The Sports Traders Union
Disclosures
How we're funded
Novig, a federally regulated sports exchange, helped bring the original group together and provided the Union's initial funding. It does not control the Union or receive special treatment under the Code, and is evaluated under the same standards as every other platform. Novig's co-founder and CEO serves on our advisory board.
We expect to raise from additional sources over time. Every funder will be named here.
Advisory board relationships
Most of our advisory board members trade on the platforms we write standards for. Several operate market making firms or trading desks that provide liquidity on them, and some have commercial relationships with operators.
Where we stand on the legal fight
Sports event contracts are being fought over in courts and regulatory agencies around the country. At the center is a basic jurisdictional question: are these products governed exclusively by federal commodities law, or can states also regulate them as gambling?
The answer will help determine where the products remain available and which rules apply. The Sports Traders Union was not formed to resolve that question. We do not take an organizational position on whether the CFTC or states should have the last word, and the people involved in the Union do not all agree.
Many of us want competitive markets—in sports and other categories—to exist legally and under meaningful regulation. Several of us prefer exchanges, where users trade against one another, to sportsbooks that set prices unilaterally or exclude winning customers. But preferring the exchange model does not require accepting every legal claim made on its behalf.
Whatever these products are called, and whoever ultimately regulates them, what should the people using them be able to expect?
Our concern is how users are treated while these fights continue—and after they are resolved. The jurisdictional question matters, but it can crowd out that more practical one.
That is where the Union's work begins. We develop standards and recommendations on pricing and fees, contract terms and settlement, dispute resolution, responsible-trading tools, and the treatment of customer funds. Most of those standards are not specific to exchanges. Many should apply just as readily to sportsbooks, brokerages that distribute event contracts, and other platforms offering comparable products.
When we speak publicly, it will be to advance those standards. At times, that may mean supporting a rule that exchanges also support. At others, it may mean criticizing a platform's practices or opposing a proposal the industry favors. The relevant question is not whether a position helps or hurts a particular business model, but whether it promotes fair treatment of the people using these products.
Our role is to recommend what that treatment should look like, regardless of who offers the product or which regulator ultimately has authority.