Business
Commentary: Betting on war? Why prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket are a problem
Who hasn’t had the experience of hearing some know-nothing proudly display his ignorance — whether in a bar, on a crowded plane or on Joe Rogan’s podcast?
Increasingly, thanks to the explosive growth of prediction markets such as Kalshi and Polymarket, every misinformed or malinformed blowhard has an arena to capitalize on his or her pontifications by placing bets on whether they will come true.
So do well-informed experts and, more troubling, insiders with the ability to manipulate the betting markets that are proliferating so rapidly.
Kalshi is replacing debate, subjectivity, and talk with markets, accuracy, and truth.
— Kalshi CEO Tarek Mansour, claiming that his marketplace has a window on the wisdom of crowds
Many people object to users’ ability to bet on death and destruction — such as the assassination of foreign leaders or the outbreak of war. The Biden administration was preparing regulations forbidding such wagering, but its initiative was canceled by the Trump administration.
The prediction market’s critics raise two more concrete concerns about its growth: It’s vulnerable to manipulation by anonymous insiders, and it risks exacerbating problem gambling, especially among young men who are among the targets of the companies’ promotional pitches.
Before diving deeper into these and other consequences of the explosion in event betting, a few words about how these markets work.
Put simply, they pose questions that can be reduced to simple choices of “yes” or “no”; the choices made by users are updated in real time.
Among the bets currently designated “trending” on the Kalshi website, for instance, is the identity of the next Democratic presidential nominee.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom leads the pack with 27% of bettors wagering that he’ll get the nomination; their counterparties are betting that it will be someone else. Newsom bettors put up 27 cents per dollar of their wager — $2.70 for a $10 bet; naysayers put up 74 cents. If Newsom wins the nomination, his bettors will collect the full dollar. If he doesn’t, they lose their stake.
These markets have taken the world by storm, with Kalshi and Polymarket combined accounting for more than 80% of the action. Both firms are privately controlled, but their valuations among venture investors are robust.
In December, Kalshi raised $1 billion from a clutch of venture investing firms on terms that valued it at $11 billion. More recently, both platforms have been seeking investments at valuations approaching $20 billion each.
That may not be an implausible goal. Prediction markets are estimated to be collecting some $13 billion a month in bets, and one research firm recently predicted that the sector could reach a trading volume of $1 trillion by the end of this decade.
News and sports-betting firms have lined up for a piece of the action. In December, Kalshi signed a deal with CNN giving the cable news channel access to its betting data and providing for a “Kalshi-powered real time news ticker” that will run on the CNN screen Kalshi also reached a deal to become the National Hockey League’s “official prediction market partner.”
Dow Jones, the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, made Polymarket its official prediction market partner in January, ostensibly to provide readers “real-time insight into collective beliefs about future events,” as Dow Jones Chief Executive Almar Latour stated in announcing the deal. In October, Polymarket received a $2-billion investment from Intercontinental Exchange, the parent of the New York Stock Exchange and other trading floors.
The sports betting firms DraftKings, FanDuel and Fanatics have also announced plans to add prediction markets to their offerings.
Any juggernaut like this is bound to attract a backlash. In this case, it has come from states that have legalized sports betting, such as Nevada, and are worried that the prediction markets could cannibalize their legal offerings and evade their gambling regulations. Indeed, most of the betting on the prediction sites is sports-related.
The prediction firms have found a friend in the federal government, specifically the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. During the Biden administration, the CFTC sued Polymarket for illegally offering prediction trades. Polymarket paid a $1.4-million penalty and agreed to subject itself to CFTC oversight.
Trading on Polymarket is still illegal in the U.S., but users have been accessing the platform via virtual private networks that obscure their location. Polymarket is working on acquiring a U.S. license from the CFTC. Kalshi is operating legally under CFTC regulations.
Last year, the Trump administration dropped CFTC investigations of the prediction business. The agency’s Trump-appointed chairman, Michael S. Selig, has been outspoken about fighting back against the states. “The CFTC will no longer sit idly by,” he wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed last month, “while overzealous state governments undermine the agency’s exclusive jurisdiction over these markets by seeking to establish statewide prohibitions on these exciting products.”
As it happens, Donald Trump Jr. has taken advisory positions with both Kalshi and Polymarket and invested in the latter.
Neither firm responded to my questions about the demographics of their customer base, the problem of insider trading, or my request for them to validate their claims of accuracy. The White House responded to my questions about whether Trump Jr.’s involvement with the firms raised ethical issues by stating that “the only special interest guiding the Trump Administration’s decision-making is the best interest of the American people.” White House spokesman Davis Ingle also told me by email that ethics rules “prohibit use of non-public government information for personal gain.”
That brings us to the prediction firms’ chief argument on their own behalf. They assert that their markets are better than traditional opinion polls at discovering what people really think — that in effect they are monetizing “the wisdom of crowds.”
Polymarket is “the most accurate thing we have as mankind right now, until someone else creates some sort of a super crystal ball,” Shayne Coplan, who founded the platform in 2020 after dropping out of New York University, told “60 minutes” in November.
“Kalshi is replacing debate, subjectivity, and talk with markets, accuracy, and truth,” its chief executive, Tarek Mansour, who founded the platform in 2018 with a fellow MIT graduate, said at the time of its $1-billion funding round.
The wisdom-of-crowds argument presupposes that the masses possess some recondite knowledge that can be unlocked by allowing individuals to express themselves as part of an anonymous mob. Kalshi’s management dresses this argument up as “democratizing finance through innovation. … Imagine transforming your insights and predictions about the future into tangible assets. That’s the reality we’re offering.”
The idea that everyone’s opinion about anything is an asset just waiting to be exploited suggests that we’re no longer talking about the wisdom of crowds, but the wisdom of you, the individual bettor.
The markets’ record suggests that claims of accuracy are oversold. Just after the close of the voting last week in the Texas GOP Senate primary, for example, Polymarket declared Texas Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton the clear winner, based on an 83% vote on its platform. When the real votes were counted, however, Paxton was so close to incumbent Sen. John Cornyn — 42% to 41% in favor of the latter — that the two were forced into a May 26 runoff election.
It’s true that traditional opinion polls have lost some accuracy, in part because the advent of mobile phones has made it hard for them to reach respondents by phone at home. But the key question raised by the wisdom-of-crowds argument of the prediction firms is: Who is the crowd? Some of the prediction questions offered by the sites are so thinly traded that they’re vulnerable to manipulation.
One example arose during the third-quarter earnings investor call for cryptocurrency firm Coinbase on Oct. 30. CEO Brian Armstrong closed the call by reading out a series of terms — “bitcoin, ethereum, blockchain, staking and web3.” He had learned, he said, that all those terms were cited in “mention” markets on Kalshi and Polymarket — markets in which bettors can wager on whether a speaker at a given event will utter certain words. Armstrong’s remark made winners of anyone who bet that he would use those words.
Coinbase told me by email that Armstrong wasn’t trying to resolve those bets, but spoke in “a lighthearted, offhand way,” and that Coinbase prohibits “employees, including executives, from participating in prediction markets” that are related to “confidential activity involving the company.”
Perhaps more troubling is a series of anonymous bets related to the U.S. government’s foreign policy initiatives — such as bets on Polymarket that Venezuela President Nicolás Maduro would soon be out of office, placed in January just before the U.S. captured Maduro, netting the bettor a profit estimated at $400,000.
Another anonymous user trading on Polymarket as “Magamyman” netted a profit of more than $630,000 with a series of fortuitously timed bets forecasting the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran, including a $123,300 profit on a bet that Ayatollah Khamenei would be “out” as Iran’s leader by March 30. Khamenei was killed in the first wave of attacks on Feb. 28.
Kalshi, for its part, has penalized two users a total of about $6,000, including a onetime GOP candidate for California governor, for allegedly manipulating its markets. Kalshi says it opened 200 investigations of possible market manipulation over the last year. Yet it’s unclear whether insider trading in the prediction market is actually illegal, as is insider trading in the securities markets.
Put it all together, and the question remains whether the growth of the prediction market is a healthy development for sports, politics, society or the bettors themselves — especially as their betting patterns get treated as “news” with an unvalidated claim to accuracy. But you might be able to turn a profit by wagering that the prospect is dismal.
Business
Spirit Airlines’ Demise Could Help Other Airlines
Spirit Airlines was once a potent force in the U.S. aviation industry. Its demise will reveal how strong that influence had been in recent years when air travel had already begun moving away from the low-fare model that Spirit pioneered.
The airline’s shutdown on Saturday after years of financial troubles resulted in the loss of 17,000 part-time and full-time jobs, and disrupted the plans of tens of thousands of travelers. But aviation experts say it is not entirely clear whether Spirit’s absence will have a significant, long-term impact on the industry, travelers or the U.S. economy.
Airlines will probably have an easier time raising fares and many will absorb Spirit’s gates, check-in counters and other assets at airports in the New York area, Las Vegas, Ft. Lauderdale and elsewhere. But the effect may not be huge, aviation experts said, because Spirit had shrunk a lot recently and was in its second bankruptcy in two years.
“By the time the plug was pulled, Spirit was no longer a major player,” said Michael Boyd, an aviation consultant with the Boyd Group International. “Half the fleet was parked and sold off.”
In May 2024, the airline operated 3.4 percent of all domestic flights, according to Cirium, an aviation data firm. It filed for bankruptcy later that year and again in 2025. Before it shut down, Spirit’s schedule for May would have amounted to just 1.1 percent of domestic flights.
The airline’s diminished business was a major reason many analysts and economists were befuddled by the Trump administration’s efforts to save Spirit, which ultimately went nowhere because the government and the airline’s creditors could not reach a deal.
Most airlines are temporarily offering discounted fares to Spirit’s customers. But many experts believe the company’s absence will result in somewhat higher fares over time, though how much prices will rise is hard to predict.
Spirit’s presence at an airport helped keep fares down, a phenomenon that was studied by economists and earned the name the “Spirit effect.” Even in its reduced state, the company played an important role in forcing other airlines to keep fares low, some experts said.
“It’s at the low-fare end of the spectrum where the market price is established,” said Robert Mann, an aviation industry consultant and a former airline executive. “And it’ll make it easier for everyone else to raise prices at that level.”
But some aviation experts said the consequence may be overstated. Other airlines have spare seats and can absorb many of the customers Spirit catered to. And many people who flew on Spirit tended to travel only when they found very low fares, so they may simply choose not to fly as often now.
Fares would most likely have risen with or without Spirit, some analysts said. Airlines started raising prices in March to make up for the higher fuel costs caused by the Iran war and many have warned further increases are coming.
“It is the industry that is the big winner as unprofitable domestic capacity is further reduced,” William Swelbar, an aviation consultant and economist, wrote in an email. “Fares have to increase or we will lose more airlines to bankruptcy/consolidation.”
Spirit’s slow decline in recent years had broadly helped other airlines, most notably larger carriers like American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Southwest Airlines and United Airlines. The cities where Spirit flew most included Atlanta, Los Angeles, Detroit, Dallas, Houston, Newark and Miami.Those urban areas are home to important airports for those large airlines.
Those carriers had already found an effective way to compete against Spirit: “basic economy fares.” In the 2010s, American, Delta and United introduced these fares, which were cheaper than standard economy tickets but did not include things like the ability to pick a seat or bring multiple bags on the plane. In recent years, use of these fares has grown a lot, reducing demand for tickets from low-fare carriers like Spirit.
Some smaller airlines also stand to gain by Spirit’s absence, notably JetBlue Airways. JetBlue had already been expanding at Spirit’s home base, Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, just north of Miami.
JetBlue said last month that it had added nonstop flights to 21 cities from Fort Lauderdale over the past year, which it views as its third big hub airport after Kennedy International in New York and Boston Logan International. On Saturday, after Spirit shut down, JetBlue said it would add flights from Ft. Lauderdale to 11 more destinations.
“It is full steam ahead in Fort Lauderdale,” Joanna Geraghty, JetBlue’s chief executive, said on a call with investors and analysts last month.
Spirit’s collapse may have a disproportionate effect on some smaller, regional airports. For example, it was the only airline flying to Arnold Palmer Regional Airport in Latrobe, Pa., which is a little more than an hour’s drive from Pittsburgh International Airport.
Spirit also accounted for nearly all flights to Atlantic City International Airport in New Jersey. But other growing budget carriers, such as Allegiant Air and Breeze Airways, which both recently started flying to Atlantic City, may well replace some of the flights smaller airports lost with Spirit’s shutdown.
Frontier Airlines, perhaps Spirit’s biggest competitor in the low-fare segment of the industry, stands to benefit, too. But it is facing many of the same challenges as Spirit did.
“The data suggests that Frontier will win because of its route overlap with Spirit,” Mr. Swelbar said. “But that overlap is also filled with basic economy seats.”
Spirit may help other airlines in another way. Its demise has suddenly made thousands of experienced airline workers available, including more than 2,000 pilots and hundreds of mechanics. United Airlines this weekend began an effort to recruit Spirit employees, saying it would pay special attention to their applications. Demand for pilots, mechanics and other professionals has been high for years.
But Spirit’s assets — planes, airport gates and other real estate, including at LaGuardia Airport in New York — won’t become available immediately. Many of those assets were used as collateral for Spirit’s loans, meaning they will be distributed through bankruptcy court proceedings, which could take some time.
“It’s not going to happen by Monday,” Mr. Mann said, “or next month, or probably for several months.”
Business
Consumers sue to block Paramount-Warner Bros. deal
A group of five consumers have filed a lawsuit against Paramount Skydance seeking to block its acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery and unwind the earlier merger that joined the storied Melrose Avenue studio with David Ellison’s Skydance Media, alleging that both deals reduce marketplace competition.
The lawsuit, filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California, alleges the Paramount-Warner deal will lead to increased prices, fewer consumer choices and reduce production of film and TV since a major rival in the entertainment business will be eliminated.
The suit also alleges that the Paramount-Skydance merger, which was finalized last year, led to higher prices for the Paramount+ streaming service.
The plaintiffs — Pamela Faust, Len Marazzo, Lisa McCarthy, Deborah Rubinsohn and Gary Talewsky — are either Paramount+ subscribers, pay for cable bundles that include Paramount-owned TV channels or are moviegoers who watch films in theaters.
The deal activity for Paramount is part of a growing list of recent media mergers, including Walt Disney Co.’s 2019 acquisition of much of 21st Century Fox and Amazon’s purchase of MGM in 2021.
“These acquisitions show an industry moving by successive combinations toward fewer independent rivals, exactly the consolidation backdrop that heightens the competitive threat posed by the next merger, even if the combined firm remains smaller than the largest platforms,” the lawsuit states.
Paramount is aware of the lawsuit and “confident that it is without merit,” a company spokesperson said.
“The combination of Paramount and [Warner Bros. Discovery] will create a stronger competitor that is well positioned to serve as a champion for creative talent and consumer choice,” the spokesperson said in a statement.
The Paramount-Warner deal is currently winding its way through regulatory approvals. While that process is underway, Paramount has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to exceed a cap on foreign ownership for U.S. media companies.
Paramount expects to receive $24 billion in funds from three Middle Eastern royal families, who will become part owners of the combined company. Those total funds will represent about 49% of equity in that new company, exceeding the current foreign ownership cap of 25%.
Paramount has said the Ellison family and RedBird Capital Partners “collectively hold the largest equity stake in the combined company and continue to be the sole owners of Class A Common Stock, representing 100% of the voting shares.”
But on Friday, Rep. Sam Liccardo (D- San Jose) urged the FCC to deny Paramount’s petition on the foreign ownership aspect of the deal.
“Congress did not entrust the public airwaves to this agency so that it could auction off America to Riyadh, Abu Dhabi and Doha,” he wrote in a statement. “This will not stand.”
Business
5 Money Lessons From People Caring for Their Elderly Parents
Shortly after Sarah Coomber moved her parents into a retirement community and started sorting through her childhood home, she discovered the mold.
Seeing those telltale spots was only the beginning of an enormous undertaking that involved hiring contractors to remove sections of walls and flooring and clean the entire house. When Ms. Coomber, who is 56, described the ordeal to a colleague, he reassured her that she was not alone.
“Now I see so many people are going through this, and they always have been,” she said.
Last year, about 11,400 Americans, on average, turned 65 on any given day. That wave of aging is continuing this year, too. Families, particularly those headed by members of Generation X, are confronting what older relatives may need and from whom — whether loved ones or professionals. It is the part of retirement no one wants to consider, yet for many it will touch every facet of life, like finances and health care, and the most fundamental questions of where and how to live.
Retirement in very advanced age is a possibility that longevity experts say could become a reality for more Americans than most people realize. Surya Kolluri, who leads the TIAA Institute, the research arm of the retirement plan provider, warns that many Americans underestimate how long they could live.
In a 2025 survey by the institute, only 33 percent of respondents answered correctly when asked how long a 65-year-old typically lived. The answer: For a woman, the average is 87 years and for a man, 84.
Despite recent reports of a decline in average life expectancy, the chance that someone who is 65 reaches 90 can’t be overlooked: It’s 40 percent for women and 30 percent for men, Mr. Kolluri said.
“We are racing toward 100-year lives,” he said.
When The New York Times asked readers about their own experiences, dozens of stories came flowing in: a relocation that revealed a painful illness, a son’s need to sell his house, spouses arriving at a tough realization. Here is what some of them shared.
You may have to help pay their bills.
When Paul Stanley’s mother was diagnosed with cancer, he and his sister initially took turns checking in. But with a demanding career as a software engineer and his mother’s increasing health care needs, Mr. Stanley knew she needed more care than they could give. At first, he and his sister relied on in-home aides, but it became expensive — about $10,000 a month — and insufficient after their mother had a hip replacement and needed round-the-clock care. So with their mother, now 83, they found an assisted-living community near her home in Florida.
“Putting a parent in an assisted-living facility is one of those things that you usually see in a movie and the person hates it and it’s terrible,” said Mr. Stanley, 41, of Berkeley, Calif. “But my mom knew that she needed the help, and she had struggled for long enough that she appreciated it.”
Understanding their mother’s limited resources, Mr. Stanley and his sister, who lives in Atlanta, each contribute $1,900 a month to help her cover her bills. Mr. Stanley and his partner even sold their home and became renters to free up money and time.
“We’re fortunate that we can generally afford my mom’s care,” he said. “But it competes with kids’ college funds, retirement and homeownership.”
Your mother’s dream could be your burden.
When Jenn Adrien’s parents uprooted themselves in their 60s from their Tacoma, Wash., community and moved to what they called their dream home 2,000 miles away in rural Illinois, “it was a big shock,” she said. Most of their family lived in the Tacoma area.
Her mother “didn’t consult any of us,” Ms. Adrien, 51, added. “She just did it.”
Although Ms. Adrien, who still lives in Tacoma, and her brother visited, they missed what she now suspects were some early signs that their parents were struggling. It wasn’t until their new neighbors called that she learned her parents needed help or were in a hospital. Her mother had several operations, and her father, who had kidney failure from diabetes, was in and out of the hospital.
“It had been my mom’s dream to live in a nice house and have lots of land,” Ms. Adrien said. But there were downsides — long drives to doctors, for one. “It was really neat to see my parents flourish in their retirement, but then the reality seeped in of what it’s like to care for a 4,000-square-foot home for two people and what it is like to live in a rural area.”
Your career may suffer.
At the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, Ms. Coomber and her husband hatched a plan to move from Washington State to Moorhead, Minn., to be closer to her family and, she hoped, get help with their son, who has special needs. She recalled asking herself, “Why are we so far apart?”
Ms. Coomber’s parents were getting older, and she had noticed her mother was forgetful sometimes when they talked on the phone. Soon after moving, however, Ms. Coomber became concerned when she saw her mother losing interest in what had been lifelong pleasures in gardening, cooking and seeing friends.
“For me, it was a little bit of a selfish move, that I was coming back to get help,” she said. “But once we got here, we really started to see my mom’s dementia was worse than I realized.”
In 2022, her parents agreed to some in-home care, but it was inconsistent, and Ms. Coomber urged them to consider moving to a retirement community. Not long after the move in March 2023, Ms. Coomber’s mother’s health declined. She advanced to hospice care and eventually died. A month later, her father had a stroke.
For Ms. Coomber, helping her parents so much cut into her work as a writer and took over entirely. On top of health concerns, she had to sort through what she calls their “very full home” of more than 30 years.
“I have felt many times my life is on hold, my career is on hold,” she said. She writes as a freelancer now, including a Substack column called Sandwich Season, which focuses on her experience assisting two generations. “And yet here I am writing about it,” she added. “Maybe I end up helping other people.”
You need a support network.
In 2020, Ram Rajagopal and his wife, Nidhi Gupta, faced a challenge: Mr. Rajagopal’s mother moved in with them and their two young children in Upper Saddle River, N.J. Mr. Rajagopal, a management consultant in the technology industry, and Mrs. Gupta, a physical therapist, felt the stress mounting. They all seemed to be waking one another up in the middle of the night.
“It’s difficult for your partner to love your parent the way you do,” Mr. Rajagopal said of those days together. “And they’re seeing your parent at their most weakened state — difficult, cantankerous and needy.”
But that experience caring for his mother, who died in 2022, is now helping Mrs. Gupta and her parents, who increasingly need assistance. They are still active, but Mrs. Gupta’s father had extensive surgery last summer and a tough recovery.
“I say to Ram now, some of the stuff that I didn’t quite understand when his mom was going through it, now I see,” she said. “He’s able to help me probably better than I was able to help him now that I’m having that experience.”
Mr. Rajagopal and his former classmates at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School have a WhatsApp group, Elder Care Connect, where he offers support and advice. “I don’t know if it’s an uptick or that people need to connect, but people are going through the same stuff,” he said.
You should take a hard look at yourself.
It is impossible to predict how each person will age, but watching how your parents and grandparents did may lend valuable insight for your own future. Hal Hershfield, a professor of marketing and behavioral decision making at the Anderson School of Management at the University of California, Los Angeles, studies how envisioning your future self can help you plan. He describes older relatives’ experiences as either associative or dissociative, or behaviors and habits that you choose to emulate or avoid entirely.
“To some extent, your parents are the closest proxy for your future selves,” Dr. Hershfield said.
He said optimism bias leads us to be overly positive about our projections. For some people, he added, watching a parent falter could offer a realistic counterpoint to a rosy view of the future.
Dr. Atul Gawande, a surgeon at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and the author of “Being Mortal,” said discussing preferences with family members was a vital part of helping them sustain a fulfilling life, especially those with serious health problems. He recommends a series of questions, called the Conversation Project, to help guide family decisions. The questions include: What does a good day look like for you? What activities bring joy and meaning to your life? If your health gets worse, what are your most important goals?
“It’s almost embarrassing that it took me writing a whole book, interviewing 200 families and patients and scores of experts, to come to a pretty simple conclusion,” Dr. Gawande said. “People have priorities in their lives besides just living longer, and in order to understand what those priorities are, you need to ask them.”
For Ms. Coomber, seeing her parents struggle prompted conversations with her husband about what the two of them want. An overstuffed house isn’t on the list.
“We’re setting deadlines,” she said. “By the time we’re 65 or 70, we’re going to downsize the heck out of the situation.”
-
Business6 minutes agoSpirit Airlines’ Demise Could Help Other Airlines
-
Health17 minutes agoThe Menopause Diet 5-Day Plan To Lose Weight Helps Women Drop Pounds Fast
-
Lifestyle35 minutes agoThe Pratt Students Patching Pants in a Brooklyn Mending Circle
-
Education41 minutes agoMAHA Awaits Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Definition of Ultraprocessed Foods
-
Technology47 minutes agoReggie Fils-Aimé says Amazon once asked Nintendo to break the law
-
World54 minutes agoExamining NATO: Inside the ‘commitment gap’ as US carries alliance deterrence
-
Politics60 minutes agoDem Senate candidate Sherrod Brown claims he supports ‘closing the border’; GOP says record proves otherwise
-
Health1 hour agoLongevity experts reveal ‘flicker method’ that could help you feel years younger