Kindred Group’s US exit proves small players cannot compete

The failed North American expansion

Kindred Group’s decision to exit North America proves that small players cannot survive the US market. I find it impossible to believe that Unibet could ever hope to regain its footing in the US market after its Pennsylvania revenue plummeted and its market share fell below 1% in October 2023. The brand struggled to maintain even 0.6% of the handle in Indiana and 0.2% in Arizona. In Iowa, the sportsbook never held more than 0.3% of the betting handle. Kindred Group plans to cut over 300 jobs to save approximately £40 million. This cost reduction helps the company redirect technical resources to its core markets. I view this retreat as a decisive move to protect long-term growth. Unibet’s history in the US remains plagued by low market share and regulatory friction. The company faced an €800,000 fine from French regulators for a technical failure in its self-exclusion system in 2021. It also faced a €400,000 fine from the Dutch regulator in December 2024. This follows a £7.1 million fine from the UK Gambling Commission in March 2023 against its subsidiaries. Unibet’s Pennsylvania revenue once peaked at $7.8 million in June 2020, but its market share was only 1.7% in October 2022. Unibet’s US presence began in September 2019, and the company abandoned plans to launch in Illinois and Ohio to focus on multiproduct states.

Burdensome state fees and taxes

New state laws create massive financial barriers for any company hoping to enter. New York Senate Bill 2614 and Assembly Bill 5922 propose a 30.5% tax rate on gross revenue. This rate is higher than other iGaming states. New York does not allow operators to deduct promotions and bonus bets from revenue totals before taxation. Eligible applicants in New York face $2 million for a license. Independent contractors looking to host an iGaming platform must pay a $10 million fee. The Hotel and Trades Council also opposes these bills due to concerns about brick-and-mortar revenue. Ohio creates even steeper costs for companies without physical gambling facilities. The state proposes $100 million for an initial license for these operators. If an operator uses a management company, the tax on gross receipts hits 40%. For those with physical facilities, the tax is 36% and the fee is $50 million.

I find these fees effectively block any small brand from the market. Does the promise of high tax revenue make sense if it drives all smaller operators out?

The monopoly of the big four

The US sportsbook market belongs to four giants. DraftKings and FanDuel control at least 75% of the market. BetMGM and Caesars hold another 15%. I find the massive marketing budgets of BetMGM and Caesars, which control another 15 percent of the market, completely overwhelming for a small brand like Unibet to ever hope to challenge. You should understand that small sites cannot match the national TV budgets of the leaders. Unibet’s performance in New Jersey shows this struggle. The Hard Rock skins, which include Unibet, generated slightly more than $23 million in 2023. This pales in comparison to the $295 million earned by the Meadowlands Racetrack skins. I would skip any operator that lacks the scale to fight these behemoths. The market concentration makes it impossible for a brand with 1% share to turn a profit. In Michigan, the top three players hold over 70% of the market. The industry grows, but Unibet failed to grow alongside the rest of the market because its share fell while the total rose.