What branded searches tell us about Eastern Europe's offshore demands

Recent research commissioned by the European Gaming and Amusement Federation and produced by Regulus Partners and Helios found that spending with unlicensed operators across 28 European states amounted to approximately €12 billion in 2025, representing 25% of the overall European gambling market. The figure is projected to reach up to €13 by the end of this year. 

States often measure gambling participation with domestically licensed operators using the channelisation rate. Calculation methods vary, combining multiple factors and only serving as estimates. Player surveys are often part of the estimation process and rely on honest responses.

In my previous article, I focused on different Eastern European states’ exposure to unlicensed operators and their availability. As in the study above, regulation was the main differentiator between states and the predominant factor in offshore gambling exposure. Despite state actions, consumers often do not distinguish whether a gambling operator possesses a domestic license or not.

Players tend to trust Google search results or affiliate websites that portray these operators as trustworthy. Higher bonuses, game availability or the absence of responsible gambling restrictions can also influence players' decisions to play with offshore operators.

But search analysis is often overlooked in combined data used for channelisation calculations – perhaps because authorities lack complete data. This article examines real Google searches for operator brands in Slovakia, Czechia and Romania, focusing on direct customer demand from deliberate, specific searches. Using the Casino Guru database of online casinos, we can distinguish licenses across all brands.

Measuring offshore demand through Search

Search analysis also relies on estimates, as Google does not provide its data with full accuracy. However, these numbers do provide a basis for the vast SEO sector, both within and outside gambling. Several third-party providers combine data from multiple sources to produce accurate estimates of the countless keywords people search for.

We use Ahrefs for our work and review all keywords containing “casino” in each country. These keywords are then carefully categorised into general terms and specific casino brands. Notably, all analysed countries show more searches for specific brands than for non-specific gambling-related terms. The branded keywords are then checked against the Casino Guru database to distinguish between domestic and offshore licences.

Most of the process is now automated after running several trials. However, anomalies still require manual adjustment. Google searches can be faked with bots, but these patterns are easy to spot and can be adjusted statistically.

Lastly, it’s important to note that the analysis focuses on demand. It does not show actual usage or play at any particular casino. It also does not account for the channelisation rate; rather, it offers one possible perspective on the prevalence of offshore activity.

The licensed-offshore split 

All three states show a similar pattern in the split between general and branded search. Slovakia and the Czech Republic had more than 60% of all searches for specific casino brands, while Romania reached 70%. These figures are from May 2026 and reflect a common trend across European states.

Searches for specific brands are interesting in the context of offshore gambling, as people entering these keywords must have heard about them somewhere. Furthermore, these individuals are likely to see countless pages on Google with details about these brands. Whether they will gamble at an unlicensed casino in this scenario depends largely on the information they receive.

Unfortunately, clearly stating licence possession is not in the interests of most affiliate websites in this case. There are of course transparent and reliable websites, but they would not show such brands at all for reputation’s sake. 

The division between licensed and unlicensed brand searches also shows a similar trend across the three analysed countries. Romania has the worst ratio, with only 44.6% of searches for domestically licensed brands. Czechia follows with 50.3%, and Slovakia “wins” with 55.5%.

For comparison, the Netherlands has similar statistics, but only after introducing strict responsible gambling restrictions. The UK is doing quite well with 73%, and Germany is at the tail end with only 3% of searches for licensed brands.

The gap between searches and official figures

It would be hasty to draw conclusions from a single analysis. As we work with estimates, the data may not be entirely accurate at the time. Searches can also be influenced by major events, regulatory changes or operator campaigns. That said, it's more reasonable to view the results as a trend that can change over time.

We did not collect data from Romania in the past, but we have collected data since autumn 2025 for the former Czechoslovakia states. Unfortunately, we see a downward trend in both. Slovakia started at 57.7% for licensed search and has gradually declined. The same applies to Czechia, which started at 54.3%. 

Official channelisation rates produced by state agencies are commonly higher than the percentages for searches for locally licensed brands in these analyses. We can debate the accuracy of survey responses or the quality of search data, but it is clear that not all searches end up with gambling.

Interestingly, recent research on illegal gambling by the Slovakian Institute for Gambling Regulation estimates channelisation in the country between 52.2% and 76.3%. Their Czech counterparts estimate channelisation rates below 77%. Furthermore, a comprehensive study by the Czech Centre of Economic and Market Analysis found that approximately 23% of the legal market's current GGR is spent on illegal websites.

Statistics for Romania are scarce. However, Finnplay, a Finnish company that supplies online gambling technology to operators in Romania, reports a channelisation rate of 90%. Given the country's fragmented regulation and our analysis results, this figure seems at least slightly exaggerated.

What's driving players to offshore brands? 

Both Slovakia and Czechia are very active in combating illegal markets, but searches for illegal gambling still account for a considerable share. Both countries also have clear, strict regulations for operators without a local licence, leaving little grey area. Still, there are a few reasons we can think about for the demand. 

Offshore operators may view Eastern European countries as markets with a low risk of enforcement action. This position enables them to increase their brands' visibility through social media or other platforms that are difficult to monitor and influence. Affiliate websites may be less hesitant to invest in visibility and SEO, with significant international marketing reach.

Differences in products and promotions are another area of potential user interest in offshore offers. These operators often offer the most popular or trending games and don't impose bonus restrictions, making them more attractive.

And one personal take: Most Slovakian online brands originate from traditional land-based betting shops and casinos. Although many players are familiar with these brands, their legacy products differ from those developed by tech-savvy, innovation-focused startups, from which many offshore brands have emerged.

Overall, only a few international companies hold licenses in the three countries.

Making the regulated market more competitive

Demand in the offshore market across Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Romania indicates that these countries have considerable potential for gambling companies. Although spending potential might be lower than in wealthier Western countries, unlicensed operators are investing to build a presence.

However, their current success may not hold in the long run, as Slovakia and the Czech Republic are on a promising path to push down illegal operators.

My previous article focused on whether Eastern European countries can achieve growth under pressure from the offshore market and examined the availability of these operators. Although branded search analysis doesn’t give us a direct answer, combining them with availability and channelisation helps paint a clearer picture.

These countries will need to do more to give their players greater power and reasons to stay within the domestically regulated offer. Empowering individuals to make the right decision is more promising than imposing restrictions. But if the local offer is not competitive and entertaining, even well-informed players might deliberately choose to play offshore.