The name on the contract is not the name on the site

Not one name carries a Croatian form

A finding runs through the nine rows that is only visible once the list is looked at as a whole.

Croatian commercial companies carry the suffixes d.o.o. or d.d. Neither appears in this table, not once.

That finding has legal weight, which is a rarity among the facts on these pages. Under article 3, paragraph 4 of the Gaming Act the right to organise casino games may be acquired by commercial companies with their seat in the Republic of Croatia, and the absence of a Croatian suffix across all nine names is consistent with none of those companies taking part in that column.

We go no further than the correspondence. We have not opened company registers in any country, so we do not infer a seat from a form suffix; we simply record that no Croatian form appears in nine rows. Which right the Act assigns to whom is set out on the page about Hrvatska Lutrija.

Six company-form suffixes across nine rows

The suffix at the end of a name repeats rarely. B.V. appears three times, SRL twice, and N.V., Ltd., Limited and Limitada once each.

The suffix is part of the name and nothing more than that. We have not opened company registers in any jurisdiction, so we infer from the form of a name neither a country of seat nor anything about capital or ownership.

It is still worth recording when checking, because it is part of the string two records are compared against character by character.

One name that is not a name but a number

At the brand Metaspins the company name reads 3–102–959384 SRL. Letters appear only in the form suffix; everything else is a run of digits.

That record is not a transcription error and is not hidden. It stands that way in the document, and for a reader it means one thing: a search by word will not find it, so you search for the whole string.

What that registry format stands for and which register keeps it we did not check, so nothing is claimed about it here.

In eight rows the brand and the company share no word

Go through the table row by row and the brand name and the company name coincide rarely.

In eight of the nine rows they share not a single word. The only exception is Rainbet, where the opening letters of the brand recur in the name RBGAMING N.V.

No company appears twice in the table. Nine brands mean nine different names, and that is a finding about these ten rows rather than a rule about the market: brands we did not read take no part in this arithmetic.

A company name and a licence number go as a pair

In the table above each name sits beside a licence mark, and that pair is the unit of checking.

Five names are tied to Curaçao marks, in two different formats, and four to Anjouan ones. The tenth row has neither a name nor a number, because at that brand we read neither.

The pair matters because the check runs in both directions. From the number you reach the company name in the issuer’s register, and from the name in the terms back to the number. If those two routes do not meet on the same string, the finding is worth more than any score.

What an entry in a register actually shows, and what stays open, is set out on the page about foreign licences.

How to compare those two names yourself

The procedure takes a few minutes and is free.

1. Find the company name in the footer of the site or in the terms, usually beside a licence number and a registered address.
2. Open the register of the body that issued the licence and find the same number. The procedure for both issuers in our table is described on the page about foreign licences.
3. Compare the name from the register with the name in the terms, character by character, including the form suffix.
4. Write down the date. A register entry changes independently of when you read it.

A divergence between those two names is worth more than the mere existence of a number, because it shows that the number and the contract do not rest on the same name.

What a company name does not settle

It stays silent on when money leaves. Four houses publish an upper payout limit, each with a clause number, and those figures sit on the page about payout limits.

It stays silent on the rule for requesting papers too, which the page about identity checks covers.

It stays silent on the age of the brand. Two houses out of ten publish a launch year, and neither ties that year to the company name; what can be checked about the age of a brand sits on the page about a new online casino in Croatia.

And it leaves the brand’s Croatian position exactly where it was. An approval for an online casino goes only to a company that already holds the right to a casino on premises in Croatia, under article 35, paragraph 2, so a foreign name takes no part in that arithmetic.

Nine names and a page for each

Every brand in the table has a page where the company name sits beside the licence number and the clauses about money.

• Rocketpot: Danneskjold Ventures B.V.
• Bitcasino.io: Moon Technologies B.V.
• Wild Fortune: Metlait SRL.
• DuckDice: Zentari Limitada.
• Empire.io: Pixel Entertainment Limited.
• Metaspins: 3–102–959384 SRL.
• Rainbet: RBGAMING N.V.
• Shuffle: Natural Nine B.V.
• Wild.io: Stack Gaming Ltd.

At the tenth brand, Vave, the licence holder is named Latcas B.V. and was read in the register of the body that issued the licence, not in the brand’s own terms. That is why it stands outside these nine in the table.