Mirax vs BC.Game
Mirax states two rules in numbered clauses that BC.Game leaves unstated, and both of them narrow what a player can do rather than widen it.
Written by the editorial desk/Last checked:
Reads operator documents and records what they say
Mirax against BC.Game, side by side
| Mirax | BC.Game | |
|---|---|---|
| Licence | Curaçao Gaming Authority | Anjouan Gaming Board |
| Licence no. | OGL/2024/1307/0748 | ALSI-202410011-FI1 |
| Register status | Active | VALID |
| Providers | Not verified | Not published |
| Coins | Not verified | Not published |
| Stated KYC threshold | Discretionary | Discretionary |
| Withdrawal cap | EUR 10,000 | Not published |
| Since | Not verified | Not published |
Read from each operator’s own terms and licence register. A blank means the document does not state it, or we have not read it — never that the answer is nil.
Mirax publishes two things BC.Game does not: a statement that identity verification is obligatory, in clause 7, and a withdrawal ceiling of €10,000 a week, in clause 8.
Neither is generous. Both are useful, because a rule a reader can find is a rule a reader can plan around, and BC.Game's file offers nothing equivalent on either point. Beyond those two clauses the record is nearly empty.
Clause 7: verification is not optional
Verification is described as an obligatory player procedure. The casino may require proof of identity, proof of address and proof of payment, and may ask for further documentation at its sole discretion; a player who does not supply it cannot receive payments.
That is unusually direct. Most terms here reserve a power; this one states an obligation. BC.Game's section 6 covers the same ground without saying whether verification is expected of everyone, so on this narrow point Mirax tells a reader more — and what it tells them is the stricter answer.
Clause 8: €10,000 a week
The published ceiling is €10,000 a week. Among the four weekly ceilings published by ranked brands it is the second lowest, above BetPlays' €5,000 a week and far below Wild.io's $100,000 and Bitcasino.io's 1,000,000 USDT.
BC.Game publishes no cap this site has read. So the comparison is a modest stated limit against an unknown one — and for a player with a large balance a modest limit that is written down is at least something to plan against.
A licence number KatsuBet quotes as well
Mirax holds OGL/2024/1307/0748 from the Curaçao Gaming Authority, marked Active, resolving as a certificate on the authority's register. KatsuBet quotes the same number.
That indicates a master-licence structure, which is weak evidence: two brands beneath one permit, with no conclusion about ownership available from it, and none asserted here. It is instructive in one way — KatsuBet publishes no withdrawal ceiling at all, so the shared certificate says nothing about the terms each brand writes.
Nothing on coins, nothing on studios
No coin list has been read for Mirax and no provider roster. It is one of six ranked brands blank on both, alongside JacksClub, Stake, Primedice, Weiss and Chipstars — and BC.Game.
So a reader cannot check what they may deposit or what they may play. The two published clauses are the whole of the file, and both of them are about restrictions on the player rather than about what is on offer.
Three feature tags, and no founding year
Live dealer, provably fair and a VIP programme. BC.Game matches the first two and adds a sportsbook, original games and a crypto-only balance model.
Mirax carries the provably fair tag but publishes no description of the mechanism, where BC.Game describes a chain of ten million pre-generated hashes released one per round. No founding year appears on either record. The licence page carries the territorial conditions attached to both operators' permits.
Pros
- States in clause 7 that verification is an obligatory procedure, not merely a reserved power
- Publishes a €10,000 weekly ceiling in clause 8, where BC.Game publishes no cap
- Certificate OGL/2024/1307/0748 is marked Active and resolves on the Curaçao register
- Carries a provably fair tag alongside live dealer and a VIP programme
Cons
- €10,000 a week is the second lowest of the four weekly ceilings published here
- Proof of identity, address and payment are all required, with more at the casino's discretion
- No coin list and no provider roster have been read
- The licence number is shared with KatsuBet, so the certificate is not brand-specific
- The provably fair mechanism is tagged but not described, unlike BC.Game's
Questions people ask
- Is KYC mandatory at Mirax?
Clause 7 calls verification an obligatory procedure and requires proof of identity, address and payment, with more possible at the casino's discretion. BC.Game's section 6 reserves the power without stating whether it applies to everyone.
- How much can I withdraw from Mirax each week?
Clause 8 sets €10,000, the second lowest of the four weekly ceilings published here. BC.Game publishes no cap that this site has read, so it gives no figure to compare.
- Why do Mirax and KatsuBet share a licence number?
Both quote OGL/2024/1307/0748, which points at a master-licence structure. That is weak evidence about arrangement and none about ownership, and this page makes no ownership claim.
Mirax · BC Game alternative