Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot recently said there is no hard evidence that allowing sportsbooks in and around five stadiums would “cannibalize” revenue from a Chicago casino.
Responding to “dire warnings” from Neil Bluhm, owner of Rivers Casino in Des Plaines and Rush Street Gaming, which presented two proposals for a downtown Chicago casino, Lightfoot emphasized she would never jeopardize casino revenue which would be directed to struggling police and fire pensions funds.
Lightfoot said, “There’s been some dire warnings that have been issued by some who already use sportsbook at their own casinos and who are trying to kill sportsbook here in Chicago. They have not put forth any convincing evidence that somehow it’s gonna cannibalize a casino here in Chicago. We’ve seen zero indication that that’s the case. We’ve heard a lot of talk by people who would profit by not allowing the sports teams to have a sportsbook of their own. But talk is talk. Facts and data, that’s what I’m about.”
Noting the Illinois legislature authorized sports betting in 2019, Lightfoot said she expects the city council will approve an amended ordinance lifting the Chicago ban this month. That would allow sports betting at Wrigley, Guaranteed Rate Field, Soldier Field, the United Center and Wintrust Arena, and also in a “permanent building or structure located within a 5-block radius” of those stadiums.
Lightfoot added, “Of course, there will be some impact on a Chicago casino. There’s never been any suggestion that it won’t impact it. The reality is, you can’t watch a sporting event now without seeing an ad for FanDuel or DraftKings. Sportsbook is in our DNA and blood system now in the city of Chicago and really across the country where it’s legal. So, the question is, how do we manage this in a way that benefits Chicago taxpayers? That’s really the only question.”
Bluhm said lifting the city’s ban on sports betting would have a “material negative impact” on a Chicago casino and revenue it would generate for the city. Specifically, he said losses could be as much as $88 million, about 10 percent of the “projected gaming revenue,” no matter which of five proposals is selected.
Bluhm said, “The person who gambles on sports is very likely a gambler who also bets on tables and slot machines. It’s 20 percent of our business. The bottom line is that less people will come to the Chicago casino when they can bet on sports at the stadiums. That means that less sports bettors will walk around the casino and play slots and table games and less people go to the restaurants at the casino if they can also be betting sports at the same time at the stadium.”
He added, “For almost 20 years, the city has tried to get a casino. Now, when you finally can have one, why would you create several competitors when the city gets no revenue from sports betting? What is more important, that the city have a great casino or the sports teams have a retail sports betting book? This is not good for the city. It’s gonna cost them a lot of money.”
