Ultra Roulette

About Ultra Roulette

The conclusion of the Yahoo Finance deal comes as there is more talk about the use of prediction market data in journalism. Operators such as Polymarket and rival Kalshi have touted their markets as a way to get real-time information on how likely future events are to occur. 

However, some media industry observers have questioned whether trading activity can reliably stand in for broader public opinion. There are also concerns among critics over the growing links between news organizations and prediction platforms. 

At the same time, prediction market operators are facing regulatory tussles in the US. State regulators are moving to shut down the firms under gambling laws. The companies say their contracts should be regulated at the federal level as derivatives. 

What is Ultra Roulette?

Each Supreme Court term begins on the first Monday in October and runs through late June or early July. The court typically receives about 7,000-8,000 writ petitions and grants about 80, or 1%, each term. Four of the nine sitting justices must vote to accept a case. Five current justices – Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor – were on the bench in 2018 for the PASPA case.

There are no SCOTUS-prediction market contracts currently on Kalshi but Polymarket lists a 41% probability that the court will accept an event contract case by 31 December.

A hearing before the Supreme Court would be the culmination of what has been the biggest sports betting-related development since PASPA. Perhaps no other issue has united gaming stakeholders from various companies, tribes, states and regulators.

What is Ultra Roulette?

This particular lawsuit involving Fox Financial, one of a growing list IPI is battling, centers on an arrangement the company made with a third party, Forson Holdings. That entity had leased property from Fox in 2016, but fell behind. IPI had signed as a guarantor of that lease agreement and, as such, was responsible for covering Forson in the event payments weren’t made. However, it decided it didn’t need to follow the terms of the contract.

It seems like not a day goes by without IPI coming under fire for something else. The company’s chairwoman, Cui Li Jie, has already found herself in trouble and was previously held in contempt of court, but now has another black mark beside her name. She has been found in contempt again, this time for allegedly perjuring herself in court. A lawyer representing employees suing IPI and Cui produced evidence proving she had lied under oath, and Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona has now agreed. She issued her ruling this morning, with Cui only able to respond, through an interpreter, “I don’t know anything, I don’t understand English.”

The post Ethical questions at IPI lead lawyer to exit as chair held in contempt appeared first on CalvinAyre.com.