Good day, and welcome to the BetMGM Q1 2026 financial update. Joining from the company today are Adam Greenblatt, Chief Executive Officer, and Gary Deutsch, the Chief Financial Officer. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the opening remarks, there will be a 30-minute question- and- answer session. To ask a question during the session, you will need to press star one on your telephone. You will then hear an automated message advising your hand is raised. To withdraw your question, please press star one again. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the call over to Adam Greenblatt. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. Today we'll be providing an update on our Q1 performance, as well as discussing our refreshed guidance for the full year. It's been a steady start to 2026, during which BetMGM has continued to deliver on our strategy. As we said at our full-year results in February, as the industry continues to evolve, we will continue to focus on winning the BetMGM way. BetMGM's strategic improvements across player acquisition and management, operational discipline, and product, continue to underpin our model and position us to generate sustainable profitable growth this year and beyond. For Q1, net revenue was $696 million, up 6% year-on-year, and we generated adjusted EBITDA of $25 million. Q1 results were slightly below expectations due to a combination of player-friendly sports results and marketplace conditions, including intensifying competitive dynamics. Our underlying fundamentals are healthy and growing, and we've built the business to ensure that we are nimble and rational allocators of capital between our iGaming and sports businesses. As an iGaming-first operator who's approaching $2 billion of annual iGaming revenue, we are better positioned than most, if not all others, from the ever-escalating noise of prediction markets present in the market. As we look to the rest of the year, we will continue to focus on where we are seeing the best returns. We are putting increased focus and capital behind BetMGM's positions of strength, which are our multi-product states that include our iGaming business, Nevada, which is the epicenter of our omni-channel advantage and a major source of adjusted EBITDA generation, and on servicing our core base of higher-value premium mass players. We are focused on controlling the controllables to deliver what ultimately matters, which is sustainable growth of adjusted EBITDA. While we now expect revenue for 2026 in the range of $2.9 billion-$3.1 billion, we still expect to deliver adjusted EBITDA in line with guidance, albeit at the lower end of the existing $300 million-$350 million guidance range. We also continue to see a path to $500 million of adjusted EBITDA in 2027. Let me provide a little more detail on performance during Q1 across each part of the business. Our iGaming business delivered $481 million of net revenue in Q1, up 9% year-on-year, reflecting solid top-line growth supported by ongoing refinements in player management and bonus optimization. This important and ongoing work has driven significant uplift to player values in the first quarter, as NGR per active was up 12%, more than offsetting the trimming of monthly actives. iGaming contribution was $143 million in the face of a customer acquisition market that has heated up slightly. While the number of players acquired in Q1 was ahead of our expectations, total cost of acquisition was a little higher as CPAs have been drifting up. Nevertheless, we are very comfortable with the paybacks we've been seeing on new players, so feel good about the outlook for 2026 in gaming. Our powerful iGaming engine continues to be fueled by best-in-class content and differentiated experiences. This quarter, we're proud to announce we are the home of Gold Blitz under our new partnership with Games Global, giving our players exclusive access to all Gold Blitz titles before they launch to the wider market. We also launched exclusive titles from the Survivor franchise, celebrating the show's 50th anniversary season. Looking ahead, we continue to focus on building on this momentum with additional exclusive game launches, as well as delivering a smooth Alberta launch in July. Turning to sports, OSB net revenue was $203 million, and that's up 4% year-over-year. As I mentioned, the top line saw some drag from unfavorable sports results, roughly 60 basis points versus theoretical margin. Don't forget, BetMGM Sports Business has relatively more higher staking, higher value bettors. While this does result in somewhat more volatility in our hold percentage, the affinity of these players to BetMGM is an advantage for us as they tend to be more resilient compared to a highly recreational customer base. Similar to my comment on iGaming regarding our strategy of prioritizing quality over volume, in OSB, we've continued to refine our approach to player management, resulting in handle per active up 23% and NGR per active up 25% versus last year. This is due to our improved player mix that is more higher-value players and fewer marginal players. The combined effect is a reduction in active players. As you'd expect, there are a lot more marginal players versus premium players. The most significant change in the operating environment for OSB in the quarter has been a significant increase in CPAs. While some OSB peers increased marketing intensity, this jump is largely driven by new sports betting companies buying media in the category. They call themselves prediction markets, and they are buying sports betting keywords as well as throwing money at any sports media property that will take it. They are targeting sports bettors directly in their marketing, thereby bidding up the cost of acquiring new OSB players and extending payback periods. Some of these companies even have sportsbook mode in their product in an attempt to offer as close an experience as possible to sports betting. As a reminder, we stand with 40 AGs, our OSB regulators, regulated states, and tribal partners. We look forward to an expedient outcome of the almost inevitable hearing of the pro-states' rights, pro-tribal rights, and anti-prediction markets case by SCOTUS. In the meantime, we're refining our approach to OSB marketing for the rest of the year under the assumption that current media conditions persist. Looking further out, I'm confident that the current intensity will abate. You just have to look at the player-level unit economics for prediction market operators, and you will quickly conclude that the current spending wave cannot sustain. By contrast, our unit economics are strong. When you account for the Q1 headwinds from results and this prediction market's moment of hyper spend, you see that our growth potential looks strong and well-positioned for a future change in the dynamics surrounding prediction markets. Nevertheless, with those Q1 headwinds, our OSB contribution was $10 million in the quarter. In retail sports, we delivered net revenue of $11 million, down 43% year-on-year. The decline was driven by a few large VIP-related payouts. These short-term results aside, we continue to see strong momentum in Nevada across digital and retail combined as we've increased our market share, and we're acquiring and retaining players efficiently. While headline growth was modest in Q1, I want to highlight again that player values in the sports business have strengthened meaningfully. We will continue to focus on winning the BetMGM way and are well-positioned to capitalize on several opportunities ahead this year, including the World Cup, launch of both OSB and iGaming in Alberta, improved trading capabilities, and deepening our established omni-channel advantage in Nevada. Now, to return to the consolidated BetMGM financial picture, Q1 total contribution was $116 million, adjusted EBITDA was $25 million, and CapEx was $3 million. Adjusted EBITDA minus CapEx continues to be the best proxy for total cash to parents for the year. To save you doing the math for Q1, that's $22 million. As for returning excess cash to our parents, our transformation into a consistently cash-generative business continues, with BetMGM now paying parent fees to Entain and MGM Resorts. These fees hit our P&L as operating expenses and are separate from the cash distributions we began in late 2025. For Q1, parent fees were $3 million in total, and this will be the only cash to parents for Q1, given the seasonality of our business with marketing investments timing for NFL and March Madness, as well as accrued annual compensation payouts. In summary, while it is early in the year and our business and sector have a second-half bias, we will continue to focus on our areas of strength and where we see better paybacks, not to be misinterpreted as sacrificing growth for short-term margin. Winning the BetMGM way means we continue to focus on iGaming and multi-product states, Nevada, and our higher-value players around the country in sports. Let me reiterate that we are laser-focused on generating profitable, sustainable growth. We remain confident in achieving our adjusted EBITDA range for 2026, albeit at the lower end, and we continue to see a pathway to delivering $500 million adjusted EBITDA in 2027. Our strategy is working, and our business fundamentals remain healthy despite some headwinds in sports so far this year. As we look to the rest of 2026, we progress with confidence and discipline. With that, I'll hand it over to the operator to open the line for questions. Thank you. As a reminder to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star one again. We ask that you limit yourself to one question only in order to enable as many people to participate as possible. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Your first question comes from Brandt Montour with Barclays. Please proceed with your question. Hi, everybody. Thanks for the question and taking the time this morning. You spoke a lot about the competitive environment on the sports side, and I think there was a little bit o f a comment about the iGaming side, which is what I'm asking about to you, have you seen a meaningful change in the competitive environment on the iGaming side? You mentioned in your release that you're leaning into iGaming. Is this an across the industry dynamic that is new? Is it something that's going to change your go-to-market strategy? How should we think about that in relation to the guidance change for the rest of the year? Thanks. Yes. Hi, Brandt, and firstly thanks for attending. Thank you for the question. Look, I think iGaming is just reflecting that we haven't seen a new state since 2022, and the market is competitive. It's always been competitive. We've seen pockets of new competition in certain states. You may have seen that one of our competitors entered the Michigan market in December, spent a bunch of money, and then reinvested in players at a meaningfully above-market rate, won a lot of market share in their first month, GGR market share, that is, and then lo and behold, as we expected, that impact is now easing. To answer your question, we're just seeing a progressive evolution of the competitive situation in the market. We have seen pockets of new competition. We don't believe them to be meaningful disruptors, and as ever, we feel like our strategy is the right one. We lead with content, as you know. We lead with exclusive, as you know, and of course, with the best brand in the business around that. We think we're pretty well set up to continue to win in our gaming markets. Okay, thanks for that. A quick follow-up. The 1Q, you said came in a little bit below your internal expectations. Can you just give us a split up in terms of the guidance downgrade for the full year? How much of that was in the 1Q versus the rest of the year? Gary, do you want to take that? Yeah, it's in both, but the first quarter, remember, was, in the case of sports, really driven by a lot of bad results for the house. That needs to be considered in. We look at the markers of how the cohorts and players are progressing. We do carry that forward in what we see. It's sort of evenly distributed would be my fast answer to that. All right, thanks, everyone. Your next question comes from Barry Jonas with Truist. Please proceed with your question. Hey, good morning. This is Patrick Keough on for Barry. Thank you for taking our question. You gave your thoughts on prediction markets. We just wanted to double-click there. Could you give any updated thoughts on potential cannibalization to sports betting handle in shared states? Is it still your view that prediction could potentially expedite legalization in states that don't currently offer OSB and iGaming? Thank you. Okay. Two parts there, Patrick, masquerading as Barry. Look, the cannibalization question, I actually think these results, our result in sports are pretty encouraging because what we are still seeing, notwithstanding a weak margin in our OSB business in the first quarter, we are still seeing year-on-year growth despite billion-dollar spenders and new spenders in the category. I think what we and the industry will show is a degree of resilience in OSB that is justifiable. I think what we've guided to, we and others, and analysts likewise, have guided to mid-single-digits impact. If you contextualize that with all the other competitive challenges, macro environments, and the existence of prediction markets, I think our first quarter results, certainly in sports, are pretty encouraging. They're certainly for the industry likewise. In terms of your second question, which is expediting legalization. It's not actually something we've said before, but without question, I was at the conference, the Indian Gaming Association conference on the West Coast a couple of weeks ago, and this was certainly one of the topics, or the central topic at the conference, the role of the impact and threat that prediction markets represented. It was one of the factors referenced for their desire to see sports betting legalized in the state of California. I think directionally it's helpful, but it's not as direct an impact as some were hoping and some might suggest, certainly helpful. Thanks so much. I appreciate it. Sure. A reminder to please limit yourself to one question. Thank you. Your next question comes from Ed Young with Morgan Stanley. Please proceed with your question. Thank you. My question's on the shape of the guidance for this year. You've obviously reduced the revenue guide you've maintained, although moved to the lower end of the EBITDA guide. I think that implies now about 40% drop through midpoint of revenue, low point of EBITDA. Could you just reflect a little bit on where you're finding those additional cost savings and how do you think about the balance of cost out in an environment where you're saying there's heightened competition and obviously actives are also in negative territory across both products? Thanks. Gary, do you want to take this? Sure. I mean, the simple answer is aligned with us saying that we're going to focus at our areas of strength, and we're going to do less marketing into some of the broader OSB-only states for general batches of players. There's going to be a reduction in marketing to that part, and that's going to drive our ability to stay on plan for the EBITDA guidance. Obviously, in a world of AI and a world of just general rationalization of how we do business, there's other areas where we look across the business on the cost front. The real leverage that's going to drive us into that range is going to be the change in the marketing trajectory, particularly in sports, OSB states only. Look, just to add to that. I believe one of BetMGM's strengths is our approach to how we buy media, how we invest in marketing. One of our guiding principles is to remain flexible. We use the word nimble in my prepared remarks. It is to continue to be nimble. These kind of what we believe to be short-term changes in the environment, we can respond to in a rational capital allocation approach. For me, this is just another example of that. What we're going to be doing is we're going to be pruning the least efficient pockets of spend, and we reallocate it to where we're seeing best paybacks. Second half of the year in sports will be a two-part effect, a little bit of easing in sports and a little bit more determined investment in gaming. Thank you. Your next question comes from Joe Stauff of Susquehanna. Please proceed with your question. Thanks. Good morning, Adam. I just wanted to follow up and maybe ask you. I understand the competitive sort of dynamics and the higher yields and higher spending that you're getting per customer. What's the right way possibly to think about monthly active user growth, say, going forward throughout the rest of the year? Firstly, hi, Joe. The answer is I don't have an answer for you today that is definitive. We're going to follow the data, and so we'll be investing where our predicted paybacks are achieved, and we optimize this multiple times a week. Given the number of moving parts, to try and forecast the profile of monthly actives, I think, would be a degree of detail that inevitably would be incorrect. What we expect, however, is the broad directional impact of our strategy to continue, which means that in sports, we should see a progressive easing in monthly actives. We should see a continued increase in per-player values in sports. On the iGaming side, the impact of our player management techniques that we implemented and refined last year in OSB, we're increasingly applying to our gaming business. You should see, and we're anticipating seeing it, a marginal trimming of the low-end, marginal players on our iGaming business too. We will be acquiring aggressively to fill up the bucket. Ultimately, the profile of actives in iGaming will be the net effect of those two effects. The strategy, as ever, is quality over quantity. Appreciate the answer. Thanks, Joe. Your next question comes from Daniel Politzer with JPMorgan. Please proceed with your question. Good morning, everyone. Thanks for the question. To what extent, if any, have you seen the prediction market operators encroaching on the premium mass customer that you've come to focus on versus some of the others in your database? Have you seen any difference in behavior among the customers within the tiers of your database? Hey, Dan. We're actually seeing the more premium parts of our database incredibly resilient. In fact, those are of the whole, if you imagine a pyramid of players, the higher up you get, the better performing our year-on-year and our players have performed. Actually, I think the impact of our strategy is proving to be correct or appropriate or resilient in these more turbulent times. Got it. Thanks so much. Your next question comes from Shaun Kelley with Bank of America. Please proceed with your question. Hi, good morning, everyone. Adam or Gary, just wanted to circle back on or stay on prediction markets and just ask, does the outlook that you've given embed a material improvement in the CAC environment from here? I mean, you sound optimistic that this may be a point in time. I definitely think there's a scenario out there at least where we actually think spending could increase as we move through World Cup and into the sort of NFL, which we think might be more about the peak acquisition period for some of these markets. Kind of what is your outlook embed and kind of how are you thinking about that trajectory, appreciating that it doesn't feel rational at the moment? It does feel like it could actually get worse. Yeah. Listen, as I said in the opening remarks, Shaun, firstly, hi. We're controlling the controllables. I don't control what others choose to spend and the rational analysis underpinning that investment, right? We're assuming the current CPA environment prevails for the rest of the year. Our plan for the rest of the year and our guidance for the rest of the year takes that into account. I'm not assuming that what we believe to be irrational current spend suddenly becomes rational. I'm expecting that the land grab that is currently the reality continues. We are positioning ourselves for when that position changes. In terms of our longer-term guidance, we think we've got a terrific business underneath us. We have the telemetry in place to buy and acquire and support our target players. We'll continue to right-size our investment according to the market conditions, in line with that strategy and in line with our target payback. It's really as simple as that. To your point, will we see the spend go up before we see rational? I'm not sure. I wouldn't want to make any comments about others' decisions. We're pleased with where we are positioned, and I think long-term, the market is going to come back to us. I think that is an exciting moment and exciting thing to look forward to for the online sports betting industry. Makes a lot of sense. Thank you. Your next question comes from Monique Pollard with Citi. Please proceed with your question. Hi, Adam, Gary, thank you for taking my question. Following on from the last question, in terms of your 2027 guidance, so that $500 million of EBITDA that you still see the pathway to for next year, I'm just wondering what gives you the confidence that you can still achieve that if we're going to come in at the lower end of the EBITDA range for this year? Whether, understand for this year, you're not assuming any change in the CPA environment, but whether in 2027 there is a natural assumption that there's a bit more rationality in terms of CPA? Thank you. I mean, the starting point is that we have a really healthy business. We have a business where, on the gaming side, we're pushing on $2 billion of revenue, and we've got so many exciting things for our players in our pipeline. As I said in my opening remarks, the best game on the retail floor, Gold Blitz, and the franchise of Gold Blitz is now BetMGM's exclusively for the initial period when it's of most interest to real gamers. What we're seeing is player values are going up, NGR per player is going up. We're getting more and more out of Nevada, we're getting more out of omni-channel. We've got a lot of exciting things coming. Sure, it's a one-off, we have the World Cup this year, but it's a stimulus of growth. Most excitingly, I think, for this year, we have Alberta launching now, confirmed 13th of July. Alongside that, what I believe to be our sleeping giant of a casino brand, the Borgata, particularly relevant in the Northeast. We're refreshing that brand and repositioning that for a different audience, a different demographic to seek to expand our relevance to even more gamers versus the BetMGM core brand. We see no bottom of premium players. You put all of that together, combined with the potential for another new iGaming state next year in Virginia, combined with the potential, not certainty, of course, the potential for a more rational sports marketing environment or CPA environment, you can quite easily see a pathway. Now, are there risks? Sure. Do we remain confident that that is achievable? Yes. That's, I think, the balance, Monique. That's understood. Thank you. Your next question comes from Ben Chaiken with Mizuho. Please proceed with your question. Hey, thanks for taking my question. I'd like to dig into iGaming a little bit. Just if we could open up how you're thinking about growing this business, how you're thinking about the underlying core trends here. Do you think we've kind of peaked in terms of the core underlying user growth, and then what levers are at your disposal, both 2026 and 2027? Thanks. Yeah. Thanks, Ben. I'll take that, Gary, if you want to chime in, obviously jump in. Look, in gaming, what we're aiming to do over the next 24 months is build on our powerful success and our momentum. The strategy that we've spoken multiple times about before in terms of content continues. Exclusive content, and we have a new pipeline of even more titles. That strategy continues. To name a few, we're at the dawn, the early stages of our Wizard of Oz franchise and Wheel of Fortune. We just launched the Survivor game. It's the 50th anniversary. Gold Blitz, I've talked about. BetMGM is positioning ourselves in the sector, in the market as the home of entertainment, and that builds on MGM Resorts' right to win, if you like, in that positioning. We are capitalizing on the talents and expertise of MGM Resorts, our entertainment prowess in a number of dimensions. The other element of our strategy that has been extremely successful, our players have enjoyed interacting with our engagement tools. We're seeing, on average, many days a week of engagement from our whole player base. Those are players that come and have a live session with BetMGM many days a week. Live is something that we are leaning into, and it really lives at the intersection of some of the things I've just talked about. If you go into the MGM Grand, you can see there's a live studio in the casino, which powers our Ontario business. We think that is a format from which we can build, and we have some plans that we're working with MGM Resorts on to continue to do that. The last area is, obviously, the area of jackpots. We gave out, I think, in 2025, over $140 million to our players in jackpots, and that's another reason to come to BetMGM. Now, your last question is, have we got to the end of all the players that are interested in the category playing? I would say no, and refer to a statistic which I've referred to in previous calls, which is, the potential depth of this market in the U.S. is, I find, just staggering. The statistic is this, I think it was published by the AGA. In 2019, obviously before COVID, over 40% of U.S. adults visited some kind of casino property during the year. Now, if you assume that is the potential market, that's the base of adults who have a positive disposition towards the category, then I think we have a long way to go. Thank you. Your next question comes from Ben Shelley with UBS. Please proceed with your question. Thanks very much for taking my question. I just wanted to ask about EBITDA cadence and delivery. Could you briefly talk about the seasonality of EBITDA generation through the year and how that cadence supports delivery of your revised EBITDA guidance? Thank you. Sure. Look, when we look at it from the year, you've got a period in the middle of the year that turned out to be very good for us last year. We had really good results. We're back-weighted somewhat. We expect that the fourth quarter is a place where we're going to have the most. I don't think you could look at it as dramatically different across the year other than the fact that we spike in fourth quarter. We expect to have Q2 and Q3. If you were to normalize Q1, Q2 and Q3 wouldn't seem that different from Q1. Obviously, we had the setback with the results in Q1. Look at the middle of the year to be strong, and then, the fourth quarter is typically sort of double those middle-of-the-year months. Thanks very much. Your next question comes from David Katz with Jefferies. Please proceed with your question. Hi. Good morning, everyone. Thanks for taking my question. I appreciate all the commentary. I understand that ocean of competitive spendings. The way we've often seen that is that there's that initial wave of competitive spending that buys customers off, and depending on what the experience and the product is, that can be temporary. I wonder if you have any insight to the degree that these sort of unlicensed competition is buying customers out of your ecosystem and whether you're seeing any duration to that and whether they return over time as we've seen historically. David, I'll jump on the end of the question. Firstly, thank you for the question. I'll jump onto the end of it right off the bat, which is my expectation is that the majority of these players will return over time because the product experience in online sports betting is better. Our ability to reinvest in that player is greater because we retain more margin than any single participant in prediction markets. We have a higher service level, and because of, certainly on BetMGM's side, our relationship with MGM allows us to reward in a way that digital-only does not. I think for a number of reasons, the value proposition of BetMGM, and quite frankly, the online sports betting sector, is better for most players, but not all players. If you are a professional player, if you are a market maker, if you are a kid in high school, unfortunately, there isn't really a better place for you than the prediction markets if you want to bet on sports. That's not our customer. I found it relevant that Kentucky just clarified its own online sports betting laws to ensure that the youngest person that can play is 21. This is a good thing for obvious reasons. Put all that together. What we are seeing is in the prediction markets, someone described it to me like, where is it going to end? It's going to end with the hardcore grinder poker environments where you have shark on shark violence. Because what's going to happen? What have we already seen happening, and where do other exchange markets in this space end up in other parts of the world? What happens is the recreational players flow back in time, majority of recreational players flow back in time to prediction markets. Shark customers who don't otherwise have a place to play are in the prediction markets. Recreational players lose too quickly, and there's data for this. Hopefully, underage players stop playing. You put all those together, I think it paints a picture of what the future of prediction market ecosystem for sports looks like. Thank you. Your next question comes from John DeCree with CBRE Capital Advisors. Please proceed with your question. Hi, guys. Thank you. We've covered a lot of ground so far. Adam, I think you mentioned Virginia at least once in your response to questions. I'm curious if you could give us your high-level thoughts on iGaming legislative process. We saw some momentum in Virginia, Maine. Are you seeing, or are your folks on the government affairs side telling you there's increased interest from legislators? What's your view today, and the outlook? I'll start with the one I like to talk about most, which is Virginia, because I feel pretty positive about the likelihood of us seeing enabling legislation in 2027 in Virginia. We've obviously seen legislation passed in Maine, that's subject to the people's vote. Look, it's a small state and the economic potential is small. I think in previous comments I said that it's not a needle mover one way or the other, but directionally, having more states adopting iGaming is definitely a good thing. I remain positive that this is going to see momentum pick up. The reality, John, is that every state is a different set of political considerations. It's not only the demeanor of the legislature, it's also the presence of naysayers on the ground. Some incumbent retail casinos are pretty active in their no campaigns. It's not without its complexity, but I do think directionally, we are going to see more momentum in the coming years. Thanks, Adam. Sure. Your next question comes from Jordan Bender with Citizens. Please proceed with your question. Hi, everyone. Thanks for the question. I'm going to follow up on Joe's question from earlier on the call around player growth, your comments around how it's hard to model what growth might look like later in the year. Has that always been the case that visibility is hard to model six to nine months out, or has promotional spend clouded your visibility to where you really don't know what the customer acquisition environment is outside of what you're seeing here in the near term? Yeah, look, I think it's the latter. Let me just jump there, Jordan. Firstly, thank you for your analysis. I enjoy some of your prediction markets pieces. It's the latter. As we look at BetMGM's plan for the rest of the year, quite a lot of things are changing. We're changing some things in response to the external environment, and with change comes outcome uncertainty, obviously. The reason I pause about giving some longer-term guidance forward or guidance on the outlook for the rest of the year is because it will be the outcome of a number of moving parts, which makes it a little bit more complicated to model. That's it. Yeah, against our internal projections, we have had higher player values, higher handle per active than what we expected coming into the year, and the player counts have been lower and the overall net impact is up. It's balancing those multiple metrics together, and when we talk about things like handle, the hold has a factor on how the handle spins up. We dial up and look at all those metrics. Overall, the theme is we continue to see higher than expected player values. Just finally, Jordan, for clarity, Gary, I think, has the most sophisticated model that this industry has ever seen, which he's very proud of, and we model bottom-up on everything from number of players by state, by product, by it. We do have the numbers, but I don't want to give direction on them because of the risk profile of every aspect in the model, given the number of moving parts. Great. Thanks, guys. Okay. Your next question comes from Richard Stuber with Deutsche Numis. Please proceed with your question. Thank you. Good morning. Just a quick question on Nevada. You mentioned a few times that it's the core strength. How material now is the contribution from Nevada out of the $116 million reported? How much of that now is from Nevada? Thank you. Gary, I'm just looking at you. I think we gave some indications of Nevada's importance, its contribution last call. I am not sure if that was prepared for this call. No, I don't think we pulled it for this call. Last call, I think we said it was a quarter of about EBITDA generation came from Nevada. Probably a little bit less than that this time, given the sports results were relatively weaker during this quarter compared with gaming. Thank you. Sure. We will now take our last question from Robin Farley of UBS. Please proceed with your question. Great. Thank you. Just wanted to circle back to your comment about what you're seeing with the spend from prediction markets being not sustainable. I know you don't necessarily know whether that means it's going to be a quarter or a year. I don't know if you would add on that. Just also wondering how that's impacting your middle-tier customers versus higher- tier versus lower- tier, sort of equally in terms of the impact from what the prediction markets are doing or any color around that. Thanks. Yes. So I think similar to one of our previous questions, the higher up our value pyramid you go, the more resilient our players are proving to be. And so then to focus to your question, if you focus on the bottom end of the pyramid, again, there are two factors driving relative softness versus the top half of the pyramid. One may well be the spend of prediction markets, the other may well be, and frankly is because the dynamic was happening before the prediction market spend, the work that we're doing on player management and ensuring that we put the right dollars into the right players' pockets by way of reinvestment. And right at the bottom of the pyramid, those players who may well be more susceptible to sampling, to the marketing of prediction markets. At the same time as they're being courted, we are reinvesting less in them, so that it might be a twofold impact. As I say, if you zoom out, notwithstanding a weak margin quarter in our sports business, we're still up year-on-year, notwithstanding all of these factors. I think back to, again, even higher, I think we are on the right track. Our strategy suits the market, and I think our strategies are enduring. Thank you. Just as a follow-up, is it possible for you to quantify and maybe it's not, but how much of that bottom end of the pyramid is you intentionally culling those customers versus them being pulled by the prediction markets? I don't know if you can. Yes. Qualify how much. I think it's too difficult to parse out. What you can see and measure is the outcome rather than the fact that what was in the minds of the player as they made that decision. It's quite challenging. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. That concludes the Q&A session. I will now turn the call over to Adam for his closing remarks. Please go ahead. As ever, I just wanted to thank you very much for attending. As you've heard a few times from both Gary and I, we are focused on executing our strategic plan, and I'm personally very optimistic for what, not only the rest of this year, but the years beyond that will bring. We look forward to updating you all next quarter. Just thanks again, and speak to you then. Bye-bye. This concludes today's business update. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.