Comment on CFTC-2026-1189, CFTC-2026-1189-0001, Noah, Rafkin

Comment of Noah Rafkin, BonusBandit (bonusbandit.win), on Prediction Markets; Public Interest Determinations, RIN 3038-AF65. My complete comment is in the attached document (bonusbandit-cftc-comment.docx), with two datasets attached as an Excel workbook. This summary states the substance. I operate BonusBandit, an independent, owner-operated consumer-data site covering US sweepstakes casinos: dual-currency products offering casino-style games with cash-equivalent redemption outside state gaming regulation. I am not an operator and hold no position in any registered entity. I publish a first-hand payout study (real money deposited on my own accounts at 91 operators, every redemption outcome documented), the Sweepstakes Casino Complaint Index (the share of 1 and 2 star reviews in each operator's public Trustpilot distribution: 190 operators, 586,009 public reviews as of July 8, 2026), and a state legality tracker. Both datasets are attached in machine-readable form under CC BY 4.0. Three points: 1. The proposed definition of gaming in Sec. 40.11(b)(1) appropriately reaches casino-style games (slot-style random-outcome games, table games, poker), which are rule-governed, luck-dependent, recreational activities. I support that coverage. It matters because sweepstakes-sector operators are migrating toward CFTC registration as state pressure rises: Novig and ProphetX completed transitions to CFTC-registered status in June 2026 while retiring sweepstakes products, and ReBet filed an FCM registration application with the NFA on June 11, 2026. Seven states have sweepstakes-casino prohibitions taking effect during 2026. The Commission should anticipate casino-style contract proposals from registrants whose product heritage is this category. 2. My data supports weighting heavily the negative public-interest factor for games depending entirely on random chance, proposed Sec. 40.11(a)(6)(iii)(B)(1). It documents what random-chance casino products produce for consumers absent a regulator standing behind redemption: the median operator's public review base runs 23.5 percent at 1 or 2 stars (120 operators over a 10-review floor); reviewers describe redemption delays at 59 operators, identity-verification failures at 52, unresponsive support at 57, and accounts closed with balances still inside at 39; and in my first-hand testing, redemption outcomes vary widely by operator (per-operator aggregates attached). Limitations are stated in the attachment: the review data is Trustpilot only and self-selected, and a high complaint share is a signal about consumer experience, not proof of non-payment by any named operator. 3. Under the state-law factor, proposed Sec. 40.11(a)(6)(i)(B), which considers whether the underlying activity is generally considered as causing or posing public harm, my legality tracker documents a rapidly consolidating state-level judgment against unregulated casino-style products: the seven 2026-effective prohibitions; the New York Attorney General's 2025 cease-and-desist campaign against 26 sweepstakes operators; the Kentucky Attorney General's June 17, 2026 suit against VGW under Kentucky's Consumer Protection Act, Loss Recovery Act, and gambling statutes; and the Washington Attorney General's 2026 action against unlicensed casino-app operators. I am glad to provide Commission staff with underlying records, methodology, or updated figures; the datasets recompute from source records on every publication. Respectfully submitted, Noah Rafkin, BonusBandit (bonusbandit.win)