DraftKings Targets Micro Prediction Markets Amid Lawsuits Against It

(AsiaGameHub) –   DraftKings co-founder Paul Liberman has expressed that the company would welcome the opportunity to offer controversial microbetting markets on its platform.

This statement comes despite DraftKings facing a lawsuit that accuses the company of promoting gambling addiction through such betting formats.

Microbetting generally involves placing bets on specific in-game events during live sports, such as the next possession in basketball, the next play in football, or the next pitch in baseball.

“Prediction markets have been remarkably fast at introducing new categories, and they’ve done so very quickly,” Liberman said during a panel discussion at the 29th Annual Milken Institute Global Conference on Monday.

“I believe we’ll soon see even faster and more dynamic micro markets emerge in sports that currently don’t exist,” he continued. “We’ve already seen this with RFQs and parlays. I expect further innovation will make prediction markets increasingly dynamic within sports.”

Microbetting Driving Growth in the Gambling Industry

In-play or live betting accounted for 62.35% of the total betting market share in 2025, according to a report by Mordor Intelligence.

“This growth is driven by improvements in low-latency streaming technology and the increasing popularity of micro-betting products, which allow wagers on highly specific outcomes like the next pitch, serve, or possession,” the report noted.

DraftKings entered the microbetting space in 2024 by acquiring Simplebet for nearly $200 million.

“What micro markets did was extend the betting platform’s availability throughout an entire game, keeping users engaged,” said Matthew Bakowicz, a former DraftKings sportsbook manager, in an interview with CasinoBeats earlier this year.

Sportsbook Experience Remains Superior, Claims Liberman

The Public Health Advocacy Institute (PHIA) filed a lawsuit against DraftKings, along with FanDuel, the NFL, and data provider Genius Sports, alleging that these organizations are contributing to gambling addiction through microbetting.

The suit describes how rapid wagers placed on individual pitches, plays, shots, or other in-game moments can affect bettors by inducing what it calls a “trancelike state known as ‘dark flow,’ in which individuals become completely absorbed in the game.”

Liberman responded that the sportsbook experience—which the lawsuit criticized heavily—remains superior compared to prediction markets.

“Our research shows that sportsbooks provide, overall, a better consumer experience for sports than prediction markets do,” Liberman stated. “For our customers in sportsbook-legal jurisdictions, surveys show they still prefer interacting with a traditional sportsbook. We’re able to offer them promotions and create a more engaging experience overall.”

Is Betting on Prediction Markets the Same as Sports Betting?

While the sportsbook model appears better calibrated to engage bettors, Liberman acknowledged that wagering on prediction markets shares similarities.

“For the average user, placing a bet through a sportsbook or trading on the Celtics feels essentially the same,” he said.

Brian Quintenz, a board member of Kalshi and previously nominated to lead the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), also participated in the panel alongside Liberman. His nomination was later withdrawn following opposition over his potential appointment.

Quintenz, however, was less inclined to equate prediction markets with sports betting.

“I see a distinction between speculation and gambling,” he remarked. “In financial markets, speculation involves trading or wagering where there is greater economic impact beyond just the money being exchanged.”

This perspective aligns with positions taken by Kalshi and the CFTC under Michael Selig, who succeeded Quintenz.

Quintenz added, “Can anyone honestly claim there’s no economic, financial, or commercial consequence when determining who wins or loses the Super Bowl?”

Microbetting Likely to Draw Further Backlash

That argument may grow harder to maintain if prediction markets expand into micromarkets. Is there any real economic, financial, or commercial significance in whether the next pitch in a baseball game is a ball or a strike?

Player unions have already called on the CFTC to prohibit companies from offering player prop markets.

With rising criticism of microbetting at sportsbooks and multiple lawsuits targeting prediction markets over their sports-related offerings, expanding into micromarkets seems likely to intensify public and regulatory scrutiny. Despite this, DraftKings—no stranger to legal challenges over its business practices—remains unfazed.

“I believe both models are actually quite positive, which is why we support both,” Liberman said regarding sports betting and prediction markets. “They’re different, but each offers unique value.”

Prediction Markets: A Gateway to States Without Legal Sports Betting

Currently, the main advantage appears to be that prediction markets allow DraftKings to reach sports fans in states like Texas and California, where online gambling remains illegal.

“Ultimately, with DraftKings, if we’re allowed to operate in any state, we intend to participate, and we hope to launch our products wherever legislation permits,” Liberman explained.

He emphasized the need for clear federal guidance, stating, “We advocate for the federal government to take a stronger stance and affirm that sports betting is lawful and socially accepted—and that it can be conducted through prediction markets.”