Upgaming casinos as a System: Traffic, Brands, and the Hidden Architecture of Gambling

The report by GAMRS, dedicated to the MyStake casino and the broader group of brands operating on the Upgaming platform (formerly InPlayNet), is a rare example of research that goes beyond a single operator and allows us to look inside an entire model of modern grey gambling.

Formally, this report is aimed at regulators and focuses on legal risks, primarily in the context of the United Kingdom. However, its real value lies elsewhere. It captures the business architecture, the logic of traffic management, and the scaling mechanisms that are used far beyond the Upgaming ecosystem.

My interest in this material is not legal, but business-analytical. I approach it as a traffic and operations specialist: how the system is structured, why it is structured this way, and why it works.

The Platform and Its Double Bottom

At the center of the ecosystem stands the development company — today known as Upgaming. Formally, it is a casino platform provider, a game aggregator, and a turnkey solution for operators. In practice, it is the core of a closed ecosystem within which an entire network of casino brands operates.

MyStake is the most visible of these brands. In the GAMRS report it is described as a clone or an imitation of Stake, and this observation is largely justified. But what truly matters is something else: MyStake is not an exception — it is the flagship, the top layer of the system.

On the same platform operate Cosmobet, Velobet, Goldenbet, Rolletto, Donbet, Jackbit, Freshbet, and other brands, registered under Santeda International B.V. and Ryker B.V. (Curaçao licenses). Some brands shut down, others are launched, but the platform itself remains unchanged.

A Closed Club Instead of a B2B Market Provider

Platform-based gambling companies almost always have two faces:

• a public one — “we sell the platform to the market”;
• an internal one — “we ourselves operate a network of casinos”.

While the infrastructure is still new, the first face may dominate. But once the platform has long been amortized, it ceases to be a product and turns into an instrument of control and scaling.

Why So Many Identical Casinos Exist

From the outside, dozens of similar-looking brands appear excessive. But from within the system, it becomes clear: each brand is an operational tool.

A tool for traffic distribution, risk management, channel testing, and managing the player life cycle.

Feeder channel and Value Extractor: The Operator’s Logic

The report employs the model of feeder channels and value extractors:

• some brands attract mass traffic;
• others accumulate and monetize value.

This model clearly works. But it is important to emphasize: it is not "designed that way" by Upganing, it naturally follows from the operational logic of the casino business and used all over the place by other, similar networks, including, for example, Altacore N.V. casinos or SoftGaming - SG International N.V. casinos.

The Brand Life Cycle Through the Lens of Traffic

New Brands: Cosmobet

Cosmobet demonstrates a typical launch profile:

• around 1.5 million visits per month;
• a high bounce rate (~80%);
• approximately 1.6 pages per visit;
• short session durations.

These are hallmarks of social and influencer traffic — cheap, massive, and risky. It is needed not for perfect metrics, but for volume and testing.

Transitional Stage: Velobet

Velobet appears more mature:

• a higher share of returning users;
• greater depth of page views;
• longer session durations.

This indicates channel diversification: media buying, partial affiliate traffic, and less dependence on pure social sources.

The Flagship: MyStake

MyStake stands out sharply:

• 15–17 minutes average session duration;
• 10+ pages per visit;
• a relatively modest traffic volume.

This is the profile of clean SEO and affiliate traffic — high LTV and minimal noise.

The Traffic Ladder as the Central Metaphor

All of these observations converge into a single construct — the Traffic Ladder.

• at the bottom — new brands, aggressive acquisition, high risk;
• above — mixed channels and stabilization;
• at the top — the flagship, where the best players remain.

A portion of traffic is deliberately channeled between brands through newsletters, bonuses, Telegram, and cross-promotion. Sometimes this is done to increase LTV, sometimes to avoid affiliate payouts. This is not an anomaly, but a standard practice of the grey market.

The Technological Key: Geo Reclassification

The essence of the mechanism is simple: a user arrives from a regulated or prohibited jurisdiction, but along the technical pipeline is presented to the system as a player from another, “permitted” geography.

This is achieved through:

• a network of mirrors;
• invisible redirects;
• and, critically, an in-house game aggregator that permits geo-evasive routing.

It is precisely the presence of a proprietary aggregator that makes this scheme viable. If visualised using two faces idea: an external aggregator verifies geolocation independently, an internal one accepts the reality it is shown.

As a result, the system gains the ability to:

• display any games, including restricted;
• connect any payment methods;
• bypass provider restrictions;
• achieve high conversion even in tightly regulated geographies.

Conclusion: A Universal Model, Not an Isolated Case

This model includes:

• a centralized platform;
• a network of brands with distinct roles;
• a traffic ladder;
• a player channeling mechanism;
• and technological control over geography.

It is scalable, geography-agnostic, and extremely efficient. Upgaming is only one example of its implementation. The underlying principle, however, goes far beyond any single company.