The article talks about how prediction markets' sports books are significantly more profitable. This has less to do with financial structures and more to do with who wants to make bets and where.
According to the article, prediction markets make magnitudes more money on potentially illegal (by today's standards in the US, anyway) sports betting than true event contracts.
That’s a fair point. I agree the current profitability is largely driven by demand patterns and regulatory arbitrage rather than pure market design.
My comment was more about why the underlying event-contract model struggles to scale sustainably, even when interest exists.
According to the article, prediction markets make magnitudes more money on potentially illegal (by today's standards in the US, anyway) sports betting than true event contracts.