A revoked licence number does not disappear from the register. It stays there with a different status, which is why the status field matters more than the presence of the number itself.
Five of the 100 brands in our library sit on numbers the Curaçao Gaming Authority certificate portal recorded as revoked when the register was read on 26 August 2026. This page sets out which they are, what the status field says, and what it does not say.
Which five, and on which numbers?
| Brand | Licence number | Company on the certificate | Granted |
|---|---|---|---|
| BC.Game | OGL/2023/118/0060 | Small House B.V., company number 164979 | 04/03/2024 |
| Bets.io | OGL/2024/1178/0479 | Bets Entertainment N.V., company number 155648 | 22/07/2024 |
| Betriot | OGL/2023/103/0067 | Rabidi N.V., company number 151791 | 05/02/2024 |
| Casinoly | OGL/2023/103/0067 | Rabidi N.V., company number 151791 | 05/02/2024 |
| Zet Casino | OGL/2023/103/0067 | Rabidi N.V., company number 151791 | 05/02/2024 |
Three of the five are one registration. OGL/2023/103/0067 is tied in the portal to Rabidi N.V., Curaçao company number 151791, and covers betriot.com, casinoly.com and zetcasino.com. One revocation therefore accounts for three of the five entries in the table above.
That is the practical shape of a shared registration: the number is a single point of failure for every brand standing on it. The wider pattern of shared numbers is set out on our page about one licence number and many brands.
Does a revoked number mean the site is closed?
No, and this is the point most often stated wrongly. The status is a fact about the register entry, not about the website. Sites carrying revoked numbers were still reachable and still publishing terms when the library was compiled, and the number was still printed in the footer of some of them.
The register records the state of a permission. Whether a business continues to operate after that permission lapses is a separate matter, and the register is silent on it.
What does the status field actually claim?
The Curaçao certificate is a short document. Its operative sentence certifies that a named domain is operated by a named company, incorporated under the laws of Curaçao with a stated company number, and licensed to offer games of chance under a stated licence number in accordance with the National Ordinance on Games of Chance. It then gives the date the licence was granted and the current status.
So the status word carries the whole weight of the document. An active certificate and a revoked one are the same text with one word changed, and every other field, including the company name, the company number and the grant date, reads identically in both cases. Even the heading changes only from “Certificate of Operation” to the single word that replaces it.
The grant dates on the five revoked entries fall between 5 February 2024 and 22 July 2024, and the certificate prints no revocation date. So the document tells you the permission was given and that it is now gone; it does not tell you when it went, or why.
Why do some brands appear in a second register as well?
Because operators can and do hold entries with more than one body. Two of the five brands above also appear in the Anjouan public register with a separate ALSI number and a status of valid at the time of reading. BC.Game appears there under ALSI-202410011-FI1, held by Twocent Technology Limited, issued 2 October 2024 and expiring 1 October 2026. Bets.io appears under ALSI-202410047-FI2, held by TESSERA LIMITED SRL, issued 18 October 2024 and expiring 17 October 2026.
A brand can therefore be simultaneously revoked in one register and valid in another, and both statements are true of different documents.
This is precisely why a single-register check produces the wrong answer often enough to matter. The two registers are described separately on our pages about the Curaçao certificate portal and the Anjouan licence register.
What does a revocation not tell you about your balance?
Nothing at all, and no page should pretend otherwise. The register entry addresses the permission to offer games; it does not address the operator’s contractual obligations to account holders, does not create a compensation scheme, and does not name a body that adjudicates individual disputes.
The operator’s own terms remain the only document that speaks to withdrawals, and those terms were written by the operator. Fourteen of the hundred brands publish a withdrawal ceiling with a clause number; the other 86 publish no figure, which is not the same as having no ceiling.
How should a revoked status change what you record?
- Record the status word and the date, not a summary. “Revoked, read 26 August 2026” is a record; “unlicensed” is an inference.
- Check whether the number is shared. If it is, the finding applies to every brand on it, not only to the one you were looking at.
- Check the second register before concluding anything. An ALSI entry may exist alongside a revoked OGL number.
- Do not read a valid entry elsewhere as cancelling the revoked one. Two registers, two documents, two separate facts.
- Note what the certificate does not contain. No Curaçao certificate in this library carries an expiry date, so “no expiry shown” is the accurate cell, not “no expiry”.
What this page deliberately does not do
It does not rank the five brands, and it does not tell a reader in India whether to use any of them. The status of an offshore licence is a question about a foreign register; whether a person in India may lawfully take part in online money gaming is a question about Indian statute, and the two do not answer each other.
The current Indian text, section by section, is set out on our page about the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025. Six of these operators also name India in their own restricted-country clause, which is a separate document again: see the brands that restrict India in their terms.