The PokerStars Network is entering a new business-development phase. After expanding across several regulated markets and adding more Flutter-owned brands to shared poker pools, the network is now ready to discuss partnerships with selected operators outside the Flutter group. Michael Boland of Flutter describes that as the next important step rather than the launch of an entirely new platform.
The network is moving beyond Flutter-only expansion
At its simplest, Boland says the PokerStars Network, or PSN, exists to bring more poker players together. Online poker depends heavily on liquidity because the product needs opponents on both sides of the table. Larger pools can support fuller cash games, bigger tournament fields, stronger prize pools, shorter waits and a wider range of stakes. Regulation and taxation have increasingly separated players by country, so PSN is designed as a way to rebuild scale without ignoring those regulatory boundaries.
The important change is that the team is no longer thinking only about internal Flutter distribution. Betfair, Paddy Power, Sky Bet and FanDuel show how the model can work with sister brands, but Boland says the network is now open to conversations with external tier-one operators in significant regulated markets. The plan is deliberately selective. PokerStars is not trying to sign dozens of partners as quickly as possible or create a large reseller network.
How the PokerStars Network is currently structured
| Market / pool | Structure described by Flutter |
| Italy | Ring-fenced market shared by PokerStars, Sisal and SNAI |
| Southern Europe | Shared liquidity across Spain, France and Portugal |
| North America | PokerStars and FanDuel share a pool across Michigan, New Jersey and Pennsylvania |
| Global .com | Players from licensed international markets, including UK Flutter brands |
| External partners | Selective discussions now open with tier-one regulated operators |
Boland emphasises that the PokerStars Network is not a concept waiting to be built. It is already operating in four forms shaped by local regulation. In Italy, PokerStars, Sisal and SNAI share a ring-fenced in-market pool. In Southern Europe, players from Spain, France and Portugal participate in a shared liquidity arrangement. In North America, PokerStars operates with FanDuel across Michigan, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The global .com pool brings together players from a range of licensed markets and now includes or will include Flutter’s UK brands.
Those examples are important because they show that PSN is not based on a single technical or regulatory template. A country that requires segregation can remain ring-fenced. Markets that permit shared liquidity can connect. A local partner can lead with its own brand or work more closely with PokerStars branding depending on the structure that makes sense in that jurisdiction.
This flexibility is central to Boland’s pitch. Global operators already understand that regulated markets do not all work the same way. PSN is built around that reality rather than trying to force identical deployment everywhere. Liquidity is shared to the extent regulators permit, while infrastructure and branding can be adapted around the local partnership.
The UK expansion is meant to strengthen PokerStars, not reduce it
One question raised by the recent UK changes is whether PokerStars is stepping back as a consumer brand by connecting players from Betfair, Paddy Power and Sky Bet into the same underlying ecosystem. Boland rejects that interpretation. He says the objective is the opposite: use the reach of other major brands to create stronger poker liquidity and, in turn, make the PokerStars poker business more competitive.
From the player’s point of view, the front door can therefore differ while the poker ecosystem behind it is shared. A customer may arrive through another operator brand, but still contribute to the same network effect that supports fuller tables and healthier tournaments. That model allows operators with strong local customer relationships to offer poker without necessarily abandoning their existing identity.
The key word in Boland’s explanation is evolution. PokerStars remains central because the network includes its game offering, tournament scheduling, integrity operation, poker properties and live-event ecosystem. The network strategy is not simply to hide the PokerStars brand behind other companies. It is to make the wider poker business available through different partnership forms.
External partnerships will be selective
Flutter says it is now ready to speak with external tier-one operators, but the selection criteria are intentionally narrow. Boland says the team wants meaningful partnerships with a small number of leading operators in important regulated markets. Each integration carries technical, commercial and relationship work, so scale for its own sake is not the objective.
Regulatory standing is one of the important filters. Poker liquidity benefits from scale, but the network also needs partners that can operate credibly inside regulated environments. Boland describes the target as operators with strong customer relationships that see poker as something capable of improving the value of their wider proposition. That makes the discussion strategic rather than purely transactional.
The source does not name the external operators currently in talks, and Boland does not claim every conversation will become a partnership. The public message is instead an invitation: serious licensed operators can now discuss what PSN could add to their business, particularly if they have scale and a meaningful market presence.
What an operator gets from the network
Shared liquidity is the most obvious part of the offer, but Boland says the proposition is wider. PokerStars brings roughly 25 years of category experience, a centrally managed game offering, tournament scheduling, a dedicated game-integrity capability, network generosity, established poker properties and a live-events ecosystem. The package is therefore presented as a poker business rather than a simple software connection.
That distinction matters because many operators could theoretically license technology without gaining the same surrounding product. PSN is positioning the combination of liquidity, brand assets, tournament expertise, integrity functions and live events as the differentiator. Depending on the market, a partner may only need access to selected components. In another jurisdiction, the PokerStars brand itself may have enough value to become a much more visible part of the consumer proposition.
Boland also says there is a possibility for partners to franchise and operate the PokerStars brand, depending on the structure. That creates a spectrum of involvement. At one end, a strong local brand can remain the main customer-facing identity while using elements of the PokerStars ecosystem behind it. At the other, PokerStars can take a more prominent role where its name carries significant consumer value.
There is no one-size-fits-all model
The network is deliberately avoiding a rigid partnership template. Operators differ in brand equity, customer relationships and regulatory conditions. A model that makes sense in one country may be wrong in another. Boland says the question should be which combination creates the strongest poker proposition in that specific market.
This is why discussions about PSN cannot be reduced to platform access alone. Shared liquidity may be the economic engine, but brand presentation, events, marketing and product ownership can all change from one partnership to another. The network therefore has to solve both a technical problem and a commercial one: connect enough players to make poker healthy while preserving the local strengths that brought those players to the partner in the first place.
That flexible approach also helps explain the variety of existing PSN deployments. Italy, Southern Europe, North America and the .com pool are not identical structures. They are examples of the same network idea adjusted to different legal and market conditions.
FanDuel shows how the partnership can work in practice
The United States provides one of the clearest examples. FanDuel is Flutter’s leading US-facing brand, while PokerStars provides the poker product and shares liquidity in a combined pool across Michigan, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Boland describes FanDuel as part of the PokerStars Network even though the underlying technology question is separate from the consumer relationship.
His point is that PSN is the mechanism through which the PokerStars poker business becomes available to partners. That can include liquidity, brand, products, poker properties and live events. FanDuel shows how a major local operator can work alongside PokerStars rather than simply being replaced by it.
The example is especially relevant for external operators because it demonstrates the type of relationship PokerStars wants to build: a leading local brand, shared liquidity where regulation allows it, and a poker proposition strong enough to reach customers that PokerStars might not reach alone.
A network alternative means more than another software supplier
Boland is careful when describing PSN as an alternative in the network-poker market. He does not argue that the industry merely needs another piece of software that looks different from existing platforms. The alternative is the partnership model and the breadth of the poker business attached to it.
For operators that want poker at meaningful scale, the attraction is the combined package: liquidity, expertise, game integrity, recognised poker properties, live events and the backing and reach of Flutter. That is the proposition PokerStars wants potential partners to evaluate. It is also why the company says every integration has to be meaningful rather than one more low-touch reseller agreement.
The network effect remains the core logic behind all of this. Poker becomes more attractive when players can find games quickly, tournaments can support stronger guarantees and operators can offer a broader range of stakes. Fragmentation weakens that effect. PSN is an attempt to restore some of it without ignoring the rules that created the fragmentation in the first place.
SBC Summit is the next meeting point
PokerStars is using the SBC Summit in Lisbon to start more of those conversations. Boland says the network team will be at the Flutter stand and is particularly interested in meeting tier-one operators that see a strategic role for poker in their business. The available structures include an Access, or white-label, basis and a Brand Franchise model involving PokerStars.
The company is not promising that every operator will be suitable. Boland repeatedly stresses selectivity, regulatory credibility and mutual value. That makes the Lisbon message less about mass sign-ups and more about identifying a small number of partners where shared liquidity and PokerStars resources can create a stronger local product.
For the wider online poker market, the key development is that PSN is no longer confined to internal expansion. The network already operates in several regulatory shapes and is now ready to discuss external connections. Whether those talks produce new partnerships will depend on the individual markets and operators, but the direction is clear: PokerStars wants its liquidity network to become a business-to-business option as well as an internal Flutter asset.