Weiss vs BC.Game
Weiss cites clause 7.6 for verification where BC.Game cites only a section heading, and publishes nothing else BC.Game does not already leave blank.
Written by the editorial desk/Last checked:
Reads operator documents and records what they say
Weiss against BC.Game, side by side
| Weiss | BC.Game | |
|---|---|---|
| Licence | Anjouan Gaming Board | Anjouan Gaming Board |
| Licence no. | ALSI-202508047-FI2 | ALSI-202410011-FI1 |
| Register status | valid | VALID |
| Providers | Not verified | Not published |
| Coins | Not verified | Not published |
| Stated KYC threshold | Discretionary | Discretionary |
| Withdrawal cap | Not verified | 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.
Weiss holds Anjouan licence ALSI-202508047-FI2 with a status of valid. So does Fairspin — the same number, quoted by both. That is a master-licence structure, and it is the most concrete fact in Weiss's file.
It is also a warning about how little a shared licence tells you. Fairspin publishes 114 studios and a five-day document deadline; Weiss publishes no studio list at all. The certificate is common; the disclosure is not.
One licence number, two brands
Weiss and Fairspin both quote ALSI-202508047-FI2 from the Anjouan Gaming Board, both with a status of valid, both referenced to the board's public register index. Three other pairs on this site do the same: Bitcasino.io with Livecasino.io, Mirax with KatsuBet, and LTC Casino with Primedice.
This is weak evidence and should be read narrowly. It shows two brands operating beneath one permit. It does not show that one company owns both, and this page makes no such claim. BC.Game's ALSI-202410011-FI1 is quoted by BC.Game alone and validated against its own domain.
Clause 7.6, and the AML programme behind it
Weiss may request any documents and information needed to run a verification check at its discretion, including in connection with refund requests. Its anti-money-laundering policy describes customer identification, verification and ongoing monitoring.
No monetary threshold triggering verification is stated. That is the same outcome as BC.Game, reached with slightly better signposting: Weiss gives a clause number, where BC.Game gives section headings for know-your-customer and anti-money-laundering without a figure attached to either.
What Weiss does not publish at all
No coin list and no provider roster have been read. Weiss is one of six ranked brands blank on both, with JacksClub, Stake, Primedice, Mirax and Chipstars — and BC.Game.
No withdrawal ceiling appears and no founding year. So of the five fields a reader would use to plan, Weiss fills exactly one: the verification clause, without a number in it.
Ongoing monitoring is the one distinctive phrase
The AML policy describes ongoing monitoring rather than a single check at onboarding. Few terms among the ranked brands use that framing, and it means a completed verification is not treated as the end of the matter.
BC.Game's user agreement heads its anti-money-laundering material as section 9 but this site holds no description of what that programme does. So Weiss says more about the shape of its compliance and just as little about its triggers.
Three feature tags against BC.Game's five
Sportsbook, live dealer and a VIP programme. There is no original-games line, no crypto-only designation and no provably fair tag on Weiss's record.
BC.Game describes a fairness mechanism in detail — ten million hashes generated in advance and released in reverse order, one per round. Weiss makes no equivalent claim, tagged or described, so a reader moving across gives that up entirely.
Pros
- Anjouan licence ALSI-202508047-FI2 carries a status of valid
- Cites clause 7.6 for verification, as only twenty of the forty ranked brands do
- Its AML policy describes ongoing monitoring rather than a one-off onboarding check
- Carries a sportsbook, live dealer and VIP programme
Cons
- No coin list and no provider roster have been read
- No monetary threshold triggers verification, so requests remain discretionary
- The licence number is shared with Fairspin, so the certificate is not brand-specific
- No withdrawal ceiling and no founding year appear on the record
- No provably fair tag, where BC.Game describes its scheme in detail
Questions people ask
- Are Weiss and Fairspin the same operator?
This page does not claim so. Both quote ALSI-202508047-FI2, which indicates a shared master licence — weak evidence about structure and none about ownership. Their published disclosure differs sharply.
- When does Weiss ask for documents?
Clause 7.6 allows requests at its discretion, including around refunds, and its AML policy describes ongoing monitoring. No amount is stated. BC.Game's section 6 is equally unquantified.
- What games and coins does Weiss have?
Neither list has been read by this site, so this page names none — documents not found rather than an empty cashier or lobby. BC.Game's records are blank in the same two places.
Weiss · BC Game alternative