This box is not visible in the printed version.
The Gambling Commission's study into consumer awareness of the illegal online gambling market.
Published: 18 September 2025
Last updated: 18 September 2025
This version was printed or saved on: 18 September 2025
Online version: https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/report/illegal-online-gambling-consumer-awareness-drivers-and-motivations
This publication explains how we have used mixed methods research to understand consumer engagement with illegal gambling websites
This is the first in our series of reports on illegal gambling.
The qualitative phase of our research revealed 4 broad audience groups that engage with illegal gambling websites.
These audiences have varying awareness levels of engagement with illegal websites, different entry pathways into the websites, and motivations for using them.
In partnership with the Commission, Yonder Consulting conducted a multi-phase study to identify consumers that engage with illegal gambling websites1.
Phase 1 used both quantitative and qualitative research methods to explore the different audiences engaging with illegal gambling websites. Insights from Phase 1 helped to inform and refine our approach for Phase 2, which involved conducting a quantitative survey using a larger sample size to validate the initial findings. More details of our methodology can be found in the full research reports for Phase 1 and Phase 2.
We refer to illegal gambling throughout this report, however, when conducting research with consumers we have used the term ‘unlicensed gambling’2. Feedback from our Lived Experience Advisory Panel (LEAP) highlighted that this might encourage more open discussions as some consumers may find the term ‘illegal’ stigmatising as it can imply that they are behaving unlawfully when engaging with illegal gambling websites, when in fact, it is the gambling companies that are conducting illegal activities by not complying with the law in Great Britain.
The qualitative research with consumers revealed 4 broad audience groups that engage with illegal websites. These 4 audiences have varying awareness levels of engagement with illegal websites, different entry pathways into the websites, and motivations for using them. These audiences are analogous with groups identified in discussions with representatives of affiliate platforms and payment platforms.
It should be noted that these 4 audience categories are based on qualitative data from Phase 1, and although Phase 2 findings validated these groups’ routes into the illegal gambling market, it is not yet possible to define the quantitative proportions of each category within the wider group of those that use illegal gambling websites. This will only be possible once further phases of this project are completed, in which data will be collected on a larger scale using the Commission’s Gambling Survey for Great Britain (GSGB).
With the exception of the individuals within the Self-excluders audience, consumers mostly report using illegal websites to supplement their gambling activity on Gambling Commission-regulated websites, rather than solely using illegal ones. Key motivations include finding better odds and offers, wanting to play games that are unavailable in Great Britain, ability to use alternative payment methods (that is, not GBP), avoiding stake or spend limits, and lower barriers to entry such as minimal age or ID verification processes.
There does not appear to be a clear distinction between the demographics of consumers that gamble with legal websites compared with illegal gambling websites. As with legal gambling websites, reported engagement with illegal gambling websites also tends to be higher amongst men, younger individuals (that is, aged 18 to 24 years), those who gamble more frequently, and those who score 8 or more on the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI). Respondents most commonly reported using illegal websites to engage in online betting on football, online bingo, online fruit and slot games and virtual gaming3, followed by a range of other online betting and gambling activities as seen in the legal market.
1This study therefore does not include consumer engagement with illegal gambling apps, or gambling that takes place on private messaging forums or direct social media platforms.
2Initial scoping work indicated this terminology would help illicit more open responses from consumers.
3 Including online casino style games, but not ‘social gaming’ or non-gambling games.
Yonder Consulting, in partnership with the Commission, conducted a multi-phase study to identify consumers that engage with illegal websites. Phase 1 used a combination of quantitative and qualitative research methods to explore the different audiences engaging with illegal gambling websites. Insights from Phase One helped to inform and refine our approach for Phase 2, which involved a conducting a quantitative survey using a larger sample size to validate the initial findings.
Online survey
The core purpose of the quantitative research was to inform the qualitative phase, by gathering information on awareness of, and potential indicators of engaging in, illegal gambling and gaining consent for recontact. Yonder surveyed 1,007 people who had gambled online at least once in the last four weeks1
Depth interviews
10 respondents were recruited to take part in one-hour online depth interviews; these respondents were recruited through recontacting a sub-set of individuals who took part in the quantitative survey, in which they indicated that they had likely engaged with illegal gambling websites in the last 4 weeks.
Focus groups
2 x 90-minute online focus groups were conducted with those who had experience of using illegal gambling websites whilst being self-excluded from licensed gambling websites using GAMSTOP. Recruitment for the groups was conducted via members of our Lived Experience Advisory Panel (LEAP), who also facilitated the sessions2. Discussions revolved around online gambling activity (including preferred activities, providers, and pathways in) as well as experiences of using illegal gambling websites while registered to GAMSTOP.
Online survey
Phase 2 aimed to validate the phase 1 findings using a larger sample size of 2,046 individuals who had gambled online in the last 4 weeks3. It aimed to explore how routes into the illegal market interact with, and feed into, the different types of audiences who use illegal gambling websites. Respondents were asked about their awareness of the illegal online gambling market and their engagement with it.
To increase accuracy in identifying those who use the market, respondents were not only directly asked whether they had used an illegal site, they were also asked about proxy behaviours that may be indicative of illegal site use4. This approach allowed Yonder to capture those who may be engaging with these sites unknowingly in addition to those who do so intentionally.
More details on methodologies can be found in Phase 1 and Phase 2.
Using a mixed-methods approach has allowed Yonder to gather a well-rounded view of consumer engagement in the online illegal market. The quantitative stages of the project provided valuable snapshots of attitudes and opinions, offering a broad view of trends and patterns across a specific sample. Conversely, the depth interviews conducted in phase one allowed Yonder to understand the complexities and nuance of consumers’ experiences with illegal websites.
While Yonder took care to ensure the robustness of the findings through the research design and application, there are some limitations which should be considered when reading this report5 . Firstly, all insights gathered from the Consumer Voice project are based on self-reported behaviour rather than observed behaviour, meaning insight is limited to what respondents felt comfortable revealing to Yonder in the research setting.
Additionally, the quantitative samples used throughout this research included only those who have gambled online in the past 4 weeks, excluding National Lottery only players. This was to ensure respondents had as accurate recollection of websites, products and experiences as possible. As such, findings should not be treated as representative of all those who gamble online, and caution should be taken in exploring sub-group differences.
The Commission is undertaking an additional phase of research, in which questions relating to online illegal gambling are being asked to a nationally representative sample of consumers using the Gambling Survey for Great Britain (GSGB).
1 Note, excluding those who only: gamble in person, play National Lottery draws, play scratchcards, or participate in private betting (that is, any combination of only these activities). Respondents were recruited to be broadly representative, using a quota-based sampling approach.
2 This was done to enhance safeguarding and minimise potential harm given the sensitive nature of the topic.
3 An example proxy indicator is asking respondents whether they paid to gamble using a credit card, as this has been banned since 2020.
4 Note, excluding those who only played National Lottery draws.
5 For more detail surrounding the strengths and limitations of Yonder’s approach, see the Phase 1 and Phase 2.
Respondents showed low levels of awareness of the illegal online market, highlighted by some reporting that they had not used illegal websites whilst their responses to other questions indicated otherwise, and vice versa. This lack of understanding was also highlighted in survey verbatim responses after respondents were asked to name illegal websites they had used, with only a minority able to name an illegal website, and numerous respondents mistakenly naming licensed operators. However, respondents agreed it is important that operators have a licence to operate in Great Britain. There therefore looks to be a disconnect in individuals who gamble online, between the perceived importance of operators being licensed, and their understanding of whether or not operators hold this licence, and how this can be verified.
Respondents reported typically using illegal gambling websites to engage in online betting on football, online bingo, online fruit or slot games and virtual gaming1. Phase 2, specifically, found that there does not seem to be a clear distinction between the demographics of consumers that gamble with licensed websites versus illegal gambling websites. As with legal gambling websites, reported engagement with illegal gambling websites also tends to be higher amongst men, younger individuals (that is, aged 18 to 24 years)2, those who gamble more frequently, and those who score 8 or more on the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI).
Respondents who had gambled using illegal websites were more likely (than those who had not used illegal gambling websites) to prioritise factors such as finding better odds and offers, wanting to play games that are unavailable in Great Britain, ability to use alternative payment methods (that is, not GBP), avoiding stake or spend limits, and lower barriers to entry such as minimal age or ID verification processes when choosing which website to gamble on than those who had not. For others, a key driver is the desire to circumvent protection measures such as self-exclusion. Many respondents reported that their engagement in the illegal online market is an extension of their overall approach to gambling, in which they seek out fun, new experiences, or better rewards.
This research also highlighted that engagement with illegal gambling websites is typically supplementary rather than exclusive, with most illegal gambling website users reporting favouring spending time or money on licensed websites rather than on illegal websites. No respondents reported gambling solely on illegal gambling websites, indicating that those who do engage with illegal markets are still using licensed operators for most gambling activities.
We also asked respondents whether they would be likely to use illegal gambling websites in the future. This revealed that those who report that they may use illegal gambling websites in the future have a broad range of motivations for potentially doing so, many of which are the same as those held by consumers who are already using illegal gambling websites. However, there are limitations to asking about future intent in self-report surveys, and so further research will be required to unpick potential drivers into the illegal market in more depth.
In the qualitative stage of Phase One of the research, Yonder identified 4 profiles of audiences that use illegal gambling websites, either knowingly or unknowingly. These 4 audiences have varying levels of awareness of engagement with illegal gambling websites, different entry pathways into the websites, and motivations for using them. Phase 2 validated these findings and provided deeper insights into consumer engagement with illegal gambling websites.
The 4 audiences are briefly described in the following paragraphs3.
These are individuals who gamble on illegal gambling websites but have chosen to self-exclude from all licensed gambling websites by registering with GAMSTOP, and/or by using other gambling blocking schemes or software. They also may be experiencing adverse consequences from their gambling.
Individuals in this audience group are therefore unable to access licensed gambling websites, so instead use illegal websites when they feel the urge to gamble.
Self-excluders primarily use search engines to find ‘not on GAMSTOP’ websites, and report receiving a high amount of direct marketing and targeted advertising on social media.
Female, aged 55 to 64
For more insight, see the ‘Self-excluders’ case study in the Phase 1 report.
These are individuals who knowingly and systematically engage with illegal websites, motivated by the desire to acquire new skills and explore a variety of new game types.
Skilled Advocates also report being motivated by access to better odds and offers, lower stakes, deposit and withdrawal thresholds, the use of foreign or digital currencies (including cryptocurrencies), and sign-up processes that don’t require identity verification.
Individuals in this audience group tend to find illegal websites from engaging in conversations with other like-minded individuals who gamble, using private or open communities (such as X, WhatsApp, Facebook, Telegram, Reddit), paid advertising on social media, and through social media influencers.
Male, aged 25 to 34
For more insight, see the ‘Skilled Advocates’ case study in the Phase 1 report.
Social Explorers are individuals who discover these websites through social networks, social media, search engine advertising, affiliate websites and forums, often trialling them before committing in order to minimise risks.
Social Explorers tend to use illegal sites so they can find the best odds, and so they can build social bonds by sharing their gambling experiences with likeminded friends or family.
This audience group typically report being unaware of their engagement with the illegal market, unlike skilled advocates who knowingly choose to use illegal gambling websites. However, they do notice some distinctions between licensed and illegal websites through a variety of indicators, such as default payment currencies, website quality and website ‘location’. In response, social explorers tend to exercise caution when trying new websites, generally placing lower bets and stakes as part of their exploration.
Male, aged 45 to 54
For more insight, see the ‘Social Explorers’ case study in the Phase 1 report.
Accidental Tourists are individuals who stumble upon these websites completely by chance, and therefore unknowingly engage with the illegal online market.
This audience group is motivated by seeking better odds and high Return to Player (RTP) percentages, and uses gambling to enhance enjoyment of their hobbies (for instance, by betting on sport).
Male, aged 55 to 64
Accidental Tourists tend to find illegal websites using search engines and through advertising or recommendations sourced through their hobbies, for instance through YouTube influencers or sports podcasts.
Male, aged 55 to 64
For more insight, see the ‘Accidental Tourists’ case study in the Phase 1 report.
1 Including online casino style games, but not ‘social gaming’ or non-gambling games.
3 For additional detail, see the Yonder see the Phase 1 and Phase 2 reports.
Prior to commencing this work, there was a significant gap in the evidence base around who is gambling on illegal websites, and their motivations for doing so. Whilst some studies were attempting to understand the size and scale of the illegal market, very few were exploring consumers drivers and motivations and layering that evidence with data from other sources. We identified this evidence need in Theme 6 of our Evidence Gaps and Priorities – Illegal gambling and Crime , updated in 2024, and this formed the basis of our Consumer Voice research.
As well as our Consumer Voice research, other external studies have since been published, including studies focused on Great Britain and others conducted in international jurisdictions.
Research exploring the illegal online gambling market in Great Britain has largely been conducted using survey data from consumers. Although sampling methods differ, studies have generally sought to deepen understanding of the illegal gambling market by using player survey data to explore engagement, pathways and awareness of the illegal gambling market.
There is some consistency in the reported drivers for, and pathways into, gambling on the illegal online market. As reported in our Consumer Voice research, findings from wider research show that motivations for using illegal gambling websites are often similar to those for legal gambling websites, with consumers attracted by better odds and promotional offers1. In addition, consumers using illegal gambling websites are also attracted by the ability to use cryptocurrencies or to gamble whilst self-excluded2 3. Studies have also found that consumers struggle to differentiate between legal and illegal products, which again supports the findings from our research.
There is also a subset of research45 in this area exploring whether regulation influences consumers to use the illegal market. This is an area the Commission will be exploring further, however our findings to date suggest that there are a range of different factors motivating consumers to use illegal websites.
The international evidence base points towards a growing understanding of the use of illegal gambling websites, and of the pathways and consumer motivations for doing so. It is however important to note that several jurisdictions are currently undergoing significant regulatory change, and the impact of this on engagement with illegal markets is not fully understood.
As we have seen in Great Britain, international studies have found that men and younger individuals are more likely to be engaging with the illegal market67, alongside higher spending consumers8. International studies have also found that one of the key reasons for consumers engaging with illegal markets is to access products which are not available in their own jurisdiction910, albeit this varies dependent on the regulatory environment. Again, this mirrors findings from our Consumer Voice research.
Across all jurisdictions, researchers looking to understand consumers’ interactions with the illegal gambling market face several challenges. Firstly, the very nature of illegal gambling is clandestine, meaning that data is often not readily available and common pathways and entry routes are difficult to tap into. Secondly, as many consumers are not aware that they are gambling on a site that is not licensed in their jurisdiction, it is difficult to collect data on participation rates and obtain robust insights on consumers’ experiences. A further challenge, as with all consumer research, is that consumer-reported intentions often diverge from actual behaviour, particularly when asking individuals to consider their future behaviour. Therefore, consumers’ reported preferences in research should be treated with caution and validated against real-world actions to understand how often their stated intentions translate into reality.
There are, therefore, still areas where we are lacking robust findings or where we have been unable to draw together conclusive findings. Furthermore, this assessment of the external evidence base considered a range of research, including both peer-reviewed academic literature and wider non-academic studies produced by regulators, the industry and others. Although both are valuable in building our knowledge, it is important to highlight the differing robustness in these pieces of evidence. Greater transparency of methodologies used within studies is also needed to assess the relative strengths and limitations of approaches taken when new research is released and determine their contribution to the wider evidence base.
1 PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2021, February) (opens in new tab) (PDF) Review of unlicensed online gambling in the UK. Betting and Gaming Council.
2 Behavioural Insights Team. (2025, January) (opens in new tab) (PDF) Understanding gambling through social media in Great Britain. Behavioural Insights Team.
3 GAMSTOP. (2024). Evaluation report 2024 (opens in new tab) (PDF) The National Online Self-Exclusion Scheme Limited.
4 British Horseracing Authority. (2023, October 16) (opens in new tab) (PDF). British horseracing faces exodus of bettors if intrusive affordability checks are introduced by Gambling Commission, survey finds.
5 Regulus Partners (2024, September). educing online gambling black markets: An analysis of international practices. Entain Group.
6 Hagfors, H., Oksanen, A., & Salonen, A. H. (2023) Gambling motives and offshore gambling: A Finnish population study. Journal of Gambling Studies. (opens in new tab)
7 Thomas, S. L., Pitt, H., Randle, M., Cowlishaw, S., & Daube, M. (2022) (opens in new tab). Gambling marketing and vulnerable consumers in Australia: A policy review and research agenda. Asian Journal of Gambling Issues and Public Health, 22(1).
8 Hing, N., Russell, A. M. T., Tolchard, B., & Nower, L. (2016)(opens in new tab). A comparative study of gambling problems among licensed and unlicensed online gamblers in Australia. Journal of Gambling Studies, 32(2), 595–613.
9 Hing, N., Russell, A. M. T., Tolchard, B., & Nower, L. (2016) (opens in new tab). A comparative study of gambling problems among licensed and unlicensed online gamblers in Australia. Journal of Gambling Studies, 32(2), 595–613.
10 Spelinspektionen. (2025, April) (opens in new tab) (pdf). Spelinspektionens lägesbild – onlinespel utanför den licensierade marknaden.
A subsequent phase of the Consumer Voice project is due to be completed at the end of 2025, in which questions relating to consumer engagement in illegal gambling websites are being developed for the Gambling Survey for Great Britain (GSGB). These questions will allow us to monitor trends in consumers’ self-reported engagement with illegal websites on an ongoing basis and build on our knowledge of the four key audiences. They are likely to require further development, however, as we continue to explore how to produce robust estimates of the proportion of consumers accessing illegal gambling websites across the 4 key audiences.
Within the Phase Two survey, we included a preliminary question that aimed to explore consumers’ ‘knee jerk’ reactions to a regulatory change that could influence engagement in the online illegal market. We asked consumers about their instinctive reactions to the financial vulnerability check proposals that were the subject of an extensive Consumer Voice project published earlier that year. This project explored gambler attitudes towards Financial Vulnerability and Financial Risk Check proposals, and illustrated that consumer-stated intentions relating to theoretical regulatory change differ significantly from their views when given a fuller understanding of the regulatory change’s purpose and scope. Building on this insight, we will use our new Consumer Voice programme to conduct further research utilising a more deliberative approach, allowing us to more deeply understand the role that both regulatory and operator practices may have on consumer engagement in the illegal market.
Additionally, we are considering the benefits of developing a consumer-facing campaign, with the objective of raising awareness within targeted groups of consumers of the risks of accessing and using the illegal market. The Commission has begun using behavioural insights research to identify specific groups and their relationship with illegal gambling products and services. This work would involve cross-referencing these insights with the data and findings from this research and could be rolled out iteratively with a view to encourage positive behaviour change.
Our overall goal is to continue to build an evidence base that includes understanding the consumer perspective to appreciate engagement and the way it changes using a range of research vehicles. This will help us understand better the areas of this issue which require regulatory action.