Blazing Bull

About Blazing Bull

Harrison Barrett, VP of business development, spoke to the iGB team at iGB L!VE 2026 to discuss the evolution of Soft2Bet’s MEGA platform, which started out as a purely gamification layer but has become “much more compelling than simply leaderboards, missions and point-based rewards”.

As Barrett puts it, MEGA is “ultimately a retention tool that helps our partners move away from heavy bonus and costs”.

With ice hockey and UFC-themed initiatives driving engagement in North America and a 45% lifetime value increase seen with the launch of MEGA Shoot, a player-versus-player simulation penalty shootout game initiative which launched during the World Cup, it is an exciting time for the Malta-based platform provider.

About Blazing Bull

Red Rock may still petition SCOTUS to hear the case, and the court could still choose to do so, but in the meantime the casino must comply with the NLRB ruling. The ruling requires the casino to recognise and bargain with the union upon request, post employee rights notices and other measures.

“The NLRB decision overturned the clear vote of Red Rock team members rejecting the Culinary Union,” Station said in a statement. “The decision prevents any company from granting benefits to its employees if it is aware of union interest in unionising the company’s employees and nullifies the Red Rock team members’ vote to be union-free, all because Station Casinos treated its team members too well.”

The culinary union declined to comment to iGB on Wednesday.

How to play Blazing Bull

George Hasselback is done with Imperial Pacific International (IPI). The attorney has been representing the controversial and incompetent casino operator as it defended itself in a lawsuit filed by Fox Financial, as well as others, but has now washed his hands and stepped away. He had filed a request to withdraw from representing the company on February 12, and a judge granted his petition yesterday. Magistrate Judge Heather Kennedy agreed with Hasselback in his assertion that continued representation would put him in an ethical conundrum.

Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.