No-deposit bonuses at newly UK-licensed casinos: what 2026’s debut cohort actually hands a player

A no-deposit bonus reads as a gift. The arithmetic rarely confirms that reading. Every newly Gambling Commission-licensed site that launches with one in 2026 runs the same statutory ceiling on how heavily the bonus can be locked: wagering requirements cannot exceed 10x the bonus amount, in force since 19 December 2025. That rule, plus a mandatory GAMSTOP link on every online licence, redraws what “latest no-deposit casino bonuses UK” actually means in practice, and a player chasing the newest offers benefits from knowing what sits behind the headline number.

Current as of 7 November 2026, verified against the Gambling Commission’s public register of gambling businesses.

Responsible-gambling tools to set before claiming a no-deposit bonus

The first thing a player should do on any newly licensed site is not the bonus. It is the limit. The Gambling Commission has, since 31 October 2025, required every online operator to prompt a customer to set a financial limit before the first deposit. A no-deposit bonus does not skip that step: the prompt fires on registration regardless, because the Commission treats any play — funded or promotional — as engagement with a gambling product.

The deposit limit is the floor of self-protection. A player sets a ceiling per day, week or month, and the operator hard-stops further deposits when the figure is hit. The ceiling is voluntary, and a player can raise it after a cooling-off period. The limit belongs to the account, not the device, so it carries across the phone browser and the app. Sites differ on whether the limit also caps the value of bonus credits that convert to withdrawable cash, and that is one place to read the small print before claiming.

Beyond the deposit cap, every online licence since 31 March 2020 has carried a GAMSTOP link. GAMSTOP is the national online self-exclusion register: a player registers, picks a period of six months, one year or five years, and every UK-licensed operator is required to block that player from opening new accounts or depositing. The period cannot be cancelled early, and the exclusion covers the full GB-licensed market, not just one site. A no-deposit offer is no exception; if a player is on GAMSTOP, the bonus is not claimable.

Two further tools sit alongside the deposit cap. Reality checks interrupt play at set intervals, displaying session length and net position. Time-outs let a player pause the account for a shorter period than self-exclusion. None of these are optional extras: a UK-licensed site that does not surface them in the account area has failed a social responsibility code condition, and that failure is reportable to the Commission.

The wider picture is the financial vulnerability check, in force from 28 February 2025. Once a player’s net deposits cross £150 in a rolling 30-day window, the operator runs a check against public data — credit file, court record — and may step in with a conversation, a limit suggestion or a temporary hold. No-deposit bonuses sit outside the deposit count, so they do not by themselves trigger a check, but they do keep the player engaged long enough that any subsequent deposit does.

A player who treats the bonus as the reason to register and the limits as the reason to stay is the one the framework was written for. A player who registers, skips the limit prompt and chases the wagering through to cashout is gambling, not collecting a freebie, and the regulator’s view of that sequence has hardened since 2025.

How newly licensed UK casinos present no-deposit offers on mobile and in apps

Phone screens shape how a no-deposit bonus lands. Newly licensed UK casino sites, the ones that launched or re-skinned in 2026, have spent the bulk of their design budget on the mobile journey because that is where the bulk of GB play now happens. A no-deposit offer on a phone is presented in three broad shapes.

The first is a banner-driven homepage. The latest operator’s landing page greets the visitor with a hero block, a tagline, and a “Claim” button that opens a registration sheet pre-filled with the bonus code attached. That block is the most prominent surface on the site, and it works on a small screen because the claim action is the only action on the block. The trade-off is that the bonus is being pushed, and the player’s eye is steered away from the safer-gambling panel that sits a scroll further down.

The second shape is the in-app notification. Casino apps that hold a UK licence are permitted to push notifications, but they are subject to the same advertising rules as the website, and a no-deposit offer qualifies as a gambling advertisement if it carries a price, a stake or a wagering condition. Most app-store guidelines strip the wagering language out of the notification and replace it with a soft prompt (“Your welcome offer is ready”), and the actual numbers sit one tap further in. A player who reads only the notification is reading the marketing, not the terms.

The third shape is the wallet-native deposit-free spin. On Apple Pay and Google Pay, no-deposit offers are increasingly structured as a free-spin bundle tied to the registration step rather than to a first deposit, with the spin value stored as a wallet credit. The technical path is shorter than the deposit-gated route, which is the point. The player protection path is identical: the GAMSTOP cross-check still runs, the deposit limit prompt still fires before any funded play, and the wagering ceiling of 10x still binds.

A practical test for a phone-first player is this: open the site in a mobile browser, do not install the app, claim the no-deposit bonus through the browser, and read the wagering terms on the same screen that the bonus was claimed from. If the terms are not visible without scrolling past two promotional blocks, the operator has buried the cost. A newly licensed site that buries the cost is not the safer site of the cohort, even if its bonus headline is the highest.

The debut lineup: new UKGC-licensed casinos in 2026

The Gambling Commission’s public register is the test of whether a brand is newly licensed. On 18 September 2026, that register listed 139 businesses holding an active remote casino operating licence, and 1065 active domain entries — sites that trade against a GB licence. That figure includes long-established brands with stable licences, and it is the background that any “newly licensed” claim sits against.

A site that has held a GB licence for more than five years is not newly licensed, even if it has refreshed its homepage or changed its bonus structure for 2026. “Newly licensed” in the strict sense means a brand that came onto the Commission’s register in the recent past, and the register makes that checkable. The format of a remote casino licence number carries the licence holder’s account number in the leading six digits, with an “R” marking remote, and the account number is the easiest tell for how long a holder has been licensed.

Newly licensed sites tend to cluster in one operational pattern: a small operator, often white-label or platform-shared, that launches with a sharp welcome package because that is the only way it can break through against established GB brands. A white-label arrangement, of which the register showed 361 entries on 18 September 2026, trades under another company’s licence, so a player sees one brand on the surface and a different licence holder on the register. The distinction matters when a complaint is raised: it goes to the licence holder, not to the brand.

The debut cohort for 2026 is the slice of the register where the licence was issued or materially altered within the last twelve months. It is the slice the Commission’s own licence variation activity has created. That activity has been heavier than in previous years, partly because of the Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Act 2014 transition that drew offshore operators onto the GB register, and partly because the package of 2025 reforms — the 10x wagering cap, the deposit-limit prompt, the financial vulnerability check — has pushed several smaller operators to re-licence rather than adjust.

A newly licensed site carries one liability a long-established brand does not: it has not been tested by GB enforcement cycles. The Commission’s enforcement record, fines, and public warnings are the closest thing to a track record a player has, and a licence that was issued this year has very little of that record behind it. That is the price of being first to a brand-new offer, and it is the cost a player accepts when “newly licensed” is the reason the page was opened in the first place.

A side-by-side look at ten GB-licensed casino sites

The comparison below is not a ranking. It is a snapshot of how ten different GB-licensed sites appear on the Commission’s register on a single date, so a player can see who holds the licence, which licence account the domain sits under, and whether the domain is listed as Active or White Label. The wagering terms of any no-deposit bonus are deliberately excluded: those live on the brand’s own promotional pages and vary by offer, and the register does not record them.

The single most important line of the table is the second one: who actually holds the licence. Three of the ten sites — Unibet, 32Red, and the licence Unibet sits on — are run by the same operator, Platinum Gaming Limited, which holds a single remote casino licence and lists both brands as active domains against the same account. That is the structure of a multi-brand licensee, and it is the most common shape of the GB-licensed market. Reading “Unibet” and “32Red” as two independent companies is wrong on the register’s own terms; reading them as two distinct brands is fine, because a player sees two distinct products and two distinct bonus terms.

White-label entries, of which 361 were on the register on 18 September 2026, are a different shape. A white-label site has a brand of its own but no licence of its own; it trades under another holder’s licence, and the Commission records it under that holder’s account. The table above carries no white-label entries because the ten featured brands are direct licence holders. If a player extends the comparison to newly licensed brands outside the featured ten, the white-label share of the register becomes a meaningful slice of the picture.

What the table cannot show is the offer. A no-deposit bonus is a promotional decision, made on the brand’s own terms, and it changes weekly. The licence and the domain status do not change weekly. A player comparing offers should compare those on the brand’s site on the day they are considering claiming; the table here is the static frame around which offers move.

What a no-deposit bonus looks like at a UK-licensed site in practice

A no-deposit offer at a GB-licensed site in 2026 has three components, and they are the same at every brand that runs one because the regulator has standardised the cost ceiling.

The first component is the bonus amount. A no-deposit bonus is typically a small cash credit — often £5 to £25 — or a free-spin bundle at a fixed stake. The amount is small because the regulator’s wagering ceiling makes any larger headline figure uneconomic. A bonus advertised at £100 with a 10x wagering cap requires £1,000 of qualifying turnover to clear; a bonus advertised at £10 requires £100. The smaller figure is the one the operator can absorb without conceding a meaningful expected loss, and that is the figure the cohort has converged on.

The second component is the wagering requirement. Since 19 December 2025, no GB-licensed online casino may set a wagering requirement higher than 10x the bonus amount. Mixed-product bonuses — the “bet on football, get casino spins” structure — are banned. Every qualifying turnover must be on the casino product the bonus was issued against. The cap binds across the industry, which is why the headline figures cluster: an offer above 10x is non-compliant on its face, and an operator that ran one would be open to Commission action.

The third component is the conversion. Once wagering is satisfied, the bonus balance converts to a withdrawable cash balance, usually subject to a maximum-cashout cap that varies by offer. The cap is the operator’s commercial choice, and it is where the gap between “no deposit” and “no cost” shows up. A bonus that converts at a 5x cashout cap returns, at most, five times the bonus amount. A player who wins more than that during the wagering phase has the excess voided at conversion. The cap is small in pounds because the bonus is small, but it is the line where the freebie stops being free.

What sits behind those three components is a calculation the player can run before claiming. A £10 bonus with a 10x wagering cap means £100 of qualifying turnover is required to clear it. At a £0.10 slot stake, that is 1,000 spins. At a 2.5-second spin cycle (the statutory minimum), that is roughly 42 minutes of play. The expected loss over those 1,000 spins is the wagering figure multiplied by the house edge of the chosen slot. A 96% RTP slot — a market-standard figure — gives a 4% house edge, so the expected loss is £100 × 4% = £4. The bonus pays out at most £10 × 5 = £50 if the conversion cap is set there. The arithmetic does not always favour the player.

A player who reads that paragraph and decides the bonus is not worth 42 minutes of play has read it correctly. The bonus is a marketing surface, and the cost is real. The wagering cap exists precisely to bound that cost, and a player who treats the cap as the upper limit rather than the typical level is the one the cap was written for.

The wagering-turnover band: how much play a no-deposit bonus actually costs

The wagering-turnover band provides a clearer picture of clearing times for a typical no-deposit bonus under the 10x cap, drawn from the realistic range of bonus sizes a GB-licensed site can offer without conceding too much expected value.

Take a no-deposit bonus of £10, wagering requirement 10x. Required turnover is £10 × 10 = £100. At a £0.10 slot stake, that is 1,000 spins. At the statutory 2.5-second minimum spin cycle, that is 2,500 seconds, or roughly 42 minutes.

Take a no-deposit bonus of £25, wagering requirement 10x. Required turnover is £25 × 10 = £250. At the same £0.10 stake, that is 2,500 spins and roughly 104 minutes of play, just over an hour and three quarters.

Take a no-deposit bonus of £50, wagering requirement 10x. Required turnover is £50 × 10 = £500. At £0.10, that is 5,000 spins and roughly 208 minutes, three and a half hours.

The band therefore runs from around three quarters of an hour, for the smallest no-deposit offers in the cohort, to several hours for the larger ones, with every figure bound to the same 10x ceiling and the same 2.5-second spin cycle. A player who sees a £100 no-deposit headline should treat the implied turnover (£1,000) and the implied time (over four hours at £0.10) as the real cost, and should check whether the conversion cap makes that cost worthwhile.

The assumption that drives the band is that the player wagers only the bonus amount — the cleanest reading of a “no deposit” offer. A player who tops up with their own funds during wagering extends the time and the expected loss, but the bonus-specific turnover figure stays the same. That assumption is the same one the regulator uses when it tests compliance.

What the band cannot capture is the conversion cap. A bonus that converts at 5x the bonus amount, capped on winnings, can return at most £250 from a £50 bonus, less the £20 expected loss over £500 turnover at 96% RTP. The arithmetic still works in the player’s favour at modest stakes, but the upper tail of the conversion is where the marketing reads most loudly and the actual return is most often clipped. A player who understands the band, then, understands what is being promised and what is not.

The legality frame: why a UK no-deposit offer can only come from a UK-licensed site

The Gambling Commission is the regulator. It is sponsored by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and operates under the Gambling Act 2005, which covers Great Britain — England, Scotland and Wales. Northern Ireland is regulated separately. The Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Act 2014 closed a long-standing loophole: any operator taking customers in Great Britain now needs a Commission licence, regardless of where the operator is based. A Curaçao, Maltese or Gibraltar licence is not a substitute. The Commission has enforced that position consistently since 2014, and the disruption work — cease-and-desist notices, search-engine delisting referrals, payment and hosting referrals — is what keeps unlicensed sites from gaining traction in the GB market.

A Commission licence is a per-operator licence. The Commission’s public register lists each licence holder as an account, with the licence number structured as account number-R-number-suffix, where the “R” marks a remote (online) licence and the leading six digits repeat the account number. On 18 September 2026 the register held 139 businesses with an active remote casino operating licence and 1065 active domain entries, plus 361 white-label entries. A site that trades under another’s licence is on the register as a White Label domain, not as an independent operator.

The minimum age is 18, and identity verification is mandatory. Since 7 May 2019, every GB-licensed online operator must verify name, address and date of birth before the first deposit and before any play. A no-deposit bonus does not exempt a player from this verification; the operator runs the same checks regardless of whether funded or promotional credit is at stake. Anonymous play is not possible at a licensed site, and any brand that promises otherwise is not licensed.

The stake ceiling for online slots has been tightened across 2025. From 9 April 2025, the maximum stake per game cycle is £5 for players aged 25 and over. From 21 May 2025, the maximum stake is £2 for players aged 18 to 24. Those tiers are statutory, not commercial, and they apply to every GB-licensed online slot regardless of whether the spin is bonus-funded or cash-funded.

Auto-play is banned. Since 31 October 2021, a slot spin may not start automatically without player input, and the minimum spin cycle is 2.5 seconds. Losses disguised as wins — celebratory visuals on a spin that nets a loss — are also banned. The result is that the wagering-turnover band calculated earlier is a lower bound on the time cost: a 2.5-second cycle is the fastest legal pace, and any operator that ran a faster cycle would be non-compliant.

Credit cards are banned for gambling. Since 14 April 2020, no GB-licensed operator may accept a credit card deposit, including credit cards routed through e-wallets. The Commission’s own research found that around 800,000 UK consumers used credit cards to gamble in 2018, and that 22% of online gamblers who used credit cards to gamble were classed as problem gamblers — the evidence base for the ban. Debit cards and bank transfers are unaffected.

Wagering requirements are capped. Since 19 December 2025, no GB-licensed online casino may set a wagering requirement above 10x the bonus amount, and mixed-product bonuses — a sports bet that yields casino credit — are banned. That cap is the headline of the present page’s calculation; it is the single most material change to no-deposit offers in the current cycle.

Tax sits with the operator, not the player. UK players pay no tax on gambling winnings; the operator pays Remote Gaming Duty, which rose from 21% to 40% from 1 April 2026. That rise is a model figure — operators should check with HMRC for current rates — and it does not change the player’s return on a no-deposit bonus, but it does shape how aggressively operators price promotional credit in 2026.

What a no-deposit offer looks like at each featured site

The ten brands below are the same ten on the side-by-side comparison above. Each appears on the Commission’s public register as a GB-licensed remote casino operator, with the licence number and holder shown. The descriptions are register-based and the offer terms are deliberately omitted: those terms change at the brand’s commercial discretion, and the register does not carry them.

MrQ, Tek Fox Ltd. MrQ’s domain is on the register as an active domain of account 60629. The licence number 060629-R-337532-004 is a remote casino operating licence, and Tek Fox Ltd is the named holder. The licence status is active. MrQ is one of the smaller direct-licence holders in the cohort by licence account, and it has built its GB identity around slots-only play with no wagering on its standard welcome bonus. The structural implication for a no-deposit offer is that any promotion on this site runs without the conversion cap a competitor might impose, because the underlying welcome terms do not gateplay behind a multiplier. A player who reads the standard MrQ welcome and then reads the no-deposit terms should expect the no-deposit terms to be the smaller, simpler version of the same approach.

Unibet, Platinum Gaming Limited. Unibet’s domain sits against account 45322, with the active remote casino licence 045322-R-324275-019. The licence holder is Platinum Gaming Limited, the same company that holds the licence behind 32Red. A player who treats Unibet and 32Red as one operator on the register, and as two distinct products on the screen, has read both correctly. Unibet’s product set is wider than slots — sports betting and poker sit alongside the casino — and a no-deposit offer is unlikely to be cross-promoted from one product to another because the mixed-product bonus is banned. The strict separation is itself a feature for a player who does not want a casino bonus to drag them into a sportsbook.

Betway, Betway Limited. Betway’s domain sits against account 39372, licence 039372-R-319367-029, held by Betway Limited. The licence status is active. Betway is one of the larger multi-product GB-licensed operators, and the licence behind the casino brand also covers sports. A no-deposit casino offer is a casino-only product by the regulator’s terms, and Betway’s casino promotion tends to be a free-spin bundle at a small stake, paired with a deposit welcome on the sports side. A player who is here only for the no-deposit bonus is in the casino column of a multi-product account; the safer-gambling tools apply to the whole account, not to the column.

Grosvenor Casinos, Rank Interactive (Gibraltar) Limited. Grosvenor Casinos is on the register against account 57924, licence 057924-R-334666-005. The licence holder is Rank Interactive (Gibraltar) Limited, which is the GB-facing arm of The Rank Group. The licence status is active. Grosvenor is one of the few brands in the cohort that is also a high-street casino operator; the GB-licensed online casino is an extension of a long-established retail estate. A player approaching Grosvenor’s online site from the retail side will recognise the safer-gambling framework; a player approaching it from online-only will see a more conservative product structure than the slots-first brands in the cohort.

kwiff, Eaton Gate Gaming Limited. Kwiff is on the register against account 44448, licence 044448-R-323408-017, held by Eaton Gate Gaming Limited. The licence status is active. Kwiff positions itself as a mobile-first product, and its promotion cadence has historically been weighted toward sports — though the casino column is licensable in its own right and carries its own promotional terms. A player who lands on a no-deposit casino offer from kwiff is reading a casino-column promotion, not a sportsbook promotion, and the mixed-product ban means the two columns do not bleed into each other.

Casumo, Recro Limited. Casumo is on the register against account 61549, licence 061549-R-336718-002, held by Recro Limited. The licence status is active. Casumo’s product is slots-and-casino, and its no-deposit offers have historically been paired with a deposit welcome that carries the bulk of the bonus value. A player who reads the no-deposit headline alone is reading the smaller half of a typical Casumo welcome. The product is designed around longer session play than some slots-first competitors, which is consistent with a higher number of spins in the wagering-turnover band.

Betfair, PPB Games Limited. Betfair is on the register against account 39411, licence 039411-R-319335-010, held by PPB Games Limited. The licence status is active. Betfair’s casino product sits alongside its exchange, and the licence behind the casino is the games licence rather than the exchange licence — a useful distinction for a player reading the register entry, because the casino-only bonus structure is what the regulator binds the wagering cap to. A no-deposit offer at Betfair’s casino is a casino-column product, with the same 10x cap that binds the rest of the cohort.

Ladbrokes, LC International Limited. Ladbrokes is on the register against account 54743, licence 054743-R-330863-014, held by LC International Limited. The licence status is active. LC International Limited is the same operator behind Coral and Gala Bingo, and the structure is the same as the Unibet-and-32Red case: one licence account, several brand surfaces. A player approaching Ladbrokes from the high-street side is on the same operator as a player approaching Coral from the same side. The casino column is licensable independently of the sportsbook column, and the mixed-product ban keeps the two columns distinct.

Midnite, Dribble Media Limited. Midnite is on the register against account 42647, licence 042647-R-321653-022, held by Dribble Media Limited. The licence status is active. Midnite is one of the newer GB-licensed casino sites in the cohort, with a product set that combines casino and sportsbook. A no-deposit casino offer sits in the casino column, and a player who is here for the bonus is not going to be cross-sold into the sportsbook because the regulator has shut that path. The newer licence means a thinner Commission enforcement record; that is the price of being early to the brand.

32Red, Platinum Gaming Limited. 32Red is on the register against account 45322, licence 045322-R-324275-019, held by Platinum Gaming Limited. The licence status is active. The licence is the same one behind Unibet; the brand is distinct, and the no-deposit offer is its own commercial decision. 32Red’s product set is heavily weighted toward slots and live casino, and a no-deposit offer from this brand is the slots-led end of the cohort. A player choosing between Unibet and 32Red on the same licence account is choosing between a multi-product site and a slots-led site, and the bonus terms reflect that.

The right reading of “latest” — what “newly licensed” and “new offer” actually mean

A reader who clicks this page is likely hunting for one of two things: a site that was licensed recently, or an offer that was launched recently. The two are different, and a player who conflates them overpays for the bonus or under-reads the site.

A “newly licensed” site is one whose account number on the Commission’s register is recent — issued or materially altered within the last twelve months. The register is the test, and the licence number format is the cue. A “new offer” is one that has been added to an existing licensed site’s promotional slate within the last few weeks, and it lives on the brand’s own terms page rather than on the Commission’s register. The two sources answer different questions: the register answers “is this brand licensed at all”, the brand’s terms answer “what does this brand pay me for this bonus”.

A site that has been licensed for years and has just refreshed its no-deposit headline is not newly licensed; it has just changed its offer. The change is real, but the safer-gambling framework, the GAMSTOP link, the 10x wagering cap and the deposit-limit prompt have applied to that site for as long as it has held the licence. A player who treats a refreshed offer as a debut offer has paid a marketing surface for the regulator’s standard frame.

A newly licensed site that has launched a no-deposit offer for the first time is the case where the distinction matters most. The site is subject to the same rules as the established brands, but the operator’s promotional terms have not been tested by GB enforcement cycles, and the brand’s complaints history is thin. The 10x cap binds regardless. The GAMSTOP link is mandatory regardless. The deposit-limit prompt fires regardless. What is not yet known is how the operator will handle a complaint, a self-excluded player attempting to register, or a technical failure at cashout. The Commission’s enforcement record fills those gaps over time; a new site has very little of that record behind it.

The reasonable reader is one who checks both sources. The Commission’s register answers the licence question. The brand’s own terms answer the offer question. A page that names one and not the other is a page that has traded accuracy for length.

Frequently asked questions

How much is a no-deposit casino bonus typically worth at a UK-licensed site in 2026?

Most no-deposit bonuses at GB-licensed sites in 2026 sit between £5 and £25 in cash credit, or a free-spin bundle at a fixed stake. Larger headlines exist, but the 10x wagering cap in force since 19 December 2025 makes any larger figure costly to convert. The headline is small because the regulator has bounded the cost.

Are newly licensed UK casinos required to cap wagering on a no-deposit bonus at 10x?

Yes. Every GB-licensed online casino is bound by the 10x cap on wagering requirements, in force since 19 December 2025. The cap applies to the bonus amount, and mixed-product bonuses — sports bet yielding casino credit — are banned under the same reform package. An offer above 10x is non-compliant on its face.

How long does a no-deposit bonus stay active before it expires?

Expiry terms vary by brand and by offer, and the Commission’s register does not record them. A typical expiry window at a GB-licensed site is 7 to 30 days from the date the bonus is credited, after which any unwagered bonus balance is voided. Players should read the offer terms on the brand’s site for the precise window before claiming.

Does claiming a no-deposit bonus require identity verification first?

Yes. Since 7 May 2019, every GB-licensed online operator must verify name, address and date of birth before the first deposit and before any play. A no-deposit bonus does not exempt a player from this check; the operator runs the same verification regardless of whether the credit is funded or promotional.

Can winnings from a no-deposit bonus be withdrawn without making a deposit?

Sometimes, but not always. Once the wagering requirement is satisfied and the bonus balance converts to withdrawable cash, the maximum-cashout cap on the offer determines what is actually returned. A player who wins more than the cap has the excess voided at conversion, and a deposit may be required before any cashout is processed at some sites.

Which recently licensed UK casinos have launched a no-deposit offer this year?

The Commission’s register shows 139 businesses holding an active remote casino operating licence on 18 September 2026, and the debut cohort in 2026 is the slice of that register whose accounts were issued or materially altered within the last twelve months. The featured set on this page — MrQ, Unibet, Betway, Grosvenor Casinos, kwiff, Casumo, Betfair, Ladbrokes, Midnite, and 32Red — is a sample of the register, not the cohort itself; a player checking “newly licensed” specifically should read the licence number on the register entry.