The conflict of interest, described
How this site earns, and what the money does not buy
One casino on this site pays a commission when a reader opens an account through its button. That card carries no number and no score, and the five checks that order the roster are the same with or without the payment.
Sites that compare gambling operators are almost always paid by at least one of them, and the ones that say so in a grey line at the bottom of the page are being technically truthful and practically evasive. This page exists so the arrangement can be read in full before any of the roster is.
The arrangement
One operator on this site is a commercial partner. When a reader opens the casino through the button on these pages, the operator records this site as the source of that visit, and if the reader goes on to register and play, the operator pays a share of its revenue from that account. No payment is made for the click itself, and none is made for a page being written.
Every other casino covered here pays nothing. They appear because Aviator sits in their lobby and their terms are public enough to score.
The money is what pays for the reading. Working through an operator's terms, finding the identity clause, checking the licence number against the issuer's register and dating the result takes hours per casino and produces nothing a reader would pay for directly. The commission is the mechanism that funds it, and it is also a reason to be sceptical of the site. Both of those are true at once.
Three rules that keep it out of the scoring
The paying card is not scored. It sits above the numbered roster without a number and without a five-point score. Scoring it would mean assigning a figure to the one casino with an incentive to see that figure rise, which turns the whole column into decoration.
The five checks are mechanical. Position in the numbered roster comes from the operator's own terms and the licence register: whether an identity clause exists, whether it names the moment it applies, whether it prints a sum, whether it sets a document deadline, and whether the licence resolves in a register under the domain in use. There is no judgement step where a partner could be nudged up, and the full reasoning is on the scoring page.
Unflattering clauses are printed anyway. The commercial partner's own terms contain clauses a marketer would rather not quote, and they are quoted — cl. 8.7 on identity before a first payout, cl. 8.8 on suspension — with their numbers, in the same form as every other operator's.
What the reader pays
Nothing. The commission comes out of the operator's revenue share, not out of a deposit, a balance or a withdrawal. There is no code to enter, no sign-up on this site, no email collected and nothing sold on, which the privacy page sets out in full. A reader who prefers to arrive at the operator by typing its address directly is in exactly the same position as one who used the button, with the single difference that this site earns nothing from the visit.
That also means a figure here is worth no more and no less depending on the route taken. Stake limits, bonus wagering and withdrawal caps are set by the operator for everybody, and no page on this site promises an improved version of them.
What it does not fund
It does not fund play. No account at any casino on this site has been funded to test a cashier, and no page reports a withdrawal time, a support response or a bonus cleared. The limits of what can honestly be claimed from documents alone are set out in who runs this site.
It also does not fund the fake tools. The predictor apps, signal channels and hack files sold in Aviator's name have their own commercial arrangements, none of which involve this site; the pages about them exist to explain why the seed that decides a round is not available to any of them.