Statistics and research release
Exploring online, illegal, individual-led lotteries and raffles
Findings from a 3 phase research project to understand how consumers engage with online illegal individual-led lotteries and raffles promoted on social media.
Summary
Also published recently
This report contains findings from a 3 phase research project to understand how consumers engage with online illegal individual-led lotteries and raffles promoted on social media with a particular focus on TikTok, while also including Facebook and Instagram. The research was conducted by Yonder Consulting as part of the Commission’s Consumer Voice Programme and strengthens the evidence base feeding into the Evidence themes on Illegal gambling and crime and Early gambling experiences and gateway products within the Commission’s Evidence gaps and priorities programme of work.
To build a comprehensive picture of this online ecosystem, Yonder conducted digital intelligence to map the network of websites, forums and livestreaming platforms where these activities take place, a quantitative survey of over 4,000 UK adults to measure the scale of exposure and participation, and qualitative in-depth interviews with 9 players and 1 host carrying out the draws to explore the lived reality of participation.
In this research, the term ‘draws’ and ‘online individual-led lotteries and raffles’ are used as practical research labels to describe illegal paid-entry lotteries run by individuals, influencers or small businesses on social media, where payment is required to participate for a chance to win a prize and the process for allocating prizes relies wholly on chance. This does not include the National Lottery, society lotteries, or genuine free giveaways. It also does not seek to cover lawful prize competitions or free draws that provide a free entry route alongside paid entry (for example, some prize-draw-style promotions run by organisations such as Omaze).
Key facts
Social media makes online individual-led lotteries and raffles easy to encounter and engaging to enter
This research examined how people encounter, interpret and engage with individual-led lotteries and raffles promoted on social media, particularly TikTok, with some experiences also involving Facebook and Instagram. Although participation is relatively low, exposure is common and often occurs passively through scrolling, reposts, live content, recommendations and community networks. Prize-focused posts, countdown, live draws and winner announcements help turn exposure into interest by generating excitement, urgency and a sense of active participation.
These activities feel casual and low risk, with trust built through social cues rather than formal checks
For many participants, online individual-led lotteries and raffles felt like casual, low-stakes fun and were easy to justify. Low ticket prices, mobile-first journeys and the social presentation of the content made participation feel more like light entertainment than serious gambling. Trust was typically built through visible winners, repeated exposure, familiar hosts and recommendations from friends, rather than through formal checks relating to licensing or regulation.
Awareness of illegality is low, and when recognised, it is unlikely to be challenged by consumers
Awareness of illegality was generally low among both participants and with the host interviewed. Players were not usually asking whether an activity was licensed, and the smaller-scale host interviewed also appeared unclear on the licensing requirements. Payment and entry often took place away from the original social media platform, where the journey still felt smooth and familiar even when protections may have been weaker. Because these draws feel low stakes and subsequently low risk to the player, they are unlikely to be reported. This means that there is difficulty in the challenge of identifying the size of this illegal activity.
Details
Full details can be found in the Exploring online, illegal, individual-led lotteries and raffles report.
Data and downloads
There are no files for this release.
Feedback
We are always keen to hear how these statistics are used and would welcome your views on this publication.