Sixty-seven studios, counted from dated addresses in an archive index
Evidence of an address, not of a lobby
An index of 20,000 archived addresses on the operator’s domain yields 67 supplier names, from 779 pages carrying one studio’s name down to two carrying another’s. Each name comes from an address that answered with a page on a dated capture, which is a narrower claim than a lobby listing.
Where these names came from
The operator’s own game pages follow a predictable pattern: an address under the casino path whose final part is the title and the studio joined by an underscore. That makes a supplier name part of an address rather than part of a marketing page, and each of the 20,000 archived addresses we sifted comes with a timestamp and a status code attached.
So the method here was to take that index, filter to the addresses that answered with a page, and read the studio names out of the addresses themselves. Sixty-seven names survive. Alongside each sits a count of how many distinct addresses carry it, so the weight behind a name is visible rather than implied.
What the count actually establishes
A single sentence marks the limit of this evidence: a game page naming that studio existed on the operator’s domain on a dated capture. It follows that the studio’s titles were on the site at that moment. It does not follow that they are in the lobby today, and it says nothing about how many titles from that studio are playable now, because no catalogue was read and no total is recorded here.
That is a weaker claim than the one comparison sites usually make, and it has a property theirs lack: every name can be traced back to an address with a date on it. Where the live site could be reached, a lobby filter would be better evidence. From where this site is written the live pages were beyond reach, so the archive index is what the record rests on.
The shape of the list, from 779 down to two
The distribution is steeper than a supplier list suggests. One live-dealer catalogue is carried by 779 distinct addresses. Two of the large slot aggregators follow at 767 and 704. Below them the numbers descend through 609, 600 and 577, then a broad middle band in the hundreds, then a long tail: several studios appear on fewer than ten addresses each, and a pair of them on exactly two.
Sixty-seven names, each with an address behind it.
A studio carried by four addresses and a studio carried by six hundred are both true entries on a supplier list and they describe completely different things about a lobby. Printing the counts is the cheapest possible defence against a list that flatters by length.
One arithmetic oddity is worth flagging rather than smoothing over. The operator’s in-house range is described elsewhere in its own text as seven titles, while the studio name it uses for those games appears on only six archived addresses. The likeliest reading is that the original games mostly sit outside the address pattern this count depends on, which would mean the method undercounts them. That is a reading, and it is offered as one.
| Casino | Operator | Licence | Countries barred | Withdrawal limit | Visit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vavepaid placement | TechOptions Group B.V. | Curaçao no number | list not read | from 50,000 USDT in instalments cl. 8.8 | Visit |
| Gamdom | not published | not published | 37 | not published | |
| Rocketpot | Danneskjold Ventures B.V. | Curacao | 34 | not published | |
| Bitcasino.io | Moon Technologies B.V. | Curaçao Gaming Authority | 1 | not published | |
| Wild.io | Stack Gaming Ltd. | Curaçao Gaming Authority | 45 | not published | |
| Wild Fortune | Metlait SRL | Anjouan Gaming Board | 47 | not published | |
| Instant Casino | Igloo Ventures SRL | Curaçao Gaming Authority | 48 | not published | |
| CoinCasino | Igloo Ventures SRL | Anjouan Gaming Board | 36 | not published | |
| Bets.io | Techno Wave Systems S.R.L. | Curaçao Gaming Authority | 42 | not published | |
| Playbet.io | Bitx Operations N.V. | Curaçao Gaming Authority | 30 | not published | |
| CryptoLeo | Uno Digital Media B.V. | Curaçao Gaming Authority | 74 | not published | |
| BetPlays | not published | not published | 15 | not published |
The old list of 52 was replaced rather than extended
Before this reading, our library held a 52-name supplier list for this operator whose origin could no longer be established. An unsourced list is treated here as unread, and merging it with a sourced one would launder the older names into the newer evidence. So the 67 names replace the 52 outright.
Seven names from the discarded list find no support in any archived address and are absent from the current record:
- Ace Roll
- Aloha Gaming
- EGT Digital
- Foxhound Games
- Good Times Studios
- Pineapple Play
- “Play”
Their absence here is the absence of a reading. It is emphatically not a finding that those studios were missing from the lobby: the last of them looks like a truncated entry rather than a company, which illustrates how such lists decay as they are copied. If a dated address surfaces later for any of the seven, the name goes back in with its count attached.
A related rule trimmed the new list too. Names carried by exactly one address were dropped, because at that count a name is as likely to be a typo or a truncation as a studio. Duplicate spellings of the same company were merged instead, which is why one hyphenated and one spaced spelling of the same studio appear here as a single entry.
Fairness claims, kept apart from each other
The operator makes two claims about its games and they are not the same claim. For its own titles — dice, crash, roulette, plinko, mines, keno and hilo — it states that results are provably fair and verifiable, and describes generating a chain of ten million SHA256 hashes per game. For third-party titles it states something else: that partnering with reputable providers ensures those games adhere to high standards of fairness.
Two claims, two different weights.
Merging those two sentences would produce a claim the operator has never made. We ran no verification of either, so both are recorded as the operator’s own claims, dated to the August 2026 capture.
Two betting limits come from the help-centre answers in the same bundle rather than from a numbered clause, and are labelled accordingly: slots are described as typically allowing up to 1,000 dollars per spin, and blackjack as set at 100,000 dollars per hand. The answers covering the in-house games are templates with the figures filled in at render time, so a bet limit for dice, crash, plinko, mines, keno or roulette stayed beyond reading.
How this compares with the other rows
Our table carries a studio count for eight of the other eleven rows, ranging from thirteen to a hundred and fifty, and holds nothing for three of them. Those counts were gathered during separate readings by separate routes, so setting them beside a figure derived from archived addresses would compare two different kinds of measurement. The honest use of the number on this page is internal: it describes the shape of one operator’s catalogue, with the evidence for each name attached.
Whether winnings from that lobby can leave an account is decided by the payout clauses, and the rewriting of the same contract between two captures is traced through the two editions. Dates, counts and blanks on this site all follow the reading rules, and the twelve operators are set side by side on the front page.