Curaçao-based cryptocasino BC.Game is facing the possibility of license revocation by the country’s gambling regulator, Curaçao Gaming Control Board (GCB) for questions over its finances and regulatory compliance. Curaçao was, until recently, a jurisdiction known for black market offshore sites, but has been attempting to clean up its reputation through regulatory reform.
GCB intends to withdraw the license because of unaddressed concerns regarding whether BC.Game is following regulations, including paying out withdrawals promptly. The regulator is also concerned about the operator’s financial stability, as Curaçao courts declared its parent company, Small House BV, bankrupt about a week earlier. The court’s decision was based on allegations by users of misconduct and uncertainty over the ownership of BC.Game. According to Next.io, the operator has until Friday, November 29, to respond and convince GCB not to move forward.
The company also operates in the UK through a licensing agreement with TGP Europe. It even sponsors the Premier League club Leicester City in a £30 million ($38 million) deal. According to some, the Curaçao license outcome will not affect the UK operations. Officially, BC.Game and other Curaçao-licensed operators don’t accept US players. However, cryptocasinos are not all equally diligent about ensuring players don’t access their services from a restricted region by using a VPN.
BC.Game denies wrongdoing
While it has not responded to the news of the regulator’s intentions, BC.Game issued a public statement after the court’s bankruptcy decision to clarify some of the allegations. The company denied misconduct claims from some players, including accusations that system malfunctions had caused user losses. BC.Game reiterated its commitment to transparency, fairness, and regulatory compliance. It noted that internal audits found the allegations to be without merit.
Additionally, the operator reassured stakeholders that it faces no liquidity or financial stability concerns and remains operational as normal. In a public statement, BC.Game’s management team said,
We strongly disagree with the court’s recent rulings and will vigorously appeal the decision, as we believe it failed to adequately consider key facts. BC.GAME is confident in our ability to demonstrate compliance and uphold our reputation as a legitimate operator in the industry.
Leicester City also issued a statement backing the company.
BC.Game’s troubles highlight the risk of offshore gambling
Curaçao is home to dozens of online casinos, many of which use cryptocurrency. Although these sites are illegal in the US, they don’t have the same stringent verification policies and geolocation technology as regulated US sites.
The case against BC.Game highlights a critical reason US players must avoid playing illegally at offshore casinos. Unlike licensed operators in the US, these sites don’t have to follow US regulations, meaning there’s no legal recourse when things go wrong. Although Curaçao is now taking a more hands-on approach to regulation than it has in the past, players are still trusting an unaccountable foreign agency to ensure sites aren’t:
- Offering rigged games with unfair odds
- Mishandling players’ personal information
- Going bankrupt without returning users’ deposits or winnings
That last scenario is not uncommon and may be on the verge of happening with BC.Game. Sites regulated in the US are required to segregate user deposits from their operating capital, so players can always withdraw their funds even if the operator goes out of business. That is rarely the case with offshore sites.
One of the most famous examples was in April 2015, when Lock Poker, another Curaçao-licensed site, abruptly shut down after years of speculation that it owed players millions. While the amount is unknown, some estimates suggest the site owed about $15 million in unpaid winnings, which were never recuperated.
An even more infamous example is poker’s “Black Friday.” On April 15, 2011, the US Department of Justice shut down the offshore poker sites PokerStars, Full Tilt, Absolute Poker, and Ultimate Bet. PokerStars, which later bought Full Tilt, returned players’ money and became a legal and licensed US operator. However, that was not the case for Ultimate Bet and Absolute Poker, which didn’t keep players’ funds separate from operating capital. Some reports suggest that users of the two sites lost up to $50 million in unpaid funds.
About the Author
