above the pre-rebuild average.
• Average monthly deposits per player increased 28% quarter-over-quarter, following a 175% increase in Q1 from historical levels.
• Deposit frequency per player climbed 22% quarter-over-quarter, compounding earlier gains, up 115% from historical levels in Q1.

Strategic Review and Operational Focus

Rivalry’s previously announced evaluation of strategic alternatives (the “Strategic Review”) remains ongoing. The Company continues to explore a range of potential outcomes aimed at maximizing shareholder value. There is no assurance regarding the timing or results of the Strategic Review.

As part of the Strategic Review, Rivalry is focused on:

• Normalizing the cost base to the aforementioned run rate by resolving non-recurring liabilities and payables from prior periods.
• Activating a controlled growth strategy, supported by high marketing efficiency and a 1.5-month Customer Acquisition Cost payback average observed throughout 2025.
• Targeted cost optimization, with additional reductions being assessed for H2 2025.

“This Strategic Review is about enabling growth from a fundamentally stronger base,” said Salz. “We’ve rebuilt the engine. Now we’re focused on unlocking its full potential.”