Weeks before HBO’s “Euphoria” Season 3 finale aired, prediction markets tied real money to whether Zendaya’s Rue Bennett would live or die. The bets turned out right—odds had shifted as the finale neared—underscoring a growing debate over whether financialized
When Rue Bennett fatally overdosed in HBO’s Season 3 finale of “Euphoria,” money that had been staked days earlier started changing hands. Winners had wagered on whether Zendaya’s character would live or die—and the market was right.
It wasn’t the only plot point tied to wagers. Polymarket also correctly predicted the fate of Nate Jacobs, played by Jacob Elordi. Nate died a painful death in the May 23 episode, and the odds had been moving ahead of time.
Weeks before the finale aired on May 31, online prediction markets had already made it possible to put real money behind end-of-show outcomes. Just days before the final episode, the odds that Rue would die doubled.
There was roughly $500,000 to $540,000 riding on the “Euphoria” finale, a figure that fans understood instantly because the show itself framed the moment with warning. In the words of Maddy, Alexa Demie’s character: “You better be joking.”
For entertainment executives, the concern is less about the presence of betting than about what it does to the product—and who it rewards.
Prediction markets are no longer limited to elections and sports. Kalshi and Polymarket let users wager on outcomes ranging from scripted TV shows to reality competitions. While these markets have existed for decades, interest has surged over the past two years.
In that same period, betting climbed to $40 million on the Papal election and $132 million on the latest U.S. presidential election.
Under U.S. law, prediction markets are not considered gambling services. They do not set betting odds, and instead offer “event contracts” on the outcomes of real-world events. They are treated as derivatives markets, a classification that means they don’t have to follow SEC guidelines.
Still, what feels like a harmless wager about television can carry business consequences. Naveen Khanna. a finance professor and insider trading expert at Michigan State University. warned that Hollywood sells suspense—and that once viewers know the ending. the incentive to watch can shrink. Networks. studios and production companies could lose up to millions of dollars if consumers have less incentive to watch a show or movie after its ending is spoiled. Khanna said. He also argued that leaking a finale is a clear-cut case of insider trading.
In Khanna’s view, once a viewer knows the ending, they’re unlikely to return. “Once I know the ending of a story, I’m very unlikely to go back and watch it,” he said.
The argument doesn’t stop at fairness. It also turns on how quickly information can move once a market creates a profitable reason to trade.
John Kwatakye-Atiko, president of Popular Demand Entertainment, described entertainment outcomes as something far more than speculation. The results of an award show or season finale. he said. are “a predetermined outcome locked in a vault somewhere.” He called the practice an “information market. ” not a prediction market. and said it “completely destroys the fairness for the average retail bettor.”.
He argued the value of insider knowledge has shifted the scale of trading. “When someone has insider information. they’re not looking to gamble $10 away; they’re looking to gamble tens of thousands of dollars. ” Kwatakye-Atiko said. He added that someone would be willing to pay “anywhere between $50,000 to $150,000 for that information.”.
Unlike sports, he said entertainment lacks the kind of regulatory policing built around game integrity. “In sports. you have massive regulatory bodies policing the integrity of the game. whereas Hollywood has zero infrastructure to police a film set for gambling. ” he said. “They have NDAs. but an NDA won’t stop a disgruntled production assistant. editor. or junior executive from placing an anonymous crypto bet on Polymarket because they read the script six months ago.”.
Khanna said the speed is part of what makes it possible for spoilers to reach traders before viewers even have a chance to decide whether to watch. Even with disclosure agreements in place. he said nothing prevents an insider from having someone else leak information to trade on their behalf. The end result, he said, is that shows can be spoiled before they’re even added to a watch list.
Reality shows have felt the squeeze too. Before CBS’s milestone 50th season of “Survivor” even premiered on Feb. 25, prediction markets appeared to know who would win. Kalshi predicted one contestant had an 83% chance of winning over the other 23 contestants by Feb. 18, while Polymarket gave the player an 87% chance. The other two finalists trailed far behind them. When votes were read live in Los Angeles on May 20, the prediction markets were proved right.
Longtime “Survivor” host and executive producer Jeff Probst publicly criticized both companies. He slammed them for “incentivizing people to lie, cheat and steal to get ahead,” telling Variety, “It doesn’t sit well with me as a human. I get it − they built a great business. They don’t care.”
Other shows show a similar pattern as deadlines approach. Food Network’s “Chopped Castaways” won’t air its season finale until June 30, but Polymarket had already identified a frontrunner: one chef at nearly 40%, another at over 18%, while the rest of the cast’s odds were under 3% as of June 13.
Kalshi and Polymarket each face pressure over how to stop insiders from profiting. In a statement to USA TODAY on June 9. a Kalshi spokesperson said the company has banned insider trading on its platform and continues to work to prevent spoilers. The statement said. “We use sophisticated surveillance systems to detect any suspicious activity − looking not just at a trader’s household. but at everything from their social activity to their personal connections. If our system flags anything suspicious, we investigate immediately and take action.”.
Polymarket declined to comment on concerns of insider trading on its platform.
Regulation adds another layer, but not one that directly addresses non-live programming. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission legally regulates both prediction sites. On June 10. the federal agency issued a 267-page proposal with new guidelines on the types of event contracts allowed. but the proposal does not contain language barring betting on non-live TV shows.
Dustin Gouker, an executive and analyst who covers the gambling industry, said the commission is unlikely to narrow the field dramatically. “They’re going to limit some things,” he said. “but that’s going to be a pretty small list.”
Even without a direct ban on non-live shows, some experts argue there’s a straightforward fix—one that aims to prevent the most profitable kind of spoiling.
Gouker said prediction markets should stop allowing bets on events that have already happened. “Whether there’s insider trading, it kind of is immaterial,” he said. “Clearly. the answer got out and was reflected in the market odds.” If a market’s odds already reflect the ending. he argued. people can still share spoilers on social media. and media outlets can still cover them—so blocking trades after an outcome is locked would at least reduce the incentive to leak in the first place.
Kwatakye-Atiko said markets could also be safer if they shifted away from plot points and toward the business side of Hollywood—such as how well a film performs at the box office. But he suggested spoilers are likely to persist as long as they remain profitable. “Someone is going to lose [or win] a lot of money. and it’s going to come out that the game was rigged. and once that happens. the feds will come in and put the hammer down on these people. and they’re going to have to get in line. ” Kwatakye-Atiko said.
For viewers trying to protect themselves, experts offered blunt practical advice: avoid or mute key terms related to prediction markets, or do so altogether. The logic is simple—if a show has already been filmed, the odds are often right.
By the time a finale airs, the suspense may already be gone for the people who watched the market instead of the screen. And the money behind the wagers makes it clear why.
prediction markets Kalshi Polymarket Euphoria Survivor entertainment finance insider trading CFTC event contracts Hollywood spoilers