EAGLEBET99.com's own licence number still resolves at Anjouan Gaming Authority's register, and the register itself marks that same number revoked as of 10 July 2026.
Published 2026-09-01Not changed since publicationNo review date set yetSources not re-read since publication
This piece is about Philippines and is written for readers there. Rules, ages and licence classes differ by country and nothing here transfers to another one.
Anjouan Gaming Authority's revoked-licences page lists EAGLEBET99.com under a licence originally issued to a company called Amor 25 Limited, marked revoked on 10 July 2026 for illegal sublicensing. Nothing about a number printed in a footer would tell a visitor any of that.
A licence number sitting in a footer is a claim about a document nobody reading it has actually opened. Opening that document at the regulator that issued it, rather than trusting the badge beside it, is a check almost nobody selling Philippine casino reviews performs. For someone deciding whether to fund an account this month, that gap is the difference between trusting a symbol and trusting a record.
A typical version of that badge reads something like 'Licensed and Regulated', sometimes with a crest, sometimes with a number in small type beside a payment-processor logo. None of those elements links anywhere a visitor can click through to confirm them, and that missing link is worth noticing before a single fact gets checked.
Everything we hold on EAGLEBET99 — the licence, what the regulator publishes about it and what it does not — is on its own page.
Anjouan is a small offshore licensing authority with no relationship to PAGCOR or to Philippine law. Its enforcement page names the operator, the licence holder, the licence type and the stated reason on one page, dated 14 August 2026 when this project last opened it. Checking it took under a minute. That is the whole method the rest of this piece is arguing for.
Rajabets.com holds a licence from the same Anjouan Gaming Authority, and on Anjouan's own register this entry reads active rather than revoked. The row names the licence holder as a company called 3-102-936502 SRL, states the licence type as b2c, and lists an issue date of 16 September 2025 against an expiry of 15 September 2026, two weeks out as this piece was checked.
Everything we hold on Rajabets — the licence, what the regulator publishes about it and what it does not — is on its own page.
Anjouan's own site makes the lookup mechanical rather than difficult. Its licence register accepts a licence number directly in the page's own web address, ALSI-202509014-FI1 for Rajabets and a comparable string, ALSI-202605046-FI2, for EAGLEBET99.com's now-revoked entry, and returns the holder, the status, the type and the dates without a login. A reader needs no account and no technical skill beyond copying the number from wherever the casino printed it and pasting it into the address bar.
Two things stand out here. Neither EAGLEBET99.com nor Rajabets.com is licensed under the name printed on its own homepage; both trade under a corporate name a visitor would never see without opening the register. An active licence expiring in two weeks is also a different claim from a licence good indefinitely, and a footer badge has no way to carry that difference.
A mismatch between an operator's public name and its licensed company name is not automatically suspicious on its own, since a regulator commonly licenses a holding company rather than the consumer-facing brand built on top of it. It does mean the brand name on the homepage is the wrong string to type into a register's search box; the company name behind it is the one that actually resolves.
None of the Anjouan detail above is a PAGCOR credential, and it was never meant to be. PAGCOR licenses domestic play in the Philippines through its own Philippine Inland Gaming Operator category, covering e-casino, sports betting, e-bingo and e-sabong as separate verticals under one class. That system runs its own register, with its own numbering and its own gaps, which this project has mapped separately elsewhere.
The two systems do not touch. A brand can hold a real, currently active licence from a regulator on the other side of the world while carrying no standing at all under Philippine law.
The one PAGCOR-side detail worth carrying into this checklist is the age line. Respicio & Co., a Manila law firm publishing on PAGCOR compliance, lists self-exclusion tooling and 21 as the age gate for the domestic licence class, not 18, which is the number most footer badges across the region default to regardless of which country's rules actually apply.
The clearest pushback against all of this is that a clean register entry proves less than it looks like it proves. Rajabets' Anjouan licence reading active this week says nothing about whether the operator honours a withdrawal on time, and a revoked licence at least names a documented problem, which an active one does not rule out developing next month. Checking the register is necessary. It is not sufficient.
Whether a currently licensed, currently active brand still delays or caps a withdrawal, unconnected to whatever its licence status shows, is a separate question, with its own separate primary sources. The licence check answers one thing honestly. It was never going to answer the other one.
Running this check on any brand answers whether its stated licence exists, which regulator issued it, and whether that regulator currently lists it as active, suspended or revoked. It does not answer whether the brand still operates today on the same terms the register recorded, because a register entry is only as current as the date someone last opened it.
It does not confirm that the company behind a licence is who it claims to be beyond the paperwork the regulator itself accepted, a limit built into every licensing system rather than one specific to Anjouan or to Philippine Inland Gaming Operator accreditation. And it does not turn a PAGCOR-class question into an Anjouan-class one, or the reverse; the two registers answer different questions, and neither substitutes for the other.
This project keeps its own read of licence class, the register link and the date it was last opened, next to the operators it has already checked, at topslotsasia.com/casinos.
Every figure in this piece came from a register a reader can open directly: Anjouan's licence lookup and Anjouan's revoked-licences page, both free, both without a login. The method does not change with the brand. Only the number typed into the address bar does.
Not by itself. A badge or printed number is a claim about a document nobody reading the page has opened, and the only way to know what that document currently says is to open it at the regulator that issued it.
Revoked means the regulator withdrew the licence for a stated reason, in this case illegal sublicensing behind EAGLEBET99.com's number. The register does not say whether the site stopped operating afterward, only that the licence backing it no longer holds.
No. PAGCOR licenses domestic Philippine play through its own Philippine Inland Gaming Operator category, on its own register. An Anjouan licence comes from an unrelated authority, and neither regulator's licence carries any standing under the other's system.
No. An active register entry proves the licence itself has not been revoked or suspended. It says nothing about how quickly an operator processes a withdrawal, which is a separate question with its own separate primary sources.
21, not 18, according to PAGCOR compliance requirements described by Respicio & Co., a Manila law firm. 18 is the default most footer badges use regardless of which country's rules actually apply.
Not a bibliography — these are the addresses behind the numbers this site stores about the 2 records this piece is about, with the date we read each one. Anything the article argues from that we have not stored as a figure is not in this list, and we would rather say that than pad it.
Nothing on this page has been corrected since it was published on 2026-09-01. When something is, it is listed here with the date and what changed — not quietly edited. How we handle a correction.
Two titles on this site are licensed to use the word Megaways. Seventeen more use a similar ways-payout structure and are not. Big Time Gaming explains the difference on its own site, and the seventeen are not hiding it.
PG Soft confirms 96.95 percent on Mahjong Ways 2 and 96.92 percent on the original. Neither page states a ways count, a payline total, or a volatility label.
PAGCOR-licensed casinos rarely lock only the bonus a player claims. The wagering requirement usually covers the whole balance, deposit included, until the combined total clears the multiple.
Mental and Fire in the Hole xBomb are both Nolimit City titles with six-figure win caps. Only one published number explains why one pays its cap roughly seven times more often than the other.