Report
Illegal online gambling - Phase 3: Understanding push factors for consumer engagement with illegal gambling websites
The Gambling Commission's research into consumer engagement with the illegal online gambling market.
Exploring attitudes towards push factors and influences in more depth
The quantitative findings show a number of factors within the licensed market can act as factors that influence individuals who gamble to explore illegal gambling websites. The digital intelligence work reveals a widespread and practical conversation around these influences, with users proactively seeking alternatives rather than simply complaining.
Digital intelligence provides a broad view of what is being discussed online, while the qualitative research with Skilled Advocates, Social Explorers, and Accidental Tourists reveals the specific motivations that underpin these conversations. By combining these 2 lenses, we can build a nuanced picture of individuals’ attitudes and the role this plays in influencing illegal website use.
Notes for readers:
- Digital intelligence provides insight into public social media content and conversation and can help identify behavioural trends and patterns. However, it reflects expressed rather than confirmed behaviour and cannot be treated as representative of the wider population. Digital intelligence naturally tends to capture those who are more vocal or hold stronger opinions on subjects. For example, individuals who feel strongly about certain regulatory measures, are often more vocal in digital spaces, whereas those with more neutral feelings may be less likely to post. Furthermore, mentions of intent can’t reliably verify actual migration to illegal online gambling, or provide a robust quantitative sizing of the prevalence of the activity.
- Digital intelligence analysis is also limited to publicly available content. Because of the sensitive nature of the topic, the anonymity provided by platforms like Reddit allows space for those who illegally gamble to share their experiences more honestly. On social media platforms like X and Facebook, discussion was more limited, and while YouTube contained a high volume of promotional videos, it lacked genuine conversations between those who gamble. This method hence cannot capture the full extent of activity taking place and instead sets up measurement for the quantitative phase.
Social proof and peer recommendations
Digital intelligence shows that because trust in gambling companies (both licensed and illegal) is low, community validation is key. Anonymous forums like Reddit have become essential sources of validation where users conduct legitimacy checks, share advice, and exchange recommendations. This peer-to-peer ecosystem is where decisions are often made. The conversation is not abstract; it is highly practical, with users seeking direct advice on which websites to use, particularly to circumvent GB-based restrictions like GamStop.
"I'm trying to find a decent non Gamstop UK casino because I'm currently excluded on the main network but fancy a few spins on the weekend."
Verbatim, Reddit: Person seeking a peer recommendation for an illegal alternative.
While the digital landscape shows that these conversations are happening, qualitative research reveals how they influence different groups, exposing 2 different types of risk.
Skilled Advocates are largely immune to recommendations from their friends and family, as they view gambling as a solo, income-focused activity rather than a social one. However, they place significant trust in a select group of respected peers on forums like Reddit. For them, these forums are not for social connection but for sharing skills and gaining a strategic edge. Trust is earned through a proven track record of successful tips and reliable information.
"I get advice occasionally from people that I follow on Reddit who follow me back, and who I have gotten good advice from before.”
Skilled Advocate, Female, 45 years old
While these forums may not be the initial reason a Skilled Advocate seeks out illegal gambling websites, they serve to validate their decision and make them more effective and confident navigators of the illegal market. This reinforces their belief that they can operate successfully outside the regulated system, making them less likely to return to the licensed market.
Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists are more likely to be influenced by word-of-mouth from their immediate social circle: friends and family. For them, a recommendation from a trusted person acts as a powerful behavioural shortcut that bypasses the need for rigorous evaluation. They operate with an implicit trust, assuming that a friend or family member would not recommend a dangerous or illegitimate website.
"I’d be more willing to give a new website a go if it was recommended by my family or friends, rather than someone like an influencer”
Accidental Tourist, Male, 37 years old
This poses a risk of unintentional migration to the illegal market. A casual recommendation can lead Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists to use an illegal gambling website without consciously assessing its licensing status. It is a pathway through which they can stumble into a high-risk environment, often only realising the lack of protections when something goes wrong.
Financial friction: slow withdrawals and the promise of faster payouts
Digital intelligence shows that financial friction is a key route through which illegal online gambling gains appeal. Online, the speed of access to funds is a recurring priority, with users reacting to slow withdrawals in the licensed market by actively seeking illegal alternatives. Many illegal alternatives, especially those using cryptocurrency1, are perceived as offering faster payouts. However, trust remains a key concern, driving users to community validation hubs like Reddit to confirm which websites pay out reliably.
The appeal is therefore not based on inherent trust in illegal online gambling companies, but on the perception that they may offer a more straightforward and efficient experience.
“I've tested a few online casinos over time, but the biggest issue I keep running into is slow withdrawals. Some platforms advertise fast payouts, yet approvals still take days with vague excuses."
Verbatim, Reddit: Person discussing slow withdrawals in the legal gambling space
“The non-GamStop landscape is a bit of a mixed bag here… From my experience and what I’ve read, platforms that support multiple payment methods and instant withdrawals tend to be the most reliable.”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person giving advice on non-GamStop options
Qualitative research adds a layer of nuance, revealing that attitudes towards withdrawal friction differ significantly by audience. Skilled Advocates see slow withdrawals not as a system issue but as an intentional hurdle created by licenced gambling companies to serve their own interests. This reinforces their deep-seated mistrust and validates their belief that the licensed market is working against them.
“There is a sense that licensed sites are quick to take your money and slow to pay out."
Skilled Advocate, Male, 44 years old
For Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists, however, withdrawal delays are more of an accepted annoyance. With lower financial and emotional investment in the outcome, they are more likely to see it as ‘just the way it is.’ While some more frequent players in this group report searching for websites with faster payouts, for most it does not significantly detract from their enjoyment.
"I disagree that licensed sites make it more difficult to withdraw winnings. I think it's more about them being cautious to check if you cheated or more of a safety measure."
Accidental Tourist, Male, 37 years old
Perceived decline in value: odds, RTP, and bonuses
Digital intelligence shows that a perceived decline in value weakens consumer loyalty to the licensed market. Users online frequently describe licensed play as offering poorer value, specifically citing reduced odds, lower return to player (RTP) percentages, and restrictive rewards. This conversation is not just complaint-driven; users are proactively searching for better value, framing illegal online gambling as a way to find more ‘freedom’ and better returns.
“I've played at UKGC-licensed sites for years. Lately I've noticed they've become stricter with limits and slower with withdrawals. Some even have lower RTPs than casinos not on Gamstop”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person discussing the perceived decline in value in the licensed market
"One thing no one mentions is the RTP. A lot of the big UK bookies are nerfing the odds to 92% or 94% to pay for their license fees. It makes a massive difference over a long session.”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person discussing poorer RTP and odds on UK websites
However, this search for value is tempered by concerns around hidden terms and lack of reliability of illegal gambling websites, particularly regarding bonuses that appear attractive but are difficult to withdraw. This reinforces the need for peer validation before choosing a new website amongst those within the digital intelligence.
Qualitatively, this perception of unfairness is a primary motivator for Skilled Advocates. They express a deep-seated mistrust, with certain individuals of this persona, believing that licensed gambling companies collude to lower odds to boost their own profits. This belief encourages them to look for value beyond the licensed online gambling websites.
“It's not just one site, you can see they [the sites] all move together. It feels the sites are working together to squeeze the value out for themselves, not for the player. That's what makes you look for an edge somewhere else”
Skilled Advocate, Male, 44 years old
In contrast, Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists are far less focused on value. In the focus groups, they rarely mention poor odds unprompted, as their focus is on the enjoyment of the activity itself rather than optimising financial returns. For them, the impact of slightly worse returns is negligible and more easily ignored.
"You know the odds are probably not the best, but you don't really think about it. You're just there to have a bit of fun with the game."
Social Explorer, Male, 25 years old
Product experience and enjoyment
The digital conversation suggests that licensed UK gameplay is often perceived as slow, repetitive, and less enjoyable, with some individuals citing forced delays between spins and the loss of features like autoplay as sources of frustration. This prompts some to seek out something new in illegal gambling websites. However, this reflects expressed views and stated intent among more vocal online users, rather than verified behaviour or a representative measure of migration to illegal online gambling.
“Been a casual player for years, but recently UKGC changes have killed the vibe for me. The delay between spins and no autoplay just makes everything feel slow and boring.”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person discussing reduced enjoyment in the licensed space.
In the illegal cryptocurrency space, a ‘boring’ or ‘uneventful’ experience can become a signal of trust and reliability. Users praise simple, straightforward gameplay without interruptions as a sign that the website is legitimate and won't create problems mid-session.
“I tried a crypto casino recently, and the weird part is how uneventful it felt… just a straightforward experience that didn't mess with my head. It honestly felt closer to playing a game and calling it a day, than getting stuck in a loop.”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person discussing simplicity as a trust signal
Qualitative findings show that for Skilled Advocates, game variety is a low-priority factor. Driven by a desire to master specific games to maximise returns, those spoken to report seeing a wide variety of games as a distraction. The only time it becomes relevant is when they are unable to place a specific type of bet (such as on certain international markets) within Great Britian.
"It's not about having a thousand slot games. It's that there are specific types of bets, certain markets, that you just can't place on UK sites. If you want to bet on those, you have no choice but to look elsewhere."
Skilled Advocate, Male, 51 years old
For Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists, the existing variety on licensed websites is largely seen as sufficient. However, some more engaged Social Explorers mention that games can feel repetitive, which can spark a desire for novelty and encourage them to look elsewhere.
Attitudes towards verification
Verification fatigue emerged in the digital intelligence as one of the strongest friction points for licensed gambling websites. Users describe feeling worn down by repeated verification loops that interrupt sign-up, play, or withdrawals. This frustration makes low or ‘no-KYC’ options feel appealing.
“No KYC loops are the biggest thing for me and what has turned me away from other platforms and casinos.”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person discussing the importance of no-KYC
However, users online also recognise that ‘no-KYC’ claims on illegal gambling websites can be misleading, warning peers that verification requests often reappear after a win. This creates a cycle where users, frustrated by checks in the licensed market, move to illegal gambling websites only to face the same issues in a less trusted environment.
“The whole ‘no kyc’ thing is kinda misleading. Most sites are fine until you win something decent then suddenly need docs. It's not really no KYC it's more like delayed KYC.”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person discussing "delayed" KYC on illegal gambling websites
Qualitative research indicatively suggests this factor has an influence for all groups. Skilled Advocates report having a better grasp on the different types of checks, and are especially more likely to say they have a ‘good understanding’ of how Identity checks, fraud or commercial checks, anti-money laundering and/or source of funds checks (KYC), customer interaction taken where financial difficulties have been identified through frictionless ‘financial vulnerability’ checks and ‘financial risk assessments’ could impact their gambling experience, compared to accidental tourists and non-engagers, in particular. Qualitative insight and verbatim analysis proves that this reported ‘good understanding’ does not always correlate with an accurate understanding of each factor, however, the perceived understanding of impact on their experience causes Skilled Advocates to reflect on verification checks as a significant point of resistance and an infringement on their personal autonomy. Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists are less likely to differentiate between different types of checks but generally hold a more balanced view, sometimes viewing them as an unpleasant necessity and a frustrating chore, with others understanding their need to an extent.
“Yes checks are annoying, but I can kind of understand in some cases why they exist”
Social Explorer, Female, 21 years old
Privacy concerns
Separate from the mandatory verification process, a significant area of the customer journey revolves around how operators use the personal data gathered during sign-up for marketing purposes. A key concern for all groups is privacy.
Both Skilled Advocates, Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists question who has access to their information and how it is used. The Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists spoken to, often feel they are sharing too much information and subsequently receive large volumes of unsolicited marketing, while Skilled Advocates worry more about the security of their personal information and the risk of hacking.
Source of funds and verification checks
Digital intelligence shows that source of funds and verification checks are a significant factor for those taking part in online conversations on the topic. Online conversations, particularly on Reddit, frame these checks as intrusive and disproportionate, especially when they interrupt play and involve requests for bank statements. For some, this privacy concern may create a push towards illegal gambling websites. For others, however, the checks reinforce the legitimacy of licensed websites.
“I've had it with the UKGC stuff tried to log in last night and got with another 'source of wealth' request just to deposit 50 quid… I just want to play some slots in peace without sending my bank statements to a stranger.”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person expressing privacy concerns
“Sticking to the proper, regulated sites might feel a bit more restricted with the newer affordability checks we’ve seen in 2026, but at least you know the RTP isn’t rigged and your money is actually protected”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person choosing to stay in the licensed market for trust2
Qualitative research shows that these divergent reactions are tied to the underlying attitudes of the different personas. However, a consistent theme across all groups is a generally low understanding of the various checks being applied. As observed in previous research, conducted for the Commission, consumers frequently conflate different types of financial checks. Research suggests that consumers often do not understand the underlying regulatory or safety purpose of checks unless they are taken through the process step by step. Without this contextual understanding, verification checks are often confused with financial checks or action taken following a check due to concerns identified is simply experienced as unexplained friction.
For Skilled Advocates, source of funds and verification and/or financial checks are a point of resistance, viewed as a direct challenge to their personal autonomy and freedom. With their more extensive experience of the gambling market, those in the focus groups often distinguish between initial identity verification (which they may tolerate) and what they view as ongoing requests for documents such as at withdrawal (which they often see as financial scrutiny and resent). They feel they should be able to gamble their money without such restrictions and be trusted to manage their own finances. The ask for bank statements or financial documents is perceived not just as an inconvenience, but as an intrusive infringement.
"I understand the anti-money laundering checks but the ones around losing a certain amount of money seem intrusive and stifling.”
Skilled Advocate, Female, 45 years old
The Skilled Advocates spoken to discuss a sense of feeling judged by gambling companies and the regulator which reinforces their anti-authority mindset. As a result, they use financial checks as a justification for them to actively seek out illegal alternatives, where they believe they can regain the control and privacy they feel has been taken from them. They are less likely to differentiate between check types, often grouping all verification under the same banner.
In contrast, Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists, who form the majority of illegal gambling website users, view financial checks as an unpleasant necessity. Significantly, these users also appear to conflate financial checks with identity verification, viewing any request for information as part of the same burdensome process of checks. From their perspective, the distinction between providing proof of identity and proof of funds isn’t clear, and it’s the active interruption of their game playing that causes frustration; having to stop their gambling to provide extra documentation is perceived as a chore. While they find the process frustrating and a chore that gets in the way of enjoyment, their reaction is one of pragmatic acceptance rather than principled opposition.
They tend to accept the rationale that these checks are a means of consumer protection and a necessary part of adhering to government policies. For them, the security offered by the licensed market outweighs the inconvenience of the checks.
“I am okay with checks for regulation purposes, but my cynical side is also thinking the checks are for marketing so they can send you information...”
Social Explorer, Female, 21 years old
For these groups, the friction caused by checks is a source of annoyance but is not strong enough to make them actively seek out illegal alternatives. They are willing to trade a degree of privacy and convenience for the assurance that they are playing in a safe and fair environment.
Additionally, for a few individuals spoken to within these groups, this friction, and the feeling that checks are a chore, is exacerbated by perceived inconsistency in how and when different gambling companies request them. In such cases, these individuals feel as though they aren’t quite sure of what document is requested of them or when a check might be triggered.
“I think its very inconsistent when it comes to gambling sites, some might just want your address and email, others want passport, drivers licence, face scan.. others say birth certificate.”
Accidental Tourist, Female, 34 years old
Account control and player management
Loss of access and control is a source of frustration identified in the digital intelligence. Some users online describe having their accounts with licenced gambling companies restricted or closed with little explanation, often framing this as being punished for winning. These users report this typically occurring after a ‘decent win’ and is followed by sudden document requests or withdrawal holds, often leading to suspicion that gambling companies are intentionally delaying payouts.
"You can get banned or gubbed3
for literally anything and they don't give you a reason."
Verbatim, Reddit: Person discussing their account being restricted.
“They just don't want to pay out. If this was crypto… would have transferred it in 1 min but because it's [licensed gambling company] they're trying to make me work for my money.”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person contrasting perceived gambling company unfairness with the speed of cryptocurrency
Loss of access: exclusion and blocking
Digital intelligence shows that when self-exclusion tools such as GamStop remove access to GB-licensed websites, users who still want to gamble often see their only option as leaving the licensed market. The conversation in peer communities then shifts from why someone excluded themselves to how to bypass the block, with users signposting each other to illegal options.
“Being blunt mate, you can't. I tried everything emailed them, called them, even tried to say my account was hacked. They won't budge until the exact date your term ends.”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person discussing the difficulty of reversing Gamstop
“I'm trying to find a decent non Gamstop UK casino because I'm currently excluded on the main network but fancy a few spins on the weekend.”
Verbatim, Reddit: Person seeking illegal alternatives to bypass Gamstop
Qualitative findings show that for those not subject to self-exclusion, GamStop is seen as personally irrelevant. Skilled Advocates, Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists view it as a tool for those experiencing problems with their gambling, which they do not believe applies to them. However, they can see how its ‘blanket block’ nature, despite knowing that GamStop is a personal choice, could infringe on personal autonomy and push others toward the illegal market.
"It's like stopping your human rights because even though it's in your best interest, it's stopping you from doing something you want to do.”
Accidental Tourist, Male, 37 years old
Alternative payments methods: crypto, credit cards, and foreign currency
Within the digital intelligence, alternative payment methods, particularly cryptocurrency, are often framed online as part of a faster, smoother, and more modern experience. The qualitative findings show the influence of these payment methods varies between audience groups.
For Skilled Advocates, the availability of alternative payment methods is a key functional requirement, not just a preference. They view these options as essential instruments for better and more efficient money management. Credit Cards are seen as a tool for managing cash flow, providing flexibility that is otherwise unavailable. Cryptocurrency is often viewed as a safer, more private option that is separate from their main bank account, giving them a greater sense of security and control.
"Crypto feels safer and more secure; if you are hacked and you have a crypto wallet then at least it's just that hacked, not your wallet.”
Skilled Advocate, Female, 35 years old
For this group, the inability to use these methods on licensed websites is a significant operational hurdle. It directly conflicts with their income-focused goals by preventing them from managing their funds with the speed and efficiency they desire.
“It's about control. If I want to use crypto for security or a credit card to manage my cash flow, I should be able to. The restrictions on licensed sites feel like they don't trust you to manage your own money, which is frustrating when you're trying to be efficient.”
Skilled Advocate, Female, 45 years old
For Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists, the issue of alternative payments is less functional and more about personal relevance and modernity. Their interest is not driven by a need for financial control, but by a desire for convenience and a feeling of being up to date. The ability to use cryptocurrency is seen as ‘modern’ and in line with an increasingly digital society, even if they don't use it themselves. The use of foreign currency is often a practical need for those with strong ties to another country, rather than a desire to circumvent rules.
"Having payments in crypto and a different currency isn't just a nice thing to have, it's all more modern as well. It's more fast and efficient and we are a digital society."
Social Explorer, Female, 21 years old
"I'm from Cyprus which uses the Euro, so having foreign currency is important to me.”
Accidental Tourist, Male, 28 years old
While this group may find the lack of these options on licensed websites to be outdated or inconvenient, it is not a primary factor pushing them towards illegal alternatives. In fact, some view the ban on credit cards for licensed online gambling websites as a responsible action that protects players from incurring debt. Overall, alternative payment methods, they report, have little influence on their behaviour.
References
1 Although the use of gambling companies which offer cryptocurrency isn’t technically illegal, there are no licensed sites that offer it, as it’s very difficult for a licensed site accepting cryptocurrency to pass money laundering assessments. For more information, see the Commission’s guidance on Blockchain technology and crypto-assets.
2 Affordability checks are not being implemented in the gambling market, consumer is most likely referring to bank statements or other documents required by operators for a range of reasons ranging from commercial to checks where indicators of harm have been identified. It is possible that following a financial vulnerability check, operators have followed up with the consumer due to identified financial vulnerability such as bankruptcy.
3Gubbed is a colloquial term to describe of experience of having a gambling account restricted by a gambling company. Therefore, being "gubbed" typically refers to the removal of a player's eligibility for promotional offers, bonuses, and free bets, or the imposition of severe stake limits.
Influences shaping illegal gambling website usage
Last updated: 20 October 2026
Show updates to this content
No changes to show.