Joker X

What is Joker X?

The committee also suggested a ban on inducements (free bets, sign-up bonuses) as these promotions stimulate betting activity and recruit new or lapsed customers.

Another point of contention was content marketing and influencer promotions. The Lords committee advised treating this as advertising and, if a full ban were not immediately feasible, prioritising its prohibition.

Sponsorships and advertising with sports teams was also flagged as according to the report, voluntary efforts had failed to reduce the industry’s exposure. 

How to play Joker X

The move initially appeared to work. Flutter had a market capitalisation of about $36 billion when it began trading in New York in January 2024, rising to roughly $50 billion by June the following year. Flutter’s value later fell sharply as investors lowered their earnings expectations.

In the second quarter of 2026, Flutter’s US revenue fell 6% to $1.683 billion, while sportsbook revenue fell 15%. US adjusted EBITDA fell sharply, and Flutter subsequently reduced its guidance. Despite this, FanDuel retained the number-one US sportsbook position, with Flutter reporting a 39% share of US sportsbook gross gaming revenue.

Ben Robinson, managing partner at Corfai, argues that the American listing achieved what it was supposed to achieve. The problems came afterwards. “The question was which arm of the K-shaped market Flutter would end up on. We have the answer now. Capital is concentrated in a narrow band of technology names and everything else is being marked on earnings.”

What is Joker X?

There is no guarantee the Supreme Court will hear the case but a separate appeals court ruling from 28 August bolsters its chances. In that case, a three-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit ruled unanimously in favour of the state of Nevada, creating a circuit court split, which is a hallmark of many Supreme Court cases.

“We’re calling on the Supreme Court to resolve this issue and recognise that Congress did not silently make the sports-betting industry immune from state law,” Davenport said in a statement.

New Jersey stakeholders are no stranger to the importance of a Supreme Court review. The state lost every case in the lead-up to the PASPA repeal, except for the one that mattered most in the end, and it could be the same in this matter as Kalshi has prevailed thus far in state court and the Third Circuit. Davenport’s petition cites that fateful PASPA ruling in its introduction.