Beast Band

About Beast Band

Its failure also leaves unresolved disputes over prediction markets and state and tribal gaming authorities, outside a comprehensive congressional framework. Those issues took on new significance during Senate floor debate over the bill, as concerns about federal commodities oversight extended to markets typically regulated at the state or tribal level. 

The latest filing is an early step in filling some of that regulatory gap for the CFTC. The agency can issue regulations under its current statutory authority, but those regulations would not necessarily be as permanent as legislation passed by Congress. 

For now, the important news is that the CFTC has officially started the administrative process. Only once the rulemaking progresses and the underlying proposal is available for public review will the extent of its eventual crypto framework become clear.

What is Beast Band?

The law came at the request of Full House Resorts, the Las Vegas-based regional gaming operator that expressed interest in relocating its Rising Star Casino in Rising Sun to a more attractive market, specifically in the northeastern part of the state.

During the lawmaking process, Full House’s exclusivity was stripped in favor of welcoming any company currently licensed as a commercial casino in the US to bid on the possible license. Lawmakers also threw in a one-time $150 million fee for the concession and a mandatory investment minimum of $500 million, all but ending Full House’s interest.

“The bill changed many times. We make money in Rising Sun. We always have, not a lot of money, but we make money. We continue to make money in Rising Sun. And we will continue to do that for our shareholders, as well as for the good of the state,” Full House CEO Daniel Lee said in March.

What is Beast Band?

“A proceeding aimed at impairing a single creditor is not the collective administration Chapter 15 contemplates, and the mismatch is not a technicality. It is part of the Debtors’ bad faith effort to forum shop for the most advantageous tool to use against their litigation adversary,” Skillz attorneys alleged.

The Debtors here deployed an insolvency statute against the one creditor whose judgment they wished to defer and compromise, left every ordinary-course creditor untouched, preserved their own equity, and sought releases for the insiders who directed the conduct that produced the judgment—then asked this Court to treat that machinery as proof that their affairs are centered in Israel,” the petition continued.

“The Court should refuse the relief requested by … because it is manifestly contrary to the public policy of the United States based on the Debtors’ well-documented and pervasive bad faith conduct,” the petition said. “The Debtors are using the Israeli Action—a limited action which lacks many of the core characteristics of a collective insolvency proceeding—as a strategic tool to evade responsibility for their deceptive conduct.”