In this interview with Yogonet, Tom Light, founder and CEO of FIRST.bet, discusses the company’s strategy in Latin America following the uncertainty surrounding Brazil’s gambling market. He explains why the company remains focused on expanding across the region, highlighting its existing presence and opportunities.
Light also shares his perspective on the role of sportsbook providers, the importance of product engagement, the challenges of scaling local businesses into Tier 1 operations, and how AI tools are shaping the way companies work.
After everything that has happened in Brazil, what does it mean for FIRST.bet? Does it change the way you see Latin America?
We’ve spent a lot of time building a product for Brazil and Latin America, and we’ve been successful in getting the majority of operators in Brazil to work with our sportsbook and sports engine. Now, Brazil is shut down, and we don’t know what the future holds. It’s a coin flip.
The good thing is that we have a product that really fits the Latin American market. We’re looking to expand in more markets across the region, including Mexico, Chile, Honduras, Venezuela, and Ecuador. There’s uncertainty in Brazil, but our broader Latin American strategy is still moving forward.
Operators often have to decide whether to use a sportsbook provider or build their own technology. Why do you think outsourcing makes sense?
It’s a good question. Many operators, especially larger ones, want to build their own technology stack, control their product, and do everything themselves. I don’t think that’s very efficient.
At FIRST.bet, we’re an extremely efficient company focused exclusively on sports. If you try to do everything yourself, you’ll never reach the level of the major B2C operators, such as bet365 and Betano. It’s a bit like wanting to work out and building your own gym at home. You can’t replicate what a major gym can offer.
If an operator does work with a provider, how should it decide which areas to control itself and which to leave to the provider?
If you’re working with a good provider, you should generally let it handle things by default. That’s why you chose the provider in the first place. But if you have specific expertise, you should take ownership of those areas. You might know how to trade certain leagues, tailor promotions, or manage CRM and bonuses particularly well.
Essentially, you should take over only the elements you’re confident you can handle better. You need to work that out with your provider and make sure you’re adding value. For example, an operator in Latvia might know the local leagues well and be able to take positions on the odds. But when it comes to Danish handball, it might not understand the odds and lines as well as our traders do.
Two sportsbooks can offer almost the same events and similar odds, yet one can generate much more revenue than the other. Why does that happen?
It used to be a numbers game. Ten years ago, when we presented a sportsbook, we would focus on the number of events, markets, and sports available. That doesn’t matter as much anymore. Everyone has thousands of events and hundreds of markets. What matters is how the product is built and how it engages users.
To generate more revenue, an operator needs to make its product more engaging. That means allowing customers to combine selections through bet builders, providing comprehensive coverage, offering cash-out options across markets, and ensuring market availability, even during high-pressure moments.
It’s about how the product responds and how the technology stack supports features such as combo insurance, flexi bets, one-cut and multi-cut options, early payouts, partial cash-outs, and other tools that make the experience more engaging.
If turnover is increasing but profit isn’t keeping pace, what does that usually tell you? Where should an operator start looking?
You often see operators generating a lot of volume, but it’s what I’d call junk volume. They might work with a sportsbook provider that brings in a lot of tipsters and arbitrage bettors. That can increase turnover, but those customers may not generate profits. In fact, they can cause the operator to lose money.
The goal is to close the door to unprofitable action while opening it to VIP customers. Balancing those two objectives at the same time is extremely difficult, so you need a good partner to help you do it.
When a strong local operator becomes part of a Tier 1 business, what actually needs to change in its sportsbook operations?
The best example is when large groups acquire local operators. Companies such as Flutter, Caesars, and Entain might buy into a local business.
I think the best approach, and we’ve seen this time and again, is to let local operators continue operating in the way that works for their markets. Large Tier 1 companies need to understand that these operators know their markets.
Every market needs individual attention. A one-size-fits-all approach won’t work because every market is unique. You need to tailor the product to local conditions, localise the offering, and understand your audience.
A quick-fire question to finish. You use AI a lot at work. If you could keep only one tool going forward, would you choose ChatGPT or Claude?
For a long time, Claude was ahead. Now, GPT has made strong progress with its latest models and Codex, and it’s doing really well. I think it depends on when you’re reading this because the race keeps changing.
Gemini is a bit behind in some areas, although it’s good with images and certain other tasks. But for language models and coding, I think Codex and Claude Code are ahead in those areas.
The key is to keep up with the latest models and make sure you have a kind of second brain where all your contacts and data are connected to different LLMs. That way, if you want to switch from GPT to Claude or another model, it’s easy to do. You also need to understand what each tool is best suited for.