Aztec

What is Aztec?

In his new role, Konstakis will be responsible not only for OpenBet’s strategy, but also for its day-to-day business, growth initiatives, and tech priorities. At the same time, he will be tasked with “raising the bar” in how OpenBet serves its clients.

OpenBet emphasized that this change comes at a strong moment for the company and follows its incredibly successful delivery for customers through the World Cup. Throughout the tournament, OpenBet processed 175 million bets totaling $3 billion.

CEO Levin, who is set to transition to a chair role, commented on the shift, saying that he was very confident that Konstakis has what it takes to be CEO and drive OpenBet to new heights.

About Aztec

This followed a period of restrategising for the operator, after rebranding from GVC Holdings and committing to having 100% of its revenues come from regulated markets.

But its share price has taken a tumble over the last year, dropping up to 37% since September 2025. Its market cap currently sits at £3.39 billion.

The operator first started trading on LSEG’s main market in February 2016 under its previous company name GVC Holdings. This followed its delisting from the Alternative Investment Market (AIM exchange).

About Aztec

George Hasselback is done with Imperial Pacific International (IPI). The attorney has been representing the controversial and incompetent casino operator as it defended itself in a lawsuit filed by Fox Financial, as well as others, but has now washed his hands and stepped away. He had filed a request to withdraw from representing the company on February 12, and a judge granted his petition yesterday. Magistrate Judge Heather Kennedy agreed with Hasselback in his assertion that continued representation would put him in an ethical conundrum.

Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.