Online casino, I think there is unlimited license is there. So there is something that does have a relatively high tax rate as Kyle just alluded to, but in a day what we do is, we make sure that we stay ahead by constantly innovating and developing better user experience. That’s what we can control. We can’t control what the competitors so, we can control how well we execute and how well we innovate to create experiences and players want to stay with us and we’ve been very successful delivering that over the years and we’re actually very focused on that now I have a lot of great ideas we’re working on that, we think are going to really help us in that area.
Unidentified Participant: Great. Thanks guys.
Richard Schwartz: Thanks, Will.
Operator: Our next question is from Jordan Bender with JMP. Your line is now open.
Jordan Bender: Great. Thanks for taking my question. With all the talk around iGaming legalization coming up, these states are primarily states that already have online sports betting, so with your established footprint in the states can you just kind of remind us the payback period if we were to get iGaming introduced into an existing state.
Richard Schwartz: Yeah, Jordan. Thanks. You’re right, it is — all the talk is around — for the most parts around states where we’re already active. Certainly it’s going to depend on the state, right? On tax rate and the competitive landscape and maybe even if we’re in there with a partner or market access partner or if it’s an open opportunity. I think that there is a huge advantage to already being opened in the market. We’ve got a database of players, we’ve got a brand that people are aware of. So those are big advantages. And if you just look at the two recent US states, most recent US states that launched for with casino, it was Michigan and West Virginia that we participated in and both of those were profitable after four quarters for the entire market.
So I don’t know that I’d want to necessarily commit to that if New York, Illinois or one — Iowa or Indiana, wherever it is were to launch. But I think we’ve got a lot more advantages than we do starting like we did in Michigan and West Virginia. So those are some of the history on how it’s played out. And I think we’d be pretty excited about that opportunity. I think one thing to remember is, in most markets that have both casino and sports, we typically carry three to five times the share in casino than we do in sports. So, if we’ve got — in Illinois, if you’ve got double-digit share and in Indiana or New York we’ve got low single-to-mid single digit share in sports, if we could get three times that in any of those states, that’s pretty darn meaningful for us.
So we’re obviously very excited about the legislation and the movement by the industry to be talking about iCasino a lot more.
Jordan Bender: Great. And then my follow-up. Looking at the MAU number. I’m not sure if you’ll give this, but I’ll try it anyways. Are you able to parse out kind of the quarter-over-quarter growth end users from the US versus what those contribute in Canada?
Richard Schwartz: Yeah. I think we’ll probably stop short of that one. It is a good try. Obviously, the growth in Q4 in Ontario is all incremental for us and it’s certainly meaningful to the number. And then just because you raised that, I think it’s important to remind everyone, although we disclosed this, but those MAU numbers are only for North America or US and Canada. It doesn’t include our Latin American countries where the MUAs are much higher and the — our MAU is lower than in our North American markets.
Jordan Bender: Great, thank you.
Richard Schwartz: Thanks, Jordan.
Operator: Our next question is from Edward Engel with ROTH. Your line is now open.
