Lynnae is a journalist covering the intersection of technology, culture, and gambling. She has more than five years of experience as a writer and editor, with bylines at SlashGear and MakeUseOf. On the iGaming side,...
Read Full BioAfter raising the hackles of almost everyone across the college sports world, prediction market Kalshi appears to be backing away from its plans to allow users to bet on whether an NCAA player will enter the transfer portal. The transfer portal is the NCAA’s formal system that players use to indicate they’re considering moving to another school.
The controversy followed a report by InGame that Kalshi had filed with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to self-certify markets tied to NCAA transfer portal activity, including contracts based on whether individual players would enter or withdraw from the portal within a specified timeframe.
The NCAA didn’t waste any time pushing back against the news, as it voiced a very public objection to the idea of allowing bets on student-athletes entering or withdrawing from the transfer portal. NCAA President Charlie Baker took to X to call the proposed markets “absolutely unacceptable,” warning they would increase pressure on athletes and threaten both competitive integrity and the recruiting process.
“It is already bad enough that student-athletes face harassment and abuse for lost bets on game performance,” Baker wrote. “Their decisions and future should not be gambled with, especially in an unregulated marketplace that does not follow any rules of legitimate sports betting operators.”
Several hours later, Kalshi responded, signaling its retreat. In a statement to ESPN shared on X by reporter David Payne Purdum, the prediction market said: “We certify markets all the time that we do not end up listing; despite our competitors having these markets live, we have no immediate plans to list these contracts.”
Given the language in the statement to ESPN, Kalshi appears to be leaving the door open to revisiting the idea of transfer portal-related contracts in the future, but has apparently caved to public pressure for now. Still, even the filing itself has raised questions about how far prediction markets could go in treating college sports activity as tradable events.
Kalshi’s CFTC Filing on Transfer Portal Bets
In its filing with the CFTC, Kalshi self-certified a series of contracts centered around whether individual NCAA athletes would enter or withdraw from the transfer portal within a defined time period. The filing said the contracts would be listed starting on December 17.
While Kalshi advertises its products as “event contracts,” the way they work is almost identical to sports betting: a user buys a position based on which outcome they think will occur, for example, that a player will enter or will not enter the portal, and payouts are determined after the event is resolved.
According to Kalshi’s filing, the underlying event for each contract would be a player’s public entry into, or withdrawal from, the NCAA transfer portal during a specified window. The resolution of a contract would be based on publicly available sources, including official NCAA transfer portal data, school athletic department announcements, verified social media posts, and reporting from national sports media.
The filing explains what would and wouldn’t resolve a market. If a player posts to Instagram or X a statement along the lines of, “I’m entering the portal,” that would count as a valid signal, while a reporter’s speculation on its own would not.
Kalshi stressed that players, coaches, athletic department staff, agents, immediate family members, and others with direct access to non-public, inside information wouldn’t be allowed to trade on these contracts.
The latest filings by Kalshi once again highlight how prediction markets can list self-certified contracts without prior CFTC approval and only face agency intervention if the CFTC objects. That framework has enabled the company to offer markets that closely resemble traditional sports betting, even as state and federal authorities debate their legal status.
Online Backlash Follows Kalshi’s Transfer Portal Filing
As soon as the news broke about Kalshi’s filing related to the transfer portal, reactions began to flood X, from reporters, casual fans, and industry observers. Going through the comments, you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who responded positively to the news.
The news was widely shared on X, where users expressed disbelief at the idea of markets tied to individual players’ transfer decisions. While there wasn’t a lot of deep analysis of why betting on college players’ transfer decisions would hurt the integrity of college sports, there were strong opinions, which were clearly enough to get Kalshi’s attention. Several accounts talked about the threat of inside information and accused Kalshi of “just begging college players to illegally gamble.”
Sports law attorney Darren Adam Heitner highlighted the potential for abuse, posting on X that, “This has the potential to get very messy.”
In a thread on the college football subreddit, some Redditors expressed their belief that Kalshi’s latest move was a publicity stunt, with others suggesting that only the athletes involved and their inner circles would bet on these markets. One Redditor said, “Somehow the Polymarket and Kalshi affiliates are worse than traditional gambling,” comparing it to the Wild Wild West.
Kalshi’s decision to walk back its plans, at least for now, suggests that it has realized that betting on player transfers may be a step too far, even for an industry that has made a name for itself by pushing the boundaries of what qualifies as a tradable event.
