I really don’t understand how these markets survive a competent DOJ considering the rate they’re having to ban people for “insider trading”. Fully appreciate the Unions position here.
> Kalshi handed him equity worth roughly $300,000 when he joined as a strategic adviser in early 2025. ... Kalshi granted him the stake when the company was valued at under $2 billion — less than a tenth of its $22 billion valuation in a funding round last month ...
Um, how does a $300K stake at an "under $2 billion" valuation become "worth billions" with a 10-50x valuation increase?
(Disclaimer: I'm not defending the Trump family in any way, the administration has been absurdly and blatantly corrupt.)
The question answers itself.
Also -- hedging is generally not done based on material non-public information, but rather to guard against known risks. Joe the farmer sells a bunch of wheat futures when he plants his wheat, not because he thinks the price will go down, but rather because if it does he goes bankrupt and he'd prefer to accept a known rate-of-return now.
[0] https://blogs.law.ox.ac.uk/oblb/blog-post/2024/01/insider-de...
But it’s more accurate to say participants can trade on lawfully obtained material nonpublic information absent some independent duty not to use it, which is much narrower than saying insider trading is generally legal.
If you make a hedging trade while having material knowledge that you withhold from the counterparty… well, that sounds like it could be edging towards fraud. Like taking out life insurance while hiding a medical condition.
But sure, it’s not against the law to do business with a sucker, so there’s degrees here.
Sam Rogers: And you're selling something that you know has no value.
John Tuld: We are selling to willing buyers at the current fair market price.
Not that this excuses some of the absurd stuff that goes on on the online betting platforms...
Answered your own question.