Vave- Operating company
- TechOptions Group B.V.
- Licence
- Curaçao no number
- Withdrawal cap
- from 50.000 USDT in instalments art. 8.8
- Documents from
- case by case
Who writes this site
One editor, one subject, one paid link. All three are set out here in full, so that nobody has to guess where the interests lie and where the limits of this site run.
What the operators put on paper themselves: the name they trade under, the licence they cite, the cap that applies to a withdrawal and the amount above which they ask for documents. Behind every figure stands the clause it comes from. An empty field means the operator publishes nothing about it or that we could not read it — it is not a zero and not an ‘unlimited’. None of the ten appears in the licence register of the Kansspelautoriteit, the Dutch gambling regulator.
Bitcasino.io- Operating company
- Moon Technologies B.V.
- Licence
- Curaçao Gaming Authority
- Withdrawal cap
- 1.000.000 USDT per week art. 6.10
- Documents from
- 2.500 EUR
Empire.io- Operating company
- Pixel Entertainment Limited
- Licence
- Anjouan Gaming Board licence excludes NL
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- 2.000 USDT
Bitsler- Operating company
- Oyine N.V.
- Licence
- Curaçao Gaming Authority
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- not published
Cloudbet- Operating company
- Halcyon Super Holdings B.V.
- Licence
- Curaçao Gaming Authority
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- not published
CoinCasino- Operating company
- Igloo Ventures SRL
- Licence
- Anjouan Gaming Board licence excludes NL
- Withdrawal cap
- 500.000 EUR per month art. 9.6
- Documents from
- not published
Rakebit- Operating company
- Nile King Media Ltd
- Licence
- Anjouan Gaming Board licence excludes NL
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- not published
Primedice- Operating company
- Antillephone
- Licence
- Government of Curaçao
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- not published
Stake- Operating company
- Medium Rare N.V.
- Licence
- Curaçao Gaming Authority
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- not published
BetPlays- Operating company
- not published
- Licence
- not published
- Withdrawal cap
- 5.000 EUR per week art. 6.11
- Documents from
- not published
One subject instead of a catalogue
This site compares no game selection, no graphics and no welcome screen. Per operator it reads two things: the licence register of the Kansspelautoriteit, the Dutch gambling regulator, and the operator's own general terms and conditions.
That is a narrow choice and it is deliberate. A site that compares everything compares nothing thoroughly enough to be followed up. What is looked into here — does the operator appear in the Dutch register, under which company name does it trade, which licence does it cite, with which number, and which clauses are there about paying out and document checks — happens to be exactly the list that determines your position when something goes wrong. And it is the list that never appears in advertising.
There is another reason for that narrow choice. Everything on this site can be checked. The register is public, the terms are online, and behind every figure stands a clause number. Anyone who disagrees with us can point out exactly where. That is a more comfortable position for a reader than a score out of ten that nobody knows the calculation of.
Marnix Oosterhuis
This site is made and checked by Marnix Oosterhuis. His work consists of reading dull documents and writing down what they say, including the places where they say nothing.
His starting point is that the subject is not complicated but is badly explained. Almost every piece about online casinos in the Netherlands is about the question "is it allowed?" and gets stuck there. The question that yields something comes after it: if the Dutch licence is not there, which system does apply, and what can you get out of it? That requires no legal training, only the willingness to lay the register and the terms side by side — and the discipline to leave an empty box empty.
He does not play for this site. No account has been opened, nothing deposited and no payout timed. That is why this site carries not a single sentence beginning with "we tested", and not a single payout time in minutes. Everything has been read, not experienced, and that is stated on every page where it matters.
How the work is done
Every figure is looked up in the operator's terms and recorded with the clause number. If there is no figure, it says "not published" — never a zero, never "unlimited" and never an estimate.
A licence number is looked up in the register of the body that issues the licence, not read off a seal at the bottom of a casino page. If the number comes only from the operator's own page, as with Primedice and 8048/JAZ, that is stated alongside it in so many words. An operator that names a jurisdiction without a number counts here as unverified, and not as licensed.
What does not happen: ranking by feel. There is no ranking, no score out of ten and no recommendation to open an account anywhere. Nor is there artificial urgency: no offer that expires today, no countdown clock, no number that is almost gone. The full version of these rules is on how we read the register.
What this site lives on
On one link. It leads to Vave, is marked as advertising and carries the coding that tells search engines it is paid. If an account is opened through that link, this site earns from it. Beyond that there is no paid placement, no paid entry in the table and no paid position in the order.
What it does not change can be read off the partner's own row. Of Vave we were unable to read a single document: no operating company, no jurisdiction, no licence number, no withdrawal cap, no verification rule, no source. Whether Vave accepts players from the Netherlands we could not establish, and it stands as unverified. That makes the row of our own partner the emptiest row in the table.
That is not favourable and it is the only way the rule means anything. A rule you reverse as soon as it hits the wrong party is not a rule but a preference. The same goes the other way round, incidentally: if Vave publishes readable terms with clause numbers tomorrow, those will go into the table, and not because it is our partner but because it will then be correct.
What is in the overview
The overview counts ten operators. Eight of them name a company name, eight cite a licence with a number, three publish a cap on withdrawals that we were able to read and two name an amount above which they request documents. All the remaining fields are empty, and empty always means the same thing here: not read.
The operators have not been chosen because we recommend them. They are in the overview because they are names a Dutch player comes across when searching for a crypto casino, and because the question this site asks — does this operator appear in the KSA register? — yields the same answer for all ten. That is precisely what makes it a usable overview: the difference lies not in the licence they lack, but in what they put in its place.
The overview is moreover not finished and does not pretend to be. Terms change, operators disappear, and a clause number of today is something else in a year's time. The data therefore carries a date, and that date belongs to the reading just as much as the figure itself.
Where this site stops
This site is not legal advice and not tax advice. It describes a structure — which register, which licence, which clause — and not a specific case. Anyone who has a real dispute about a blocked balance or an unpaid win needs somebody who looks at their file; what is here can at most help to ask the right question. The route such a complaint takes is set out under where a dispute ends up.
And then the point that stands above everything: playing is from 18, gambling costs money in the long run, and nobody is the exception to that. Anyone who notices that it takes up more room than they want can turn free and anonymously to Loket Kansspel. This site earns nothing from that, and that is exactly why it is here.
