Praia Bingo - Bingo Games

What is Praia Bingo - Bingo Games?

This week, Casino.org reported on Atlantic City’s difficulties in August, where in-person casino revenue slowed 5.5% to $294.9 million.

The Mid-Atlantic struggles weren’t limited to New Jersey, as Pennsylvania revealed today (Sept. 17) that brick-and-mortar gross gaming revenue (GGR) from slot machines and table games totaled $280.3 million.

Pennsylvania casino revenue for August was almost 6% lower than a year ago, when the state’s casinos won $297.7 million from their physical slots and table games. Pennsylvania’s August 2026 struggles came despite the state having one more casino last month than it did in August 2025, as Happy Valley Casino only opened in April 2026.

About Praia Bingo - Bingo Games

That widening breadth is vital for the industry at a time when some analysts estimate volume could jump to $10 trillion by 2035 – a projection that is largely rooted in other categories surpassing sports for the top spot.  

Nearly a third of respondents told Fullstory that increased event contract breadth could compel them to consistently choose a prediction market over a sportsbook.

Sportsbook operators have an inherent advantage over prediction markets in that the former can offer significantly larger sign-up and retention bonuses and gaming companies are leaning into those expenditures this football season.

About Praia Bingo - Bingo Games

George Hasselback is done with Imperial Pacific International (IPI). The attorney has been representing the controversial and incompetent casino operator as it defended itself in a lawsuit filed by Fox Financial, as well as others, but has now washed his hands and stepped away. He had filed a request to withdraw from representing the company on February 12, and a judge granted his petition yesterday. Magistrate Judge Heather Kennedy agreed with Hasselback in his assertion that continued representation would put him in an ethical conundrum.

Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.