t time they have reorganized following bankruptcy proceedings the company has also evolved in terms of its top leadership i know that the ceo and the general counsel at the time are no longer with the company and one of the areas of concern involved another identified individual who is also no longer with the company um if you do i know there are many areas that you're going to be discussing this afternoon you know if in the end you do decide to move this uh application forward with respect to this issue in the out the parent company application that we do not have my uh proposal is that you would consider moving it forward on the condition that the application is submitted and that iv is uh able to do its preliminary review of the parent company uh application um i did want to make another note about the self report from the applicant on its compliance history which appears i think on page nine eight um you're really uh seven seven through nine um they talk about a matter in virginia self-disclosed the massachusetts matter uh self-disclosed three uh recent fines self-disclosed and then a general statement on page nine uh about um you know the applicant receives various um actions disciplinary actions from time to time uh they are um routine often resolved through an administrative process uh so i wanted to state that i expect that the company uh will be uh responsive to the i e b's request for a more itemized and comprehensive accounting uh those requests uh do often come in the form of supplemental requests by the i e b once the licensing division transmits an administratively complete application um and i have you know absolutely no reason to believe that the company would not be more responsive um would not be fully responsive at that time that's just in the process that we're in now the i e b has not made its request for supplemental information yet so i did want to point that out um i know that we have members of our contractor team here in the meeting uh at this point i i uh rest on the report in the exhibit but of course we're uh available for any questions as i i know the applicant is available for questions i have a couple of comments um one of which is in in a general sense um what was flagged by um director lilios in terms of the the lack of explanation in terms of 2013 in the interactions with this commission at that time i personally want to be briefed on that as part of this i think we'd be remiss in not being briefed on that as we move forward we have a very limited review um but that's information within the confines of our walls and so i would like to get briefed on that um uh and i do also want to ask the questions that were put forth in terms of what was flagged pages seven eight nine some of it i don't know whether or not it can be done openly at the end of this presentation or whether it would have to go into executive session and in part that's due to the lack of detail that was provided by the applicant so um i'm flagging right now my frustration with the answer that was given in the application um in e3 f and that's recited again in page nine um the additional information upon request we did request it it was the application and so i'm a little frustrated with a lack of detail in that area um so in terms of whether we're figuring out executive sessions and planning the rest of this day um i would point out my desire to get more information in those areas and i'm chair i'd like to call sign everything commissional brian just stated so todd um this is i'm sure you may have anticipated that we might want to go into or consider our options for going into executive session as appropriate some of these this this discussion may be appropriate for public review but um i turn to you i suppose um director wells and um executive director wells former iab director wells and director billios might have some sense about this as well in respect to the first matter that commissioner brian wants more details on and then with respect to the just the general the general um responses on on compliance history yeah i'm i apologize i'm just trying to pull up uh find the parts of the application that commissioner brian that you were referencing so i could have a clear understanding could you it's just it was both in the um the suitability part and then what e three is that i was just i think it's in two different places one i think is e three four um the same paragraph is put in in response in a couple places in the application and i think the suitability report on page nine cites it in its entirety and references the answer to e three four so g three in particular that simple case i'm sorry could you say that again commissioner skinner i didn't hear what he said b three g g three okay i may just have a moment to look at those virtual alias um just for clarification the entity that was before the commission in 2013 was the caesar's entertainment team was a different entity it was um uh uh caesar's entertainment corporation i think that's a result of the reorganization uh you know it was renamed i could provide a little clarity on that if that would be thanks thanks jeff sure so the entity that was uh was an applicant in 2013 with caesar's entertainment corporation that entity is now a holding company of the ultimate publicly traded parent so that former the c ec is how i refer to it is now caesar's holding's ink which is a subsidiary company of caesar's entertainment ink uh go back a few years ago eldorado resorts ink acquired c ec eldorado resorts ink through that acquisition move c ec is a subsidiary of eldorado resorts ink and eldorado resorts ink changed its name to caesar's entertainment ink so caesar's entertainment or cei now the ultimate publicly traded parent was not involved in those 2013 applications in any sense uh and certainly we'll be happy to discuss this in any form which you'd like our intention in identifying those was to note that while cei william hill us and america wagering ink were not in any way associated with the company that applied in 2013 uh the ultimate parent cei did acquire that entity in 2020 and we wanted spiritual transparency to disclose that to make sure the commission was aware of that relationship even though the applicants are front of you today were not in front of you in 2013 thank you for that so maybe jeff two you might i don't want to put you on the spot but i think the question right now is um it would kind of be helpful in terms of continuity of the meeting to maybe address these issues now rather than later and i'm wondering if it's um if you have a sense as to what of whether any of the addressing the issues that were generally addressing the application um whether there's any confidentiality issues that you would flag across as we look back at that case in 2013 and if so um would you have an argument for councillor grossman about why it fits into our limited scheme for going into a sector session yeah sure i'd be happy to offer my thoughts on that i believe there's some technical elements of the virginia matter that was disclosed in those comments that we would request confidentiality regarding however i'd be happy to discuss both of them uh at a high level and if there is an area of significant detail that we would request confidentiality i would be happy to cut identify that during these discussions and perhaps request executive session if that would be appropriate and can we speak to nevada dc the others the other three that are listed on page nine can you do the same thing high level or does that need to go into executive session um i believe that we could discuss nevada matter we could certainly discuss uh quite thoroughly um some of the details surrounding the dc and terakie matters we would request uh discussing executive session obviously will provide full detailed transparency and all of them so i would defer to your directions to how you would like us to proceed i mean should we start with high level on what is in your comfort level publicly discussable for lack of a better term and then focus on what's left in terms of going into greater detail and executive session um and you know commissioner director welles you're and putting you in a spot here's former director of ivy but whether your participation provides any insight into 2013 at this time if we were to go past what's going to be a high level discussion right now and i obviously didn't ask that before so i don't want to put you on the spot and not be prepared to have that level of conversation that might be necessary i have not reviewed the report and that was more than nine years ago i have a high level understanding of um what happened at that time um i'm also aware of certain things that have changed at the company since that happened um so um i could give a high level but um for if the commission looks wants any specific detail probably just refer to the report itself which i think has been provided but it is very long it has not been provided okay that's one of the things i i do want to look at it just i feel like to do due diligence i need to at least put on it it may have been accessible but it wasn't provided in conjunction with our review and as you know there's a few thousand pages in front of us so um probably nobody thought to say let's add another report so um why don't we try to see if questions um and um responses satisfied needs on this matter let's stick to maybe just the massachusetts one right now for clarity and then move on to the the other matters okay commission brian you want to go ahead yep sure uh would it be helpful if i provided further context on the matter that we disclosed and uh yeah so i think that makes no sense for you mr hendrix to start off in terms of what you feel like you disclose publicly uh absolutely so um in our application we identified it with two matters relating to um withdrawals of licenses applicable to affiliated companies within our portfolio um the first matter i'll address is the withdrawal licenses associated with a project from a now subsidiary company of seizures entertainment Inc uh that applied for licensure massachusetts in 2013 so as i mentioned earlier um the ultimate parent parent was not the current ultimate parent company cei now was not affiliated with any of those entities that made the application in 2013 at the time of the application cei acquired those entities in our various holding companies in 2020 through the stelrata resort banks acquisition of seizures entertainment corporation um when looking at that question we wanted to ensure that we provided full transparency uh even if those matters did not directly relate to those applicants in front of you today so i could certainly say that each of the two applicants american wagering inc and william hill u.s uh they're currently in front of you were not associated with cec or any of its subsidiaries in 2013 uh nor was uh seizures entertainment Inc which will be an applicant in front of you very shortly um so in doing so what we want to do is provide enough information to the staff to reference the awesome report of the issue in 2013 uh and communicate that we are aware of this matter and while we do not think it impacts the suitability of the entities in front of you today nor the key persons in front of you today none of whom were also associated with cec or any of its subsidiaries uh pharmacist ron bruh wasn't there one qual individual qualifier who's on the list today that was also on the list in 2013 i apologize i misspoke so i believe uh our president of our digital business mr hessian uh was with cec at the time uh in a very different role than he is in so it's an excellent point to not mean to exclude him i so i'm referring to the qualifiers i'm referring to uh the senior management team of caesars entertainment Inc our ceo ceo present chief operating officer cfo and i apologize if i omitted any of the qualifiers associated with caesars entertainment Inc all of those individuals at caesars entertainment Inc were associated with elderwater resorts Inc and that's how they moved into their current leadership roles of the company um so yes to summarize we wanted to identify that matter for the commission the commission's staff um though from our perspective and uh those matters do not actually directly relate to any of the applicants running today just an interesting disclosure we want to make sure that we could put that to you and answer any questions you might have um and then just briefly i would note um if helpful we would be happy to talk through why we believe the four items cited as concerns at cec are no longer applicable to cei um lilios uh referenced i believe two of those matters distinctly earlier um i don't know if that would be helpful to the commissioner or not but as stated in our general presentation we believe that all of the entities in front of you today are suitable under the relevant massachusetts provisions i mean i'm i would want more detail i mean i i appreciate the high level and the the level you stopped at obviously because that's where you feel comfortable but i can say that it's something i'm going to want to talk about in more depth so i guess that for the executive session uh option counsel grossman if you could go over those options and see if um if that's something that could be we could avail ourselves of absolutely so well we're discussing the massachusetts matter from 2013 the nevada matter from uh september 2022 uh the dc matter from 2022 and the charakey matter from 2022 is is that accurate for starters i believe he said he can talk about and correct me if i'm wrong mr hennick's that you could talk to some extent publicly right now about nevada um and virginia the latter three for the most part um the the dc and the tribal would absolutely be executive that's correct commissioner we could speak to uh the virginia of matter at a very high level the nevada fine in more detail and then we would request request uh executive session to discuss some of the details of the last two disciplinary actions linked to dc and we're tribal regulators well certainly of course um to the extent that uh this information is competitively sensitive um because it doesn't feel like it's a try a trade secret or proprietary so if it's competitively sensitive um it would replace the applicant at a competitive disadvantage if we talked about it publicly um then we could go into executive session um unless there's some personal information associated with this but otherwise it would need to fit into that category that would be my apology that would be my attention mr grossman and if certainly if anything that i communicate within that session uh does not fit within the exception in the commissioners use i'd be happy to then restate it publicly and so the only question i have in that regard is whether anything in connection with 2013 may go into privacy interests of individuals who aren't in front of us today yeah i think we should assume that right i can't i imagine it i have a hard time imagining that it doesn't apply right so because there is one individual qualifier um that could be part of the discussion chelsea grossman i do think we'd have both yeah i think it's certainly um on its face would would seem to qualify um and we could start as mr hendrix mentioned and if it starts to veer into territory where it seems clear that it should be discussed publicly then we can stop the discussion and move into a public session uh but as we've done a number of times as long as we are very meticulous about the content of the conversation this seems to fall within uh the parameters the only uh catch with the 2013 matter is to ensure that we're not going into executive session to discuss anything that the commission has already discussed publicly in 2013 so we just need to be careful about that i'm sure before release publicly director wells at the time or was it more the fact of the end recommendation was released trying to remember because this is no i know my recollection is my recollection is the i'm not sure if we i mean we ended up um because the caesars matter they were just one qualifier with part of a larger application the whole suffix downs yeah and i don't remember if that information was taken out of the report when it was public because the commission never deliberated on it it was never discussed in public the issues were never hashed out so i know that did not happen um but i don't know as if the report section remained in and was part of the packet when the suitability was done on the company because i think some of the some of the issues they they questioned uh Suffolk Downs on was the due diligence on uh partnering with caesars i mean i know there's a globe article from october 30th 2013 that talks about some of what came out um and it said suffix asked caesars to withdraw on october 18th on october 18th um that during the background check a certain information came up and then they do have a paragraph that publicly states raising red flags about a licensing deal with gansivert hotel group and new york boutique hotel company whose name caesars wanted to use in a reefered las vegas hotel principle of which have been linked um to russian mobsters and that says according to a report from the commission's enforcement arm which would tend to indicate some portion of it was released publicly at the time maybe not all of it though yeah well i mean i think everyone knew what the issues were publicly that was not confidential in any way the gansivert matter well that that's just it i was i was in a different agency i want to make clear that there are some people on this team and some members of the applicant that were part of this but many of us were not right so we don't have any information on this in terms of background so we want to be really cautious about um us making any assumptions if it was in the public forum then it could be it should be discussed in this public forum if we're not able to confirm that then i think it makes sense that we avail ourselves of its proper you know according to our council to avail ourselves of the executive session to clear this matter up um and then you know um just on for me and commissioners if i could offer i believe a redacted port uh a redacted version of the report from 2013 is publicly available i'm i'm certain of that um so if the redacted version is sufficient to have this discussion i guess i suggest that we could refer to that version um as the basis of the public discussion obviously your that's your product that seems fair um but do but we haven't seen it yet i also don't know if the commission i mean i think what is clear is that there's portions of Nevada that in Virginia you could talk publicly about right now and that we would at a certain point have to go in on those at least could i just i like to i'd like to at least address this this issue because you know this was just we were just quoting a 2013 globe article with you know some reference that none of us know about right um none of us have that um available i mean the other four of us i doubt um maybe you did um but i think now that's been stated and we need to be able to decide what weight we're going to attribute to this 2013 matter and what we want to do um moving forward so i'd like to not put it aside because i really have a sort of on a plan our day so commissioners um Commissioner O'Brien why don't you suggest what you think would need to happen for going forward and then we'll go to each other commissioner sure i mean i think in terms of moving forward right now if we go in if we start with the public discussion of Nevada and Virginia when we get to the point where it has to go into executive session if by then no one's been able to get the redacted version to know what was actually publicly available we go into executive session on so much as we know needs to be discussed on those matters um okay that keeps it moving anyway well we're trying to figure out the parameters of what was out there beyond what i just said which was quoted publicly right right which i right and and hopefully actually so um um so that that could keep us moving Karen if you could track that down please i'm sorry it sounds like the applicant may be able to also see i mean if mr. Hedrick's you're aware that it's publicly available a redacted version or you know somehow Karen whoever she asks this is you know whether it's the applicant but if we can get the redacted version then we'll know what's in the public form and not commissioners how does that feel to you commissioner skinner commissioner hill that sounds fine with me commissioner maynard i see you nodding at commissioner hill oh and the thumbs up commissioner maynard that works okay so that i just wondering mr. henders do you have that readily available um it might take me a few minutes to grab it but i you know if we went to a brief uh break i could find it otherwise you just have to look in my face as i search my direct lilios do you have it available by chance i don't have the redacted version i have the full version i don't think it's not about our legal team mr. grossman you were there weren't you i was there i don't remember whether there was a redacted version or not to be this is matt toller with gaming labs um miss wells i just recently sent you an email checking to see if that is the report that's in question um if that helps everybody move forward um not certain what the protocol is here but uh wasn't that's very helpful i'll see if garen will contact it i may not be and matt if it's not the right document we really give you a thumbs up for trying here thank you no and i'll be glad to post that link in the chat here if we found it is i found it um directly a little found it um i'm hosting um so uh i can you can send it to mr. hendrix and then send it to the commissioners i also have the redacted report available so whatever you're readily available after all there we go and thank you to matt it's nice to having the the tech expert handy here for us um all right so now we'll move to the nevada and um virginia the virginia matter is that the first one mr. garen absolutely if you'll allow me i'll start with the virginia matter i think it's a quite a simpler explanation and then that a matter obviously happy to double back uh the the virginia item that was disclosed uh pertain to a withdrawal license uh in that state um the withdrawal uh was initiated based on the either pending or almost immediately then after completed acquisition of what was william hill by caesar's entertainment uh so as mr. hashin mentioned this company has grown through mergers and acquisitions uh including our caesar's acquisition of our sports business so we were completing an acquisition while both caesar's and one of its subsidiaries was pursuing brick and mortar license in virginia uh simultaneously william hill was pursuing a mobile license in the same state uh based on the pending acquisition we spoke the regulars there and made a decision to withdraw one of those licenses and we soon combined those companies uh and that license was withdrawn uh without any findings of unsuitability or concerns relating to um the qualifications of either applicant it was more of a kind of technical withdrawal based on the number of licenses available in the statute and the pending or soon after acquisition of william hill by caesar's any questions for mr. herbrix on that okay next on the list so the next item on the list was a recently settled uh disciplinary action with the nevada game and control board and commission um that matter pertained to four different counts within the disciplinary action i'll speak to each of those counts in turn i would start by saying the fact pattern that led to this uh disciplinary action uh predominantly dates from before caesar's and hinks acquisition of the subsidiaries involved in this disciplinary action uh though obviously uh caesar's entertainment myself various members of the current leadership team of caesar's sportsbook worked very directly with the commission to resolve these matters um additionally i think it's really important information is that the system in place that resulted in some of these fines is different than the system that we would uh request for approval within massachusetts so today we've been speaking about our liberty platform uh we gave you a demo a demo of the liberty platform um all of the matters within this nevada disciplinary action uh relate to a platform that we call cbs cbs is a much older heritage platform that we are actively working to switch out within nevada we're working through the regulatory process to achieve necessary approvals to deploy liberty in nevada which will address many of the issues referred to in this count so as we talk through that just really want to make it clear completely different system a much older system without the level of sophistication of our liberty platform uh which is you know i think uh important information for this discussion so uh within that uh disciplinary action there were four counts that we settled to nevada game control ward um one pertained to um essentially duplicate wagers that were occurring within the sports wagering system of cbs again cbs our older platform that we are not going to deploy massachusetts and then we are working to substitute within nevada uh we identified that matter uh reported that to nevada game control ward and then actively worked to put in place a patch that would fix that issue uh additionally we reviewed the transactions that were impacted by this error and to the extent possible reimbursed guests for any losing wagers that were made as a result of this so uh our approach there was to try and ensure that a guest who won a wager based on this duplicate wagering issue still received the benefit of that winning wager any guest who lost a wager as a result of a duplicate we reimbursed for their loss um additionally there was a note that the system flaw that led to this wager was not timely identified um we have worked very very intensively with all of our teams to improve our training when it comes to identifying matters that require regulatory reporting uh and reporting those two our regulators in this instance uh we became aware of the issue through a customer complaint to the nevada game control board we kept them aware of everything we were doing to further investigate and resolve the matter uh and then we retrained our team members thereafter to more quickly report anything that would uh require some form of regulatory reporting um an additional account pertained to allegations of adequate customer service not being provided to nevada patrons during 2021 okay we settled this matter i think for context for the commissioners um fall of 2021 had a lot of different dynamics that are currently in place today so earlier in our presentation um eric and ken walked you through the robust customer service measures that we have put in place as cesar sportsbook um cesar's acquired william hill in the april of 2021 and we immediately began investing resources to improve our customer service function uh and address these sorts of items to include uh hiring substantially more staff introducing the chatbot function um using third party resources where allowable under various regulatory provisions and dramatically changing the scope of our investment within that area which all of which also relate to nevada gaming control board and then the last count in that matter related to uh failure to timely notify the game control board of a suspected theft at one of our retail sports locations within nevada um some context for that count is that the matter occurred at one of our smaller properties in nevada also dramatically different operating environment in nevada um large rural state we have a number of uh smaller retail sports book locations and it occurred at one of those smaller locations however in response again we retrained our team members on the appropriate procedures uh settled the matter with nevada gaming control board and continue to train and instill in our team members uh the requirements to report these sorts of matters in a timely fashion so i might pause there um i'd be happy to answer any more questions either in virginia or nevada matters thank you uh jeff thank you i have a question about that last count you described failure to timely notify and i didn't catch the rest of it can you repeat that yeah it was a failure to timely notify the nevada gaming control board of a suspected theft at a retail sports book location okay thank you and then um i got inadequate customer service in 2021 um duplicate wagers occurring into 2022 i believe and i didn't get the the fourth one um so it kind of relates to the duplicate wager issues that the duplicate wager issues not timely reported um and we were not able to identify the root cause of the flaw that led to the um duplicate wager issue though we did resolve the matter from a system protective and the flaw effectively allowed a patron to enter in one wager but it showed up in your system twice and deducted funds from the patron's account twice good question slightly different so uh the way it worked is that when the system the system was under a high stress or volume again different system uh that would not be in place in massachusetts then certain wagers in those high volume periods would be recorded twice so um you know henricks places a bet to for the chiefs to win against the broncos and uh we i do that on sunday morning uh very high volume time i placed $10 bet that $10 is struck twice if you know henricks intended to strike that bet once so what we did was we put a patch in place that limits bets within a certain amount of time to ensure that uh essentially a bet cannot be placed more quickly than a human could place it so we identified the specific time period by which those duplicate wagers were occurring and put a patch in place to ensure that no duplicate wagers could be issued within that timeframe and again anyone who made a winning bet as a result of uh those wagers kept the benefits of that winning bet we did not ask for free funds and any guests who lost a duplicate wager we credited it back they're uh they're lost later but patreon's accounts were deducted twice for one bet or yes okay thank you if i can did you stop in terms of the detail is suspected that because that's something you don't feel comfortable talking about in public um there are elements of that that i i could provide a little more detail on uh in private just relating to the controls we put in place and how we made security over those operations okay yeah i'd be interested in hearing a little bit more about that in the right setting i i apologize i've been kind of speaking for a minute was there another topic i should address i think that i'm hearing is we have the two outstanding of the general update on on on past clients but we now have that redacted report in front of us why don't give you a chance Jeff to um to review um loretta doesn't look like that you you you you sent us to page 219 as being the curtain is that right 219 230 i might be wrong 219 starts the bottom of 219 i think starts the discussion and it continues then the financial piece picks up on 265 so 219 there appear to be very few if any rejections that's yeah that's what i thought but um so um i thought that commissioners you probably should have a chance before um we uh we start discussing this again this is a report from that was prepared by the i e b right Karen and it was part of the application for um region a connection with region a and this report included includes information regarding ceasars entertainment but it's not exactly the same entity that's before us today is that right even the parent company has so much shifted that's right um and so i i guess i'm cautioning against a little bit being cautionary here because one none of us had a chance to digest it um but perhaps there is a desire to further delve into it perhaps we could ask i e b as you know if we got to the end of our analysis and any determination either condition or desire to get some kind of report back on really the relevance of this case of this matter to what we have in front of us today i think from my perspective you know i'm just trying to put it all into perspective i want i want to know i'm appreciative of the fact that it stops most and for that you know that was exactly the you know the the i think all of us would agree we are very pleased that happened but now i want to make sure we digest it correct so permission tell me what you would like to do um then chair if i could just clarify for the record just to make sure it's clear because this became relevant um in litigation the actual investigation was assigned to spectrum gaming so they actually did the draft report had a recommendation it was finalized by i e b but the spectrum gaming group was actually tasked with doing most of the investigation and they were the weed on it and did provide a recommendation uh that uh indicated their position on the on the suitability there was some dispute at a litigation down the road spectrum gaming itself indicated they did not recommend a finding of suitability and the i e b agreed with that okay so this is a report that was not adopted by i e b but rather by spectrum no it was it was initially drafted by i by spectrum as consultants for the i e b and then they worked in conjunction for the final report got it okay um but if i if i look at the last page of this document it's going to say mgc i e b right correct thank you okay um commissioners what would you like to do i for one would like the opportunity to actually one read the report or the relevant portions of it but then do you know confer with i e b as appropriate in terms of um you know their understanding of um the landscape as it is now at the applicant entity but then also you know i would like the opportunity to really just understand and assess the risk myself because right now i i know nothing other than what's been alluded to and referenced in this meeting so i i have one uh suggestion so i directed you to the part of the report that starts on page 2 19 so that's page 2 19 to 250 talks about three matters um there was a fourth matter the financial condition of the company that starts on page 265 i i would suggest that you've already had rsm look at the financial condition of the now parent company so if you're looking at relevance i i invite you to think about whether that is the least relevant uh of the four of the four matters if at all relevant i'm also just wondering given that this is not redacted could i e b kind just brief us right now quickly about these these items that um and and without going beyond does that make sense yeah i i i can try i mean certainly 10 years ago you know i was much well better versed uh in this i have uh reread the report uh in preparation for today but i i can i can i i would like the opportunity to actually read it myself um i'm in line with commissioner schindler that um i guess i was wondering at the end of the day and i realize you want to move things along madam chair no i think you might have misinterpreted i wanted if we could have my eb's briefing maybe as a background to our reading to help okay context into it i wasn't eliminating the opportunity to reject um mr hendrix though i want to turn to you if we get a little bit of a background from our i eb what's available pop was available publicly um it does that serve to help put things into context and then remind us of the of what was how it was the resolution and then we can pause and and and read um or decide to continue on today with the rest of the application and perhaps have some kind of a um of sol i think with respect to this matter uh we're we're happy to assist in whatever way benefits the commission so if that's a lot of time now answer questions after you've had a chance to review it um um you know pausing and moving into other questions uh whatever most benefits you will have to facilitate okay commissioners do you want to pause and read now sure okay um commissioner maynard yeah i um i i guess i would suggest that we take a few minutes break though i don't know if everyone wants to see me uh no we can't read i'm going to break yeah yeah watch each other read i i i don't want um i eb to be speaking in the background line my mouth's open reading something so that no we would break to read um so it's 211 can somebody offer 30 pages to 30 to 25 to 30 is that enough time to to 11 to 2 it's like 219 to the if you accept the recommendation around the financial piece sorry i need more than 15 minutes to the 30 minutes i'm going to understand you need in a minute in an hour is that too much i i we're going to have to kind of get that 20 minutes of an hour so that's how what we do in between something like um i can't you know i'm having i don't know if it's me commissioner skinner i'm having trouble hearing you i'm so sorry not to speak at the i think it's oh okay i keep on playing with my my speaker sorry maybe it's just that you close to my phone thank you ma'am chair may i recommend a half hour we come back at 245 i need a half an hour so i would appreciate you i i couldn't i'm had did everything i think i think brad suggested 30 minutes and commissioner skinner said she would take the 30 minutes if that works everybody okay thank you so sorry i'll figure out if it's me or something else thank you we'll break um to uh 245 thank you Karen Karen you're on i'm muting you you're good just give me a second okay good to go thank you missioners we all set down so this is a reconvening of that's just game commission meeting public meeting number 411 and we are returning to our agenda where we were um discussing point that our eb director raised that was also disclosed in um the applicants uh application in response to our increase so um missioners have you all had a chance to review the portion relevant portion of the report thank you commissioner brian shall i have you leave any questions you have for i guess it would be for any member of the applicant oh i don't see check yeah let me say thank you yes thank you there's a lot of windows i appreciate the hand thank you there's no problem so i mean my takeaway from reading it and i know that there's been a substantial there's a bankruptcy there was a reorg you've got a lot of different players but obviously um the lack of sort of compliance is what jumps out at me when i read that section so if you could speak to um in a little bit more detail sort of your compliance structure at the current um for the current applicant yeah absolutely so um um i guess a briefly note by mentioning that almost all of the individuals noted in that report that were in a decision-making capacity are no longer or never were with seizures entertainment Inc so the individuals that uh negotiated the transact the potential transaction identified a significant investigative issue one or no longer with the company the uh compliance committee as a whole that reviewed that matter has been uh completely turned over we have a different compliance committee which i'll walk you through in just a moment um the uh senior legal team that was involved in those determinations also known with the company the former chief compliance officer and senior regulatory professionals and um what i believe was the chief legal officer at the time those individuals are not with the company any longer as well the second major investigative issue involved the review of a qualifier associated with former CEC that individuals are longer with the company and then in relation to item three which dealt with allegations of improper accommodations for a high-value player our company does not offer any such incentives or accommodations to high-value players currently nor will it in the future uh and additionally the senior management team that was responsible for those decisions is not affiliated with seizures entertainment Inc so just kind of add to lay the groundwork from a compliance committee structure um we have a compliance committee uh at seizures entertainment Inc uh there's comprised of several individuals our compliance committee chairman is an independent member a longtime uh Nevada gaming regulatory attorney mr bud hicks um additionally two independent members of our board of directors serve on our compliance committee uh mike bagrom was longtime experience in gaming uh racing matters and then frank farenkoff who is also the independent member of our permanent sits in our compliance committee uh frank is a legendary attorney in the gaming space helpful me jay and longtime um affiliation with various government relations programs additionally two of our senior executives serve on that committee our president chief operating officer and our chief administrative officer uh chief administrative officer and lastly our chief legal officer uh is an ex officio member of that same committee uh i serve as the compliance officer uh as designated by our amended restated gaming compliance plan uh in that role i report directly to the compliance committee for independence purposes for day-to-day purposes i report to our chief legal officer i would note that that plan is also distinct from the plan that was used during this matter referred to in 2013 um that plan has been in place at former elder auto resorts Inc and now Caesars entertainment Inc uh for the last you know roughly nine years uh we applied a amended version of that plan to the consolidated enterprise following elder auto's acquisition of Caesars so matters like this would now be reviewed by an entirely different senior management team and under a new gaming compliance plan with multiple levels of autonomy and independence within the process uh and i firmly believe that these sorts of matters would be treated differently uh where they'd be reviewed by the Caesars entertainment Inc compliance plan that was a lot so maybe i'll pause to say one of those sorts of items you were looking for is anything i can give you some more detail on can you tell me how um what are the terms of the people on the compliance committee um certainly so the members of the compliance committee that are uh members of the board of directors their terms would run commensurate with their terms on the board uh we have a different mechanism to be to appoint membership to the compliance committee that we do on the board uh but each year we review appointments to our various committees and then the board of directors makes those appointments those all of course have to comply with the gaming compliance plan um similarly the chairman is able to be you know elected on an ongoing basis um and then the individuals who are executive officers um they could be appointed or removed pursuant to the terms of the gaming compliance plan at any point so depending on what we want that constituency of the committee to look like that can be changed so long as of course the tenants of the plan we're here to and then i'm appointed and serve at the convenience of the committee so is there a separate nominating committee or is it the board that then like when you said we come up with recommendations to the board to the compliance committee is that a separate nominating committee or is what is that yeah a good question so uh it is virgin royal we there so the compliance committee has terms within the gaming compliance plan that define who and when it would be appointed to and then from a corporate governance perspective we do have a separate nominating governance committee that makes recommendations and plans okay great thank you other questions to mr skinner you're naming it commit your skinner i apologize i can't hear you very well you have to get really close i don't know what happens that's yeah he's trying to get ahead all right with a giant head yeah um attorney Hendricks there was mentioned earlier uh that mr hessian was involved in prior incidents from 2013 and i'm sorry if this is awkward for you mr hessian but what was that involvement before eric response i guess i just don't if i implied that i apologize i know he was listed as a qualifier in the prior process i did not mean to imply that he was involved in any decisions listed within these significant investigative issues okay no on any comments i might have made eric over to you okay thank you i'm sorry i misunderstood um i have the same questions similar questions rather uh that commissioner o brian had so i appreciate her asking them i hate to go backwards uh but i'm going to ask about the nevada settlement again and just if you could tell us what those terms are if you're able to do that publicly the uh the terms in what respect because you you you signed a settlement agreement right there's a settlement a stipulation for settlement in order yes and so just asking what the terms of that settlement absolutely so within the settlement uh and i'm all happy to send that as a supplement to our application immediately following this meeting um i believe we we presented on the record in front of the nevada game control board that described the various remediation efforts that we took under or took in relation to them uh and then settled to find i am doing this off the head so i top of my head so i apologize i don't believe that there are any ongoing conditions as a result of that settlement other than to of course adhere to the remediation that we described and i will confirm that for you and send you the actual settlement agreement and what was the fine i believe it was a hundred thousand dollars in total thank you because it was the reference uh to the globe article that was made earlier there's the um current applicants and the parent company and direct and end the ultra parent company have no um involved at all with and as the individuals that recited in the first investigative matter in that report kids win and gavin's any any of those names i no involvement whatsoever we do not not as a parent company nor in any of our subsidiary holding companies and as i understand it was a matter for that was involving a licensing agreement for a non gaming entity um that is correct though that that property has been completely redesigned with a totally different brand we have no association with individuals who uh negotiated the transaction or potential transaction nor the ultimate licensing partner so none of those uh individuals nor the agreement run to the current parent company today yeah thank you and um with respect to the last party mr carver again it's a matter public record it's no yes no involvement whatsoever with any of the entities that are key um the individuals are for qualifiers um this matter before us that's correct he has no affiliation with the company or involvement with any of these applicants no affiliation okay and there's no outstanding litigation uh relating to this matter relating to him now i have none that i'm aware of any other questions about those okay um so direct lilios because there was just that inadvertent um scoping issue that's um you're expecting that the applicant is i know that you're in discussions i think that the applicant to get the application in on the parent company and then um and you're expecting that over uh yes we are uh lisa from the company's uh licensing team has been very responsive and the latest information i had i think we're expecting it friday or monday okay um and i think that um i know that we've got a couple of matters that commissioner bryan and uh and others may wish to address but we need to go into executive session to do that should we wait till the conclusion of our review of the sections just in case we have another second session we might as well in case anything comes up with rsm or anything like that okay and i saw commissioner hill nodding up and down okay we're all good with that plan anything else further with respect to this matter oh okay we um we thank you and and kudos to all the commissioners for their speed reading we appreciate that um and so do we have any further questions then for director lilios on suitability at this point okay okay then uh thank you to the uh applicant and we'll turn then to rsm rsm has been giving uh the gaming commission uh some assistance and in interpreting the financial uh components of the uh of the application rsm us lp is one of the leading providers of audit tax and consulting services in the united states rsm has been working with gaming commission to provide insights and analyses to help the commission um i'll let each of them introduce themselves but i do want to be clear that rsm team was asked to join um this meeting and make a presentation really relevant to just certain aspects of the applications and that was sections b2 subsection d on the sports waging experience description of sports waging operation and that focus was on the applicants estimated market share within each jurisdiction then section c2 projected revenue rsm has been asked to provide insights into all aspects of the applicants projected revenue and g3 section g3 financial stability and integrity uh rsm uh did provide a report to i e b part of the suitability report that we just evaluated rsm has been asked to provide insights into all aspects of the applicants financial stability and integrity so it goes a little bit beyond the scope of suitability so thank you very much i see um perhaps it's teresa who's leaning in first good afternoon teresa teresa marlino nice to see you nice to see everybody here today uh rsm appreciates the opportunity to present to the commission and we understand the importance of the licensing process and the importance of these meetings we've accumulated diverse teams of professionals to present on the various topics as requested by the commission as noted by madam chair we were very focused in our scope to sections b particularly with a with an emphasis on market market share and wagering activity section c with a focus on projected revenue and focus g with a focus on the financial stability liquidity and scenario analysis that the applicants uh were asked to perform uh my name is teresa marlino and i'm a principal in our gaming and hospitality practice based here in las vegas um i've been in gaming for the last 20 plus years and as a firm we've served the gaming industry since the 1960s um as different presenters present throughout the presentation they'll briefly introduce themselves um please note that the information that rsm will be presenting on today was received on november 21st 2022 and the discussion prepared by rsm is based on our preliminary research today and is subject to change if new information becomes available uh questions posed to our team may require further research and if we are unable to respond to a question before the end of the meeting we will circulate a response to the commission as soon as soon as practical uh as instructed by the messachusetts gaming commission rsm conducted a preliminary review of each category three applicants market share and submission materials in tandem with other investigations with the process much of the information we reviewed is likely considered confidential by the applicants including the market share and projections we're happy to discuss these items in detail in an executive session and as as directed by the commission we will we are prepared to speak generally about the process of which each applicant shared the information within this public forum rsm's preliminary market study the jurisdictional rules and other nearby markets with what each of these are doing may impact any of the applicants estimates on market share and the sportsbook composition in a given state uh for example if massachusetts goes live it is probable that neighboring states will see a decrease in sports wagering activity as patrons stay at home to play rather than crossing straight lines to do so for reference something we did not note yesterday the new jersey market year to date september 2022 shrink by 7.3 percent which we we anticipate is in part due to new york legalizing and initiating sports wagering so we do anticipate that other states may see an impact by the increase of wagering in massachusetts rsm yesterday um spoke more broadly to the industry and various sportsbook sizes which we're happy to revisit again but for the sake of time we'll we'll move on but we spoke specifically to sportsbook um you know new jersey having for example 25 sports books uh while other states have two or three or even down to one which may um impact the market share estimates uh given the nature of the online sports wagering and the varying number of platforms in different jurisdictions it is difficult to predict the ultimate composition of the marketplace and even after conducting market extensive market research but we do anticipate that massachusetts will be a very lucrative market and each of the applicants and including the current applicant which will refer refer to throughout the presentations as cesar sportsbook or awi consistent with the rest of this hearing uh has has anticipated or appears to have anticipated uh the commission as noted here has received ieb's report addressing the suitability review by director lilios and which which we we spoke to at length and note that we rsm did provide a report to the commission of the applicant self-disclosed financial submission including the historical financial performance of sports wagering other jurisdictions liquidity and ability to fund um upstart costs and losses financial projections in massachusetts in the financial impact of compliance risks bankruptcies and other legal items uh we we understand that the the review of ieb's report was intentionally limited in scope and we're prepared to speak to this broadly here today but but do anticipate if necessary going into a executive session uh if any specifics are needed the applicant has built a us sportsbook business through the recent acquisition of the 2021 uh transaction with william hill plc as part of the application rsm was only provided financial information for the publicly traded parent company and the pre transaction william hill information which limits our ability to review you know the overall sports betting operations uh the applicant provided one year of financial projections for awi and making it difficult to understand assumptions and projected business trends over time we recognize significant uncertainties and starting operations in a greenfield market and want and the only five-year projection we were able to observe within the application was related to projected handle we utilized this five-year projected handle to try to understand market share estimates that were provided by the caesars sportsbook for the revenue projection section an executive session may be warranted as our discussion contains specifics on caesars estimated market share with with the acknowledgement that it was limited to the handle projections so we're definitely like going into a lot of rsm assumptions as we go into that section um and and so i'm going to utilize direction from last yesterday's meeting and go at a high level and then if you guys would like us to go into executive session on further details as appropriate we're happy to do so um madam chair is that an appropriate approach i think that's right okay so we we compared the projections at the limited projections as provided to market analyst doish bank uh and truest securities research report both of which were issued in and october 2022 um those estimates just for context roughly both of them roughly estimate the massachusetts market uh sports betting market to be between 300 and 350 million dollars um the market share estimates for massachusetts online sportsbook market uh were not shared by the applicant so um nor were those five-year revenue projections so we did note in section e2 e0 of the application that there's a graphic where the applicant showed their acquisition model and based upon our review of that uh it does seem to indicate that there's methodology and and thought behind market share so we don't want want to imply that that the applicant hasn't thought about it but they just didn't share how that graphical presentation of market acquisition translates into revenue projections in within the application specifically to repeat that section please yeah section graphic but i don't yeah it's section e2 e0 and and it's related to player acquisitions and they talk about market share and kind of their approach and so it does appear that they have uh some modeling in place to to think through and build that out and i think in their presentation earlier today they referenced that they haven't you know finalized their market plans but are actively working to develop a market approach that i would assume aligns with that graphic which i think is about page 576 unless my numbers come up different than everybody else's yeah unless we're doing the section by section so right right that's just in the overall pdm thank you uh i would also like to highlight for the commission that uh cesar sportsbook provided a market share percentage for the various various jurisdictions in b3 g01 uh it was noted as confidential but but i think a lot of the information and calculations they're estimating for market share are based upon public data but um as the application was noted as confidential i'm not going to to reference the specifics of their market share in those other markets uh and we can talk to the estimates in the executive summary of the estimates of handle and how we kind of back into their estimates of market share but generally speaking their market share estimates for the state of massachusetts are in the middle range of their of their um stated market share within the other jurisdictions so if you look at that table there in um b3 g01 uh and kind of look in the middle of that table it's it's generally in the middle of that table i would say kind of leaning towards the higher end and and we can speak to that more in executive session as requested but directionally you you can you should be able to see that and uh given given that the revenue projections were only provided for one year there's an unknown ramp up period um to terminal market size meaning we were unable to evaluate and provide the commission on kind of what those build out assumptions are what their planned growth is year over year with with the data provided uh the commission may may want to confirm cesar's assumptions on market share although um it does seem to be close to what they offer in other markets and and they may have some you know some some the the the the numbers they provided seem appear to have some context uh based upon their historical performance uh we'll also like to note that the planned relationship with on core boston harbour was not detailed in the application nor reviewed as part of our our application and we're unsure what the perception of that relationship would have on market share or marketing efforts or or lack there of or not having marketing efforts we've seen various jurisdictions handle that relationship differently uh as the commission is aware revenue is closely tied to whole percentage it's important to note that cesar's revenue projection uh are based on performance of their platform across the jurisdiction from november 2021 to october of 2022 which which appears reasonable to us um although conservative compared to newer sports wagering markets as as discussed throughout today uh this platform is is in many many jurisdictions and is a primary player within the nevada market which which trends towards a little bit lower whole percentage so the whole percentage is stated in their application uh do do seem in a line aligned with their current performance across multiple jurisdictions and is i would say conservative compared to newer markets where we'll we'll see sometimes the whole percentage creep up a bit based upon the sophistication level of players and whatnot and we could speak to more specific numbers in executive session if appropriate and then i'll turn to jeff to discuss a bit about liquidity and the overall financial stability review and then and then open for questions and discussion as to the appropriate or necessity of going into executive session thanks charisa uh good afternoon uh madame chair and commission uh jeff cats i'm a director at rsm and i lead our strategic finance and fpna group uh based in boston and spend uh you know the the bulk of my time doing financial analysis on on companies in the technology industries like it is apparent that uh cesar's entertainment the parent company is well capitalized as of its most recent quarterly sec filing and has touched on the opkins presentation this morning as of september 30th there was approximately three billion and available liquidity comprising of 944 million in cash on hand and 2.1 billion in availability under their revolving credit facility uh there are no major uh uh debt maturities in the next 12 months and then cesar's generated 704 million in cash flow from operations during the nine month period ending september 30th 2022 and cesar's has also reduced their total debt by two six 2.6 billion during the same period it is ultimately up to the applicant's parent on how to allocate its financial resources if faced with um losses in the future there is no guarantee the applicant will continue its sports wagering operations in massachusetts but it has the current financial resources to fund operations in the commonwealth if it's so desires now we'll remain on the line to answer any questions the commission may have about this presentation or our written submission if there are further specific questions in the contents for a report we're happy to discuss those in the executive session thank you thank you very much um i think you've probably heard um which happened to me so that we um intend to go through the application mind if we have any other issues that are more appropriate in the executive session are you available to hang on yes i'm available certainly and and we can make sure that others for the written submitted report are available as appropriate excellent thank you so commissioners that concludes our reports from our internal team members now we're going to start with a review and evaluation of the application section by section and a reminder that um at the conclusion of each review of each section i'll take our temperature and find whether or not we think that the applicant has met our expectations in terms of the um quality of of its response so ma'am chair are we doing the executive session now are we going to wait until we proceed through this i thought i may have misunderstood i thought that we might go through the application and find if we have anything else got it okay that would go into uh then we could do one executive session okay that's appropriate does that make sense should we continue on then commissioners i'll set okay so turning to section b questions for the applicant madam chair yes irisa touched on an important point for me and that is what the relationship the partnership the details of the partnership with uh win excuse me on core boston harbour are and so definitely not interested in the fine details but generally what the partnership entails and uh i don't know if that is reserved for executive session or not but hoping hoping someone can speak to that either now or then uh i'd propose that we could give you a very high level summary if that's efficient great and if not we'll provide additional context in the executive session um and as i say that i'm mentally suggesting that eric is going to uh actually provide that summary here in just a moment so um if that works we'll proceed that way sure it's uh relatively straightforward um as in partnership with win we're able to through your review here access uh their first skin or ability to use a second brand for the commonwealth and in exchange we're providing them with uh financial uh payments based on our performance in the state along with some minimum amount uh that we're paying per year and and also just to be thorough we have deals with them in other states where they operate on our licenses and have a similar arrangement where there are minimum uh payments that they make to us as well as uh performance-based uh payments well it's just gonna you might be on again no and now we heard nothing so there's something definitely going on sorry what if it's on you how's that that's good okay i'm gonna get to another location shortly um but i appreciate the answer to the question it really is just as simple as that you're it's you know just as straightforward as i guess the statute envisioned so thank you yeah it is we we have uh the obligations to provide you all with the uh responsive reporting that you're asking for through a contractual agreement with win but uh so it ensures that that we're complying with all of the reporting requirements and so forth but it's mainly a financial transaction with them but could i do a follow-up question to that commissioner skinner uh we've concentrated a bit on what we've purchased third-party affiliates and and how um you know particularly in the in the um the market advertising um landscape and i believe that i asked the question or maybe it was one of my fellow commissioners asked the question of uncle wasa harvard but i um i would assume that you would have those third-party affiliates and to the extent that um you engage in any contracts and they have content that you would assume control of that content um and and then ultimately uncle boston harvard also would have responsibility that you as a partner am i wrong no i think that was a good summary and i actually heard their response from yesterday and thought that it was a good response that win made in terms of the monitoring of the affiliates and the general relationship uh we have similar structures in the states that we offer operate and to the extent that they're allowed in uh massachusetts and get licensed etc we would plan to utilize them and if they're not available then we do an alternative approach but you would have um ultimate control over any content and i'm we're thinking of course a responsible gaming yes that that lines with you yes that's that's correct yep and that's correct no please go right ahead it's probably helped i was going to add that all of those affiliates would abide by our marketing advertising code our standards they would use our advertising guidelines and we would be responsible for the content with which they you know then distribute it in the market so the actual material would adhere to our marketing advertising guidelines and requirements and we would then of course take responsibility from that from a regulatory perspective right okay that's really helpful thank you okay um other questions under section b i'm just looking at my notes i think i got a few answered earlier i i would like to explore um your response in section b i think b3 um on um projected revenues and the issues that teresa brought up so if we could include that in our in um an executive session i think we can learn a little bit more about what you're estimating um other questions on b commissioner may be i'm sorry i assume my apologies no problem i have a features question what's a selfie sign up how does that work i can take that one commissioner if you don't mind ken pukes uh so a selfie sign up is a secondary kyc approach where and it's it's fairly common with most of the major operators where if you go through initial kyc and there's a flag for whatever reason perhaps you recently moved in your address doesn't match driver's license you can submit a photo of yourself from the phone and you can submit a a photo of the front and back of your driver's license and then the software will ensure that you are the person that the idea is valid and that you are the person on that identification and it's basically a secondary secondary means of kyc that's fairly common in in the industry and deployed across multiple states is that is that an in-house or is that is there's some vendor that does this it's a third party vendor there's a number of them that do it our vendor is on fido thank you so they would need to be licensed okay commissioner so the questions on this section with just the follow-up on that we'll get in the executive session that uh um do we have a consensus that it met expectations i would say they met expectations under section commissioner i see you're shaking head and christian skinner all set i'm all set um just with with the caveat that we will hear some additional information from rsm during executive session thank you so much so we'll move on to section c excuse me mr hendrix i think the cold is coming through the um the screen let's see these also are marked out as um confidential um so we'll tread carefully um see what everyone's comfortable with questions so just if i'm not if i'm reading this correctly and i'm not shocked by the answer but no anticipated jobs in the Commonwealth other than what exists already and as you described it i think i think that's generally correct uh as we're exploring whether we're going to do local activations and have some uh you know in-market uh employees to help uh you know facilitate sign-ups or to do those type of activities we don't know how many yet uh but it won't be more than a than a couple and then we do allow our tech team to work remotely and that's where the majority of the seven that we currently have are coming from right so the and if you don't want to talk about it publicly just put your hand up and stop me um but in terms of the brand ambassadors that you talk about later are those the potential jobs that you're talking about just now or is that something different yeah those those would be uh the potential jobs i have another question on that but we can save it to different sections okay thank you other questions like i'm sure oh sorry go ahead madam chair i wanted to point out that under the social impact statement because i think between commissioner skinner yourself and myself we've brought up the lottery every every um meeting there's an answer that says um as the mobile sports voyaging business is unrelated to the lottery business seizures does not anticipate its operations to affect the revenues generated by the master's estate lottery um that is well and good and and um maybe this is just a little background on on us being a slightly different jurisdiction and region but we anticipated and we've taken votes that any licensees would work with the lottery and speak to the lottery about specific issues that they have in regards to to whether it affects the lottery or not and so that's something that i would want to see i your answer left a little bit to be desired commissioner mayor i could speak to that we would be happy to collaborate with any of the state agencies obviously including the lottery so not intentional to not indicate that we would not collaborate we certainly will just indicating our initial analysis from an overall market perspective and we could certainly supplement that and obviously i'm i'm terrified here on the record that we will work with all applicable state agencies and to your credit you do say that you know you don't anticipate any acting any you know negatively but that you consider cross marketing strategies and increasing ticket sales and i think from my experience that that's music to the executive director of the lottery so that alone um it's just something i think that commissioner mayor suggests that they am i looking at the wrong place i'm scared that's that that's the question the answer is under the question thank you well that's what i would suggest you do great the cross marketing is really there's opportunities there to have conversation with them and they may come up with something but thank you for clarifying what i'm really worried about just now commissioner maynard was that i was reading somebody else's application for a moment because i've i've done that accidentally today not today but the other day i'm oops so yes it is including cross market and so what you're saying is the answer is the word as to the end of lottery okay good so some guidance there and i think the executive director would would love to hear from you folks on thanks commissioner maynard okay i have another question and it crosses over a little bit into responsible gaming but it's referenced by you guys and see which is this 18 wheeler that was my question yeah i mean i have a lot of questions for you guys coming up in terms of the the responsible gaming in the end of 21 and your your marketing and your affiliation relationships at the college level etc so i was on one hand amused in the other hand a little taken aback by where this might end up and what it's used for so i'd love to hear a little bit more about that but maybe we table that for the rg section well it was in this section and commissioner brian it's it's it's bare um i think it's i think it's interesting that it may have marketing and it may also have implications of course and be for market firms but i think you know you quite right suggest by their rg considerations involved i think my question was telling me more about the trucks itinerary where does it go um this is that helpful commissioner brian for the launching the discussion right now yeah okay that's fair so do you want me to handle this on jeff or yeah if you could explain it a little bit and we'll sure so you know as as you as referenced earlier one of the things we try to do is to activate locations in the states where we're operating and so that can be at a bar it can be you know at sporting events etc and the goal is kind of twofold one to highlight our our brand and get people to to see see the brand and and associate it with the sports sporting event and two to provide the ability to actually help folks in person sign up for the app get you know answer any questions that they have resolve any problems that they could have with the app if they're already customers and those types of things and so what this truck is is is a concept to try to improve our ability in in those areas and have the truck be essentially a showcase that opens up there's an inside area we have panels we have people that are staffed to help answer questions as customers might have about the app and we move it around to different locations most recently with the launch in maryland it's been at maryland we're doing a right now it's it's in a parking lot of a major grocery store chain that wanted to try out the association of that with one of their one of their products it was at our racino in Ohio for a number of weeks and we'll be moving it to Cleveland when we launch the product in Ohio and I'll pause there and and see and see if you have any questions I would say that the results haven't been great and so I'm not sure that we will end up having it around in Massachusetts in February and I might add to Eric's comments that we obviously look to place the activation events in areas that are going to predominantly be oriented individuals that are over the age of 21 and able to use the product so we also have controls around checking IDs before anyone is able to engage with the truck make sure that all of the users who are actually experiencing that pardon me uh the truck and you know the kind of whole event are individuals over the age of 21 so we are checking IDs and confirming these are the right sorts of folks that are engaging with us uh before we're you know offering that to the public can we show right it's kind of hard to bubble an 18-wheeler you know to make sure that only 20 went enough for seeing it but I appreciate the sentiment it's you know what you're saying but it'd be hard to maybe drive the 18-wheeler in a snowstorm in March here too so I need to add food to it I mean I think I think our food trucks get actually parked during the this the winter months I don't know how many around there but um I respect the answer to the clarifier that you're you know looking for those locations that are are predominantly and I think that probably was what Commissioner Briney might have had currently on your mind so thank you um I just had um one follow-up point that I made yesterday so you may have heard of that again there's an opportunity if you do end up using your branding ambassadors there's a couple it might be a little bit different than what was proposed yesterday but I do think to the extent that you make any inroads with partnerships and local establishments that you consider being really intentional about you know bringing your your partnerships and business to minority-owned establishments it's an opportunity there of course it's an opportunity for women-owned establishments and veteran-owned establishments I do know that you have a relationship with mass military support foundation so we appreciate that but to the extent that you do work to introduce your product and and recruit new players to the extent you can do that with some intentionality around minority-owned businesses that would be something that I certainly will address favorably for a long-term relationship in Massachusetts. Thank you chair and we absolutely will as we you know develop those relationships with local intentionality of those relationships with minority and diversity and women-owned businesses. Thank you thank you so with that I actually have I have one other thing I wanted to ask about and I'm probably stealing Commissioner Hill's thunder by asking this but you talk about your community enhancements etc at the local level and you talk about developing a relationship with the mass military support foundation can you be a little more specific when you say developing like what stage is it in what do you contemplate financial support like what are you thinking yeah so that's right we are contemplating financial support we're identifying the individuals who are leading that organization seeing where we can support their initiatives you know similarly we've been reaching out to agencies that work in responsible gaming areas to develop relationships to ensure that you know should we prepare their license we can smoothly facilitate all of the responsible gaming controls within the state so just given the timeframe of the application in the process we are early in those relationships but we are committed to developing strong community ties. Thanks and then Ms. Wrapp you unmuted I didn't know if you had something you wanted to say or now Jeff covered it I'm still having technical difficulties so I couldn't get off but he was able to speak but he covered it beautifully you you can repeat anything you want we're good with that that was spot on okay Michelle did you want to add to that um I was very impressed with what you've done and other jurisdictions and I didn't know if you wanted to enlighten the public of what some of the other community involvement you've had in other jurisdictions I would just say we've had a variety of community involvement across the countries and the jurisdictions in which we operate we also have involvement with organizations at a national level both with our philanthropic giving as well as with our seizures foundation so we partner with like I said a variety of organizations but we really look to seek partnerships that hit our strategic impact giving areas which include social equity and education climate change and food security responsible play and and mental health so a variety of organizations fall within those areas and we work to cultivate relationships with all of them both at a corporate level as well at a local property level excellent thank you thank you madam chair thank you you're all set right I thank you mr skinner all set okay then we'll move on to section oh I need to just take a temperature honestly thanks um do we have a consensus that the SAP has met its response expectations in this response I would say yes they have met expectations under section C thank you just maybe yes I would also say yes they've met with the same caveat we do need to hear from rsm on the financial piece and executive executive revenues yeah and and with the caveat that mr hindricks did say they are willing to work with the law and thank you for some reason commissioner maynard it presents a little bit differently awful text and so I just thought that was there be so thank you for clarifying um that that is the question all right then we have a consensus we'll move on to section D please any questions and again some degree of confidentiality so exercise yes mr skinner thank you so the diversity spend around minority and women business enterprises is commendable actually um what is missing in this paragraph d2 is and I don't have a page number I'm sorry I'm going with one of the earlier versions of the application but what's missing from from that data is veteran business enterprises and I know chair judge stein mentioned veterans and the organizations that you can link up with to sort of increase um your partnerships and spending in that area and so looking forward to seeing that I wonder if you had your minority in women uh business enterprise spending broken down we don't break down and report publicly um by each respective group we report as a whole so as you can see we have a total spend of diverse spend of 9.5 percent um of our total addressable spend but we don't report publicly by each respective group women minority and vendor that is something that we can look to provide and possibly discuss an executive session okay okay that yeah I'm interested in understanding why you don't report that information publicly um and then I noticed that you don't have or you haven't identified in the application goals for that spending and so are those not available do you just not have them because I'm wondering how your nine nine point five percent matches up to those internal goals sure our overall goal with our supplier diversity program is really just to source quality goods and services benefit the communities in which we operate and engage those small diverse and local businesses it doesn't have a metric tied to it we want to identify those businesses work to get them certified if they're not already and then support them in the markets in which we operate um and and help um you know move their business forward as well we don't have a specific metric tied to what the goal is we're always striving to increase our diverse spend both in the regulated markets and in the non-regulated markets so how do you measure success we look at our increase year over year to see where we're seeing improvement um and and like I said we're always striving to see an increase in that year over year spend and we do report as a whole um each year in our our corporate social responsibility report you also have reference to dbe that the disability violation okay all right yeah thank you my pleasure and just to go back to one of your uh comments commissioner I believe you also mentioned uh veteran owned businesses uh we absolutely do you know endeavor to work with veteran owned businesses uh my brother's a veteran owns a small business uh and we're passionate about this company so um is inadvertent if it was not specifically identified we will look to do business with veteran owned businesses where possible good to hear it thank you our just to speak to that our overall focus is women owned my own minority owned um disadvantaged disabled veteran and lgbtq owned and certified businesses and we partner with um local chambers of commerce and organizations that help support those businesses as well and certify them um within those organizations that's notable um heather so thank you that stood out to me I you know sounds like it's a worthwhile initiative for you and in terms of the effect that it has and that's increasing overall spend from year to year absolutely thank you any further questions on madam chair yes i wanted to commend the applicant on the data the data is there uh a significant portion of the data is there I did notice the year over year increase I'm not going to get into numbers um I did see the 2025 plan in d1 and I appreciate your answer on the record to which our skinner that you know you're not trying to set a ceiling you're trying to to work on they're not being as so I appreciate that this rapid and uh just wanted to commend on the record that the data is there I pleasure other questions in this area okay um I have one madam jam sorry or maybe it's a comment or a combo um I appreciate your commitments to increase your senior leadership roles for women and people of color and um what are your efforts and I know you you've given yourself quite some time uh to kill 2025 but any targeted efforts you'll be making um to increase your numbers there can you talk a little bit about what it is that you'll be what's your strategy absolutely um so it their strategy in a couple different areas starting with diversity recruitment um we have our job hostings as we think about uh using inclusive language in all of our job postings um we review those with a DEI lens before those are are published um we have our candidate outreach and partnerships um we include historically black colleges and universities in our outreach we partner with multiple DEI focused organizations that can help extend our reach and attract diverse candidates and support inclusion retention and development of those candidates we have an objective to ensure that we have a very diverse candidate slate sometimes that can be challenging depending on the market but it's our goal to ensure that we have at least one diverse candidate for every available position if that proves to be challenging may extend that timeline um if if possible um hiring managers undertake a conscious inclusion training um which provides um a diversity focused training um to help them really understand um DEI as a whole and how they can take that back not only to their hiring processes but their management training overall uh moving on to our talent development and training and development overall we host an emerging leaders summit which is a two-year program for high potential uh managers and directors um it includes a range of learning opportunities in person summits uh leadership panels with our senior management team uh e-learning modules we also work with uh McKinsey to um utilize their connected leaders academy which targets different ethnic and racial groups such as african-american hispanic or latino and asian team members of asian descent where it targets um high-level managers they have a program that they can work with uh with mckinsey as well as executive uh leaders and that's a four-month program we also have our um employee resource group or business resource groups ours are are called BAGS for business impact groups which brings together self-identifying like-minded team members and their allies um which really support each other and of those communities through dimensions of diversity equity and inclusion um something that we're very proud of um that has really kind of taken shape over the last couple years would be our compensation and our benefits as you think about uh offering benefits for a diverse population um we've also recently launched a last year our all in on education program um we have several others I could probably continue to to go on our disability inclusion program um we are getting ready to relaunch our veterans program um so we believe we have a very firm strategy built out to achieve those goals by 2025 that sounds like a good long comprehensive plan I I hope it yields the results you're looking for and if granted a license I look forward to hearing about your successes in that area thank you excellent any other so it is back to um section D what is how do we feel about that section in terms of our expectations I think it met expectations as to D Commissioner Skinner yes I agree in fact I would I would I would maybe say it exceeded expectations and we've been top graders I would agree with Commissioner Skinner um um our first exceeds I think Commissioner Hill I agree with Commissioner Skinner on that thought Commissioner Maynard I agree with Commissioner Skinner and Commissioner Hill and and it seems like you a mental chair yeah um I'm glad to hear and exceed um but it was a very very thoughtful response and and um to the applicants credit so thank you and Commissioner O'Brien thank you I think we've got a consensus there all right I think we'll have um there's one matter though you Commissioner Skinner you want to get a little clarification um on in in the executive session that I think did you note that I did but I think okay then just um we'll go throughout at the end yeah okay excellent thank you so much and we'll move right on to responsible gaming um if everybody's okay and that's in section B Commissioner O'Brien did you want to start I did so um this section was not like the other sections for me in terms of there were a couple of things that jumped out at me one is that there was no mention at all of Game Sense I don't believe in terms of working with Game Sense um which is a huge part of the responsible gaming program that we have in the Commonwealth and so I I I feel like what's in here isn't sufficient for me to be honest with you I'd like that to be specifically addressed a little bit more clearly um and if I missed this second part please let me know but it looks unlike the other ones that I've looked at so far it didn't look like Caesars was adhering and adopting the responsible marketing code for sports wagering under the AGA that you have your own internal code that you have had for quite some time but there is a there's a marked difference in omission and that code compared to this that pertains to sports wagering promoting on colleges and universities etc so if you could please address that because to me that was that was a troubling part of this application uh sure Commissioner O'Brien I'll I'll begin to uh address your comments and all the lights of my colleagues to speak as well uh in respect to Game Sense our attention was to note that we are going to adhere to all regulatory requirements applicable to responsible gaming we have zero concerns with with adhering to the Game Sense requirements and integrating that into our program um that should have been more specifically stated I apologize for that error uh we can for a moment tell you we will um comply with that in all respects uh and would be happy to supplement our materials uh to further reflect that if that would benefit the the commission um secondly to your question about the various codes of conducts that apply to the industry um I might offer some initial comments and ask some of my colleagues to join me um you are correct within our applications we reference our adherence to Caesars marketing and advertising code that has been a hallmark tenant of our responsible gaming plan uh four years and that is one of the you know kind of driving philosophies of our company it is distinct from the American Gaming Association uh and its code of conduct um I would note that what we aspire to do within that code I believe is here's the spirit of the AGA which is to represent our industry uh very well to do so in a way that um does not advertise gaming in a way that we incent problematic behaviors um and so we can kind of walk through those various tenants in a little more detail if that would be beneficial to you um so that's for we operate under the MAC versus the AGA code of conduct uh though I believe with the MAC and our company's responsible gaming plan we have all of the constituent elements to drive a not just kind of routine but industry leading responsible gaming program uh in respect to your comments about uh sponsorship agreements with third parties I'm going to write my colleague Eric in to give some insight into kind of how we reached those agreements that were referenced in the New York Times article um and then I might also kind of add some additional context about the controls we place when we were looking at that agreement and how we operate those agreements currently um so Eric can you kind of get a little insight into how those agreements were reached in your perspective sure thanks thanks chef um when we you know I mentioned earlier in the day we rebranded the app uh you know it's the Caesar Sportsbook back in 2001 and as part of that process we recognized we needed to you know basically alert people to the fact that we have a sportsbook app out there and as part of that we did deals with a number of strong brands that we thought associating our brand with their brand would heighten that uh visibility you know and it spanned the media companies it spanned uh you know leagues uh athletes like the mannings that we had uh and and we were approached by a marketing company representing a number of universities and we evaluated those in the context of the goal of uh bringing our brand forward and presenting it to their alumni uh the universities we chose were michigan state and lsu uh they both have very large uh alumni networks hundreds of thousands to a million their sports fans really resonate with the school and we thought that it would be a good uh trial to see if those relationships with the university's alumni association would drive affiliation to our brand and uh signups on behalf of the universities we entered into the agreements um and put in clauses and statements to ensure that we were only uh focused on their alumni and 21 plus uh alumni to be specific um and we also reviewed the statistics of the stadiums um to ensure that a very high percentage of the attendees were over 21 and that the average age was significantly over uh the 21 and so in combination with what we referred to earlier where we don't sign up anybody who's under 21 we don't take their credit cards we don't send out marketing materials and this is this is for the United States uh we felt that that all in concert uh was an appropriate uh effort uh to sign up the universities and do sponsorships with them and so that's how we came to the uh decision that we made and i'd like to add a little more context and kushel brye i haven't answered any more questions you have we also applied additional controls relative to how those advertisements would be portrayed within the limited stadium and arena areas right so we wanted to ensure that all of those materials would be directed individuals over the age of 21 that they would only be included within the arenas and stadiums they're not included elsewhere within university um and that as we've talked about that all of our content is kind of of the highest standard is does not propagate any sort of uh material that might suggest um problematic behavior amongst our customers um so all of that was intended to provide some further control around how we manage that while so as Eric mentioned it's explicitly avoiding any sort of direct communication individuals who might be under the age of one individuals who might have uh a college um email address uh so we tried to very much distinguish any sort of uh direct marketing to only those in over the age of 21 and all of our indirect marketing in areas where the average age was well in excess of the legal age to so can i ask looking at the article looking at some of the photographs i think you know there's correct me if i'm wrong a picture of probably the 18 wheeler that you're talking about um sort of being in a tailgating area so we had an app we had an applicant and a licensee come in um not too long ago within days basically pointedly saying they rip off requests from universities to sort of get involved advertising even promote the use of their facility which is a very different approach obviously than what you as a as a company have taken so i'm troubled by that because when we look at the research and we look at who's the vulnerable population it goes up to you know 25 26 year olds even um who are very susceptible to addiction and to the negative consequences of gambling this is a new introduction across the country this is obviously going to be brand new to the commonwealth we have a number of you know college students university students particularly in the boston area um and the aga standards pointedly say don't advertise on college university campuses and you guys seem to have drawn a line in yours that putting it in a stadium is a distinction from putting it on a campus or university so you could explain that rationale to me and why you think that that comports with responsible gaming yeah uh happy to so the distinction that we made was to try and tailor any sort of advertisement or marketing material from seizure sports book areas where the average age would be well in excess of the legal age to wager so you know we looked at the demographics where these sorts of materials would be presented they were far north of 21 which north of the additional age 25 26 that you mentioned and additionally the goal was to reach out to alumni that would be well over the age of legal age to wager and you know associate that group with what we're offering the seizure sports book i appreciate that licensees can take you know multiple different approaches to wagering and not everyone would agree with this particular decision but we did design numerous controls to try and very clearly restrict any sort of direct marketing to individuals under the age of 21 avoid you know association with areas outside of the stadium and the arenas and present experience that is similar to what you might see at some of our affiliations with professional sports by making sure that all of the individuals in that area demographic standpoint would be in compliance with our code and also with the sort of demographics that the aga's code of conduct looks at so in that respect we took a number of efforts to distinguish what we were doing and again we did so on a very limited basis as the business was expanding i can't tell you we don't have any plans to pursue such a relationship within the commonwealth nor are we pursuing other relationships elsewhere these are you know limited scope that took place during 2021 and as we've refined how we you know promote our product how we engage with our customers this is not an active part of our plans moving forward eric anything you might want to add to that no i think you covered it well jeff you know we recognize that we have a lot of different constituents you know we're we're a a b to c customer and we need the customers to recognize that our brand stands for quality and it stands for all the different attributes that we put forward including responsible gaming and we have employees that we want to be able to make those statements to we have partners we have you as the regulators and we have the communities in which we operate so we take all that feedback and it's not missed into account and we evaluate as we move forward what actions we're going to take and so to jeff's point we we uh we have heard views from other people that were different than when we entered into these uh agreements so when you say that it's not current part of your plans are you saying that you were no longer going to have these affiliations or are you going to continue the affiliations or is that something you don't want to answer in this setting we need to go in another setting what i'd say is there's some aspects of the agreements that we'd like to discuss in the executive session but we are not pursuing any additional agreements elsewhere or specifically in massachusetts but maintaining the ones you already have so long as we can maintain them in a way that we think adheres to all of the principles the controls we put in place we do expect to do so and can i ask you specifically about the photograph at michigan state with the 18-wheeler whether you confirm for me it's it's in the embedded in the article oh yes yeah it looks like a it's like a tailgating area you you mentioned the front page i'm sorry no no um that that that was in fact an area then that was 21 and up in order to confirm that for me yeah in order to get into the truck uh area where we had games we had uh support staff those types of things you had to be 21 years old to enter the enter the area yes okay and it's visible from outside the area but you just can't get in until you're unless you're 21 is that right that's correct it is visible and then and again if you need to answer this in executive session let me know but your standard is about 70 percent it looks like in your materials being over the legal age the 73.6 percent is what the aga code is um i'd be interested to know exactly average age is one thing but i'm curious what the percentage is in terms of um where in the stadiums with the the ones that you have the relationships with yeah we happen to provide some additional information in the executive session i will say we believe that we the standard was met here in both instances but we can give you some additional context great thank you i have something else but if i don't know if anybody else has questions on that i have a follow-up on that one first to my form of teachers um michelle bryan led our game sense program and then asked a question are you related uh questions we still have to do our rg regulations uh i thought i may have read in your application in the rg section but i may be wrong i was trying to find that language but that um is it there for us to say that you will comply with all of our that you understand that you have an obligation to comply with our regulations and then in addition would you be willing to work with our our director of responsible gaming in his division to perhaps um i'm not going to say the aga um uh i'm going to say why not work with ours so the aga's are uh tenants are superb but we also are developed we have our own framework so you may go beyond what you've said in your application uh chair that's absolutely fair uh we will comply in entirety with all of public public regulations and we will work with all the stakeholders in massachusetts design the best responsible gaming program possibly can thank you okay um can i just make a statement and jeff i'm not trying to be fresh so please don't take it that way but i'm trying to understand how you could put something in a um college stadium where i would say and i've been in many of them majority of the people that go are 18 19 and 20 and yet today you're telling me there's data that shows otherwise i'm really trying to juggle in my mind how that's an accurate statement i mean we have as you know many college uh sports here in boston and i've been to many many of them and half a section is student sections they're 18 the 19 the 20 21 22 it's a it's a great question that was the first question we asked of the potential relationship was can you assure us what this demographic looks like within your status so that we're not just kind of skirting by this that all of these advertisements would very clearly meet our standards and would say as we think uh you know also we could block an a g code of conduct for instance uh and we did receive information uh from the partner validated by our ultimate partners at university that comported with our standards and we'll give you some additional context within executive session so that was the first thing one of the very first things we asked we want to make sure this was the right sort audience for our material and we were sure that it was and so as we look at these relationships now and moving forward obviously we're going to continue to evaluate that and if we think that what what you mentioned mr hill uh becomes the case that these are not being effectively directed at individuals over the age of 21 then we would reevaluate thank you can i also ask in those situations do you have responsible gaming messaging that goes with the advertising at those universities we do we have responsible gaming messaging in all of our advertisements so you know the stadium not just within these context billers dms have responsible gaming messaging on our advertisements as well and then do any of those and again if you need to talk about this in executive session that's fine but do any of those also entail giving mental health support or addiction support at those respective institutions uh with those resources would it be available if both institutions and in both states uh they're toll-free helplines where our uh not just our customers i mean specifically at the institutions where you have the marketing relationships those colleges in university of michigan and ls u we would we would direct those individuals to the statewide resource uh which is our practice everywhere to point them to those who have no no specific money that bolsters addiction services or anything at those institutions those educational institutions they're not currently specific teams at those institutions that provide that specific service risha maynard i'm gonna just put some food for thought out and it's really in response to commissioner nill's question it's not going to be what i'm saying is not going to be popular probably amongst my colleagues being from a very um a state that has no professional sports and i'm from kentucky uh the university of kentucky is the professional sports team there we call we call everyone that sits in the lower level is the gray hairs if you've ever been to rafferina right because there's literally no one even close except the student section to 21 or under in the entire rafferina and so when i think about east lansing when i think of baton rouge i feel very differently than than thinking about and and having the assurance that you're not um looking to expand into the commonwealth in the same way i think very differently i mean you know my grandfather with an eighth grade education is a rabid university kentucky fan he never set foot in university of kentucky right and so that's just you know it's a way of life it's a way and it's something that i view very differently because i am used to seeing college sports as being predominantly over 21 crowd depending on where you're going now i do have concerns about where you're where you're promoting um but i can see that you could reach a 21 plus crowd um pretty regularly uh at certain universities you've been a follow-up did i see and you know christian hill you you raised a really good question because that went through my mind too but when i read the application i had to think about it that when you were doing your research you said now i think you picked 70 percent not 85 percent but at least the 70 percent were 21 and older in wherever you are advertising did i read that correctly i know yeah a ga is 73.6 but i believe cesars is 70 right but i but is that there i've seen you know for for investors which i've seen 85 percent also being proposed this thing maybe it's in our white paper but at least you were picking 70 percent correct that's correct and we would apply that to all of our you know branding and promotion deals right so in massachusetts that you know we we haven't adopted a percentage standard um and that's something for us to think about but it did make me think that at these at these particular two universities you have what mr. maynard points to it's much more of a professional sport um audience than what we might see at some of our local schools and and new england universities um and and colleges uh which would probably lean to a lower a lower average age um why those you know i i i understand what commissioner maynard is saying with that said um outside of the venue i think uh commissioner ryan and past meetings you we've raised concerns about what's happening on the campus itself um and then just in terms of your marketing generally um and i i may have missed it too but i i thought i saw some commitment to ensure that you're not promoting any kind of excessive gambling irresponsible gambling that i don't want to put word to him out and if you have that language i'd love to see it no that's right so one of the tenants of our marketing and advertising code is that um our advertising is not depict encourage or condone excessive or responsible activities we never imply that gambling is a right of passage for young adults nor the gambling is an acceptable means of satisfying other family work or life commitments um so could you just point to that in this section um jack so that i can satisfy my my failure to note that more precisely um where was it is it in your plan it's uh it's in our marketing advertising code and i'll find where we've included that within the application um and i certainly read it so which is also probably available on our website and i'll send you i'll send you that material here shortly maybe i read it in the the attachments it was in the along attachments and so in that yeah that would like me and we we covered in slide 19 earlier today as well maybe that's also where i said thank you okay and go on um yeah so i can sort of say i think the the proof is in the pudding as you look at our material right how we use our brand we focus on fun we focus on customer engagement and rewards uh we don't have advertising that suggests that things are risky or that um you know customers should engage in behavior uh as an escape uh what we're doing is providing entertainment experience and we want all of our customers to be here for the right reasons to have fun and hope as you look at you know our caesar and our cleopatra you'll see that same sense of fun my colleagues probably have some better ways to describe it because my description of marketing is from a very lawyerly perspective so i'll eric again if you want to add to that um i think that's just that's embedded in all of our promotional materials and the way that we operate i think you said it well jeff and i think if you look at our advertising creative our tv commercials over the last year it really really has been focused more on the narrative of what caesar stands for uh around the customer and around the hospitality aspect of of our brand um we obviously do promotions and um you know we will highlight those from in our in our marketing from time to time in order uh to gain customers and and retain customers but the primary creative uh elements that that we've really invested behind is is the overarching storyline of what caesar stands for and they all include the responsible gaming uh elements that are required and that are in our guidelines thank you other questions on this section yeah i do i have a comment and a request um your answer and it was referenced in the suitability discussion in e3f 01 where we asked you to list fines violations citations etc and a couple times throughout the application and in your suitability you put what i i think i can nicely say is a rather cheeky response which is you know hey when you do business this is going to happen etc additional information available upon request which you know the request was in the application and you've been in business a long time and so i realize you may have a lot that are de minimis um but you didn't even attempt to put in something saying within the last x years or you know where a fine was greater than a certain amount of money and so to me that answer is not sufficient and i want more information i want a substantive response to this to be able to really gauge suitability and responsible gaming it was in e3f 01 which is the um responsible gaming section i i believe that same paragraph appears again elsewhere in the application and i'm trying to find it e3f 01 isn't in our section but i know i read it in the scrolling version last night we have now the section by section because it's hard to do the scrolling um version so it's yeah it's i mean it's in the responsible gaming section specifically when you're asked to list out like i said the fine citations that sort of thing um i'm not seeing it in front of me now e3f one it's not e3f one it's definitely one of them yeah i'm not i didn't make my original i don't know commissioner skinner you know the same way but now i have to go to a different version but i definitely read that in the scrolling version last night i think i went through um that right e3f okay and that one let's see how the one where it's the same response was given because maybe it's referenced i know in the suitability report but i and i remember when i read through this the very very first time i was a little taken aback by it in the moment and then i saw it a second time i didn't write down the first reference which was i think earlier in the application the one that jumped out at me most notably was the one in the one in e3f one e3f one it's so funny e3f one i know it's so funny it's not in my it must have been added after it got loaded onto my because i'm using my desktop so that's funny um and now i'm looking at the suitability report to see where that response is uh commissioner ron i can speak to that uh just certainly we do not intend to apply anything cheeky in that response uh i believe a separate exhibit uh implied a fine threshold i think it was a $50,000 to specifically enumerate those fines uh which we did within that exhibit and i think in that section we also know that additional information could be provided on request uh with the intention of noting if there were matters below $50,000 that you want to supplement that we would be happy to do so um we we can and will provide a comprehensive fine schedule of all matters so including those under $50,000 um so on the you know behalf of of us as an applicant uh there was certainly no intentionality there about um skirting the request or not being responsive we hope that we satisfied it by addressing the specific threshold it's clear that we did not do so in this context and that will be very quickly resolved if you could direct me to that because i'm not seeing a threshold limit in the application so if there's another threshold that was put out there maybe in the suitability context if you could point me to that if you could point me to the BED uh i was thinking of the BED versus the application which did not set a threshold right we were brought with the application right um uh madam chair if you're in the scrolling version it's page 590 of 722 is it yeah i'm not in the scrolling version now so but could you could you read the the section to me commissioner mater and and the response please sure list any fines violations citations and or corrective actions required by the applicant in response to insufficient or proper policies procedures operations advertising marketing and any and or my eyes are strained any other business related to sports wagering or other gambling enterprises and the answer was um the applicant and its operating affiliates and subsidiaries from time to time received various warnings fine citations and other types of disciplinary actions related to various aspects of its business these matters are of a routine nature and are often resolved through the administrative process of the regulatory agency that issues the warning fine citation or disciplinary action additional information is available upon request so i believe commissioner o'brien's um characterization so yeah yeah and that's the same language that appears in the suitability section yeah g3 f i said g earlier Todd so i hope you found i hope you realize that by now but maybe that's where i was remembering it um mr. Hendricks if if you were to come um go back to your records would there be would you be able to do a compilation of all of those um matters absolutely i am i'm going to call on gli um i don't know gli if you have experience with operators and Joe you may not be missing but if they have experience with operators to know um what is standard out the language that mr. Hendricks referred because um this is a new industry to us and so it will be helpful to have context to um for that response um and in what we may see um i'm i'm i'm not sure if the fresh i'm not sure how that was response was made other applications so under under 50 000 there's a reason why i guess it's under 50 000 i actually share i heard from uh carah and there's i stand corrected there is no uh threshold amount in the penalty portion of the BED there is a threshold amount in the litigation piece which got me confused but no threshold amount in the uh discipline portion excuse me madam chair was there a specific question for on the tech side i'm i thought mr. Hendricks was leaning in Joe um the the response that was given with respect to an inquiry around um again i don't have the language in front of me but the assessments and fines and it was generally answered um Jeff if you want to give that i think um for some context i wondered if you could be helpful you may not be able to be helpful it's not in your realm i was thinking maybe Kevin might share we're looking for the threshold right now um so just kind of looking through the application uh on the side as well um i guess i go back to the initial concern which to note that hear you uh appreciate that we didn't provide a false response here and that's going to be remedy post-taste okay and you should probably label it for both the e and the g could you say it again please when they do submit uh and supplement they should reference the e and the g numbers because it's asked in both places and i believe the the threshold that we were referring to is in item 28 b of the b e d um so that that was the reference that uh i used earlier um again it properly or not understand that we need to supplement these materials we do have a a full fine schedule that we provide very quickly all of which were resolved promptly uh and fines were paid promptly so um but we we apologize for the for that there's no no intentionality behind it to be dismissive of your concerns uh we're just trying to kind of respond to it uh separately noted threshold and we did not do so properly so i you know we will get that resolved for you very quickly okay i could probably speak briefly like more generally um uh without even in regards to the actual uh application here that uh since the commission is new to sports betting and the technology uh if there was ever an issue post launch that came forward uh that issue could enter granted everything i say is in um up to the decision of the commission and very likely will uh if there was an issue that came forward uh to have an investigation and on the technical and the forensic side uh which g li i don't want to say does all the time because this doesn't happen all the time but uh we have a planning experience in that in that area to uh issue a technical report to if anything were to uh go um not according to plan so i don't know if that adds light to that situation in on a more general sense i don't want to speak specifically to any type of uh um situation so i i'm assuming some of these could be technical in nature and could be outside the technology jeff i'm sure yes no that's joe um jeff mr hendrickson that's correct i mean there oh across the scope of the enterprise there have been instances where there's even out operational control a technical matter or a procedure that was not followed that resulted in the fine um so we we can and we'll build that schedule very quickly or just you know and maybe you can answer can't don't want to answer this here and maybe it's an answer for second session but would you be able to say whether any had to do with um violations of states expectations regarding response for any other jurisdictions expectations are very good for you um uh i want to confirm against the schedule i mean i don't want to give you bad information off the cup but i will confirm for you that's fine i don't want to put you on the spot either okay all right so um in terms of this section um this is section forgive me um section p there are outstanding questions around the response for gaming and and issues around reporting on fines and includes suitability the suitability section and g section g and we um is it fair to say that we've asked um the applicant for additional information okay and we have that ability to do so under our regulatory statement over um earlier today uh health service okay so commissioners and um i want to see do we have a consensus then that at this point we need more information and it does not be me expect patience that what i'm sensing i think that's an accurate statement yes okay skitter thank you um kricia mayard you're you feel the same need additional information okay then now we'll move on to um section f where we are looking at the g-offencing the kyc and um issues around monitoring and other issues do we have questions for for the applicant i can say that many of my questions were addressed through the presentation today it's very helpful for me to see that uh to hear you you address those in the presentation michelle bryan um just a question that i probably should have asked earlier on in terms of the um the system but the helpline that you have i wanted to i was wondering where it was located and also what the language capacity is on that do you have you know english spanish vander and like what's the realm of languages if someone called a live person the uh so the call center we have is predominantly located in las vegas we have uh about 30 operators in new jersey um and we do have just through the nature of the employee base uh they do speak other languages but at this time we only offer english on the ivr and other um and other approaches we have considered going with some spanish as well um and it's a very valid point uh that you're raising but right now it's english other questions on the technology as i said the um the presentation was very helpful i do think that one note i i i noted that you stress the the um limit setting and i do think that probably our director of um responsible gaming would have different um nuances on on on the setting and and so that's why i i asked earlier would you be willing to work with our responsible gaming uh division i think you might even use the term problem gambling more where there's been a shift from that language i'm wrong correct me but i do think there's opportunity for growth in that area with that said um what for the the piece that we just discussed i i did feel your responsible gaming section was was quite responsive we we didn't ask that you adopt um a particular set of tenants and i thought that your approach was wholesome but i do think that the um the issue that we just addressed still needs to be addressed but um with respect to the technology um i would just say there's probably some room for um additional nuanced language around the rg piece looking forward on on that piece of the technology evolving any other comments or questions richard do you feel that they have met the responsibility expectations under section count yes yes okay i agree all right then we'll move on to g questions on g nothing the only thing i would say beyond what's already been said um and what they're going to supplement with is ideally we would get um the oversight in our part that didn't exclude the one entity qualifier ideally when we get the supplemental we can also get from ieb um that entity qualifier okay any other any other questions about the suitability as well as the compliance issues i'm just looking at my notes anybody else need time to look at their notes again i'm i'm looking also on the financial stability piece and then i think we're going to address that in the executive session i know it's it's quite late but i'm hoping everybody can hang right in there for the executive session could we choose to go into it so some of the questions on finance would be addressed there too so pending that um are we comfortable with section g i feel like we need the supplemental sure i do anyway right so um with that piece being taken care of and then with the finance piece being addressed in executive session right now so we're saying it does not need expectations because of those i think it needs to be supplemented both of the the section we didn't put in and then what we've asked them to add right but otherwise it met expectations i'm not going to say until i see the the supplemental information madam chair no i guess is there anything else then is there anything else maybe i should bring nothing else missing from my perspective now yeah those are the only outstanding items for me thank you commissioner same all right commissioner hill there there goes a cat's tail yeah all right now i have dueling cats today all right with um that said commissioners um i'm going to recommend that we take a a short break but we should probably consider first whether we can go into executive session um before we move into our virtual room so council grossman help us out here well i think the the challenge here is going to be to identify all of the issues that the commission is has identified to discuss an executive session i have a running list that i'd be happy to go through just to make sure i have these things right so that we can identify which provision of the law allows the commission to go into session um so if i may um there are there were the issues from the 2013 um suitability report that were initially discussed i know we took a pause on that is that still i think we resolved it because it had been released okay so cross that one off the list the next one were the four essentially action items out of the state of nevada involving the duplication issues of the identification the timely identification of those issues the customer service matter and the failure to uh notify the commission of the suspected theft at the retail location are those i think the nevada and virginia were taken care of commissioners and then both also those are also okay outstanding so um okay on a high level those involve um which dates again uh washington dc and um it's a tribal gaming uh yes so those two and and they involve what i understand it would be a matter that pending so put it into a competitive disadvantage should you disclose that is that the issue but i think shared the the manner in which we remediated those matters i believe would fall into a uh competitive trade secret category so we were able to explain that and why we blew that through the case and then should you disagree we'd be happy to discuss it publicly okay can i press one with that work sure so those are okay so those are we're on page nine here of the ieb report uh those are the two matters identified um at the top that's items two and three so if i i just want to make sure we're talking about the same thing so it's the offense date of may third 2022 and uh october 25th 2021 there's no information as to what that was about so it's hard to say i guess we just have to at this juncture take mr hendrick's word