Every guide on this site carries a named author, and that name links to a page like this one.
We do this because a review of a casino you cannot complain to should at minimum tell you who wrote it and what they did to reach the conclusion. Our reviewers open funded accounts at the offshore casinos we rank, deposit real money, play, and time withdrawals on each rail an operator offers. They record licence authorities from named sources rather than from marketing copy, and they label an estimate as an estimate.
Where a figure cannot be verified at all, they leave it out rather than fill the space. Reviewers do not take payment from operators, are not given accounts by them, and have no input into commercial arrangements. The order of a ranking is set by the lineup we publish and by measured payout data.
If a reviewer's testing contradicts a commercial preference, the testing is what gets published. Corrections are made in place and noted, and a re-test replaces an old figure rather than sitting beside it. Reviewers are named because accountability is the point.
A guide that no one has signed is a guide no one can be held to, and on a subject where the reader has limited recourse that matters more than usual. Each author page sets out what the reviewer has tested, how long they have covered the sector, and what they will not do. Between them our reviewers have opened and funded accounts at every casino this site ranks, and none of those accounts was provided by an operator.
Where a reviewer has a conflict, they do not write the page. Corrections carry the name of the person who made them. We publish the testing method alongside the name so that a reader can judge the work rather than the byline.
Every ranking on this site traces back to a funded account, a timed withdrawal and a licence claim checked against a named source, and any reviewer can be asked to show that trail. If you believe a guide is wrong, the contact page reaches the person who wrote it.