White LottoReviews 

5
TrustScore 3 out of 5

3.2

While we don't verify specific claims because reviewers' opinions are their own, we may label reviews as "Verified" when we can confirm a business interaction took place. Read more

To protect platform integrity, every review on our platform—verified or not—is screened by our 24/7 automated software. This technology is designed to identify and remove content that breaches our guidelines, including reviews that are not based on a genuine experience. We recognise we may not catch everything, and you can flag anything you think we may have missed. Read more

Company details


Contact info

3.2

Average

TrustScore 3 out of 5

5 reviews

5-star
4-star
3-star
2-star
1-star

No history of asking for reviews

This company hasn't invited their customers, so reviews may not be representative

Replied to 100% of negative reviews

Typically replies within 1 month

How this company uses Trustpilot

See how their reviews and ratings are sourced, scored, and moderated.

3.2

All reviews

(5)

5 reviews in the last 12 months

Write a review

We perform checks on reviews

Companies on Trustpilot aren't allowed to offer incentives or pay to hide reviews. Reviews are the opinions of individual users and not of Trustpilot. Read more

Rated 5 out of 5 stars

2 years as a white label

We have been working with WhiteLotto as a white label partner for over two years. During this time, the cooperation has been stable and professional. The team is responsive, open to feedback, and consistently works on improving the platform and adding new features for lottery websites.

One of the main advantages is the ongoing development of the system. New functionalities are introduced regularly, and technical issues are handled efficiently. Communication is clear, and the cooperation process is straightforward.

From our experience, WhiteLotto provides a solid solution for operators looking for a reliable white label lottery platform. We are satisfied with the service quality and the long-term cooperation so far.

January 1, 2026
Unprompted review

Trustpilot is assessing this review in accordance with our flagging process.

Rated 1 out of 5 stars

BEWARE OF THIS SCAM

BEWARE OF THIS SCAM! I am suing the owner Wojciech L for not paying salary and he is going to jail. Don't let them manipulate you. Better deal with other companies. By the way - Wojciech L who wrote the other review here is the owner and it's a lie.

April 17, 2026
Unprompted review
White Lotto logo

Reply from White Lotto

Jakub Muda has been reported to Polish and Canadian authorities for aggressive, violent behavior, making criminal threats (over 20 documented cases), and stalking.

Rated 1 out of 5 stars

10-Month Delay, Contract Changes, and Major Operational Concerns

Our company entered into a white-label platform agreement with WhiteLotto in April 2025 following discussions with Wojciech Lysak and his team. During these discussions we were informed that a fully functional platform (Sports, Casino, and Lotto) would be ready within approximately 3-4 weeks.

Our actual experience was significantly different.

1. Timeline and Payments

In April 2025 we paid 50% of the setup fee to begin the project. In May we were asked to pay the remaining 50% earlier than initially planned, with the explanation that the project required the funds in order to proceed. We agreed and paid the full amount in good faith.

Despite this, the platform took approximately 10 months to reach a partially usable state instead of the originally discussed timeline.

2. Changes in Management and Contract Terms

During the delay we were informed that the project had been taken over by Thomas Fritz Koller through Graucus Trade Limited / Alphos Ventures. At that point we were asked to sign a revised agreement that introduced new commercial terms.

These terms included higher monthly fees and the introduction of “Negative Carry”, which had not been part of our original discussions. Because we had already invested substantial funds into the project, our options at that stage were limited.

3. Platform Functionality and Technical Limitations

Another significant challenge was the slow implementation of core platform features.

• A basic sports deposit bonus system was only implemented around late January 2026.
• The team informed us that their system could not separate “Bonus Balance” from “Real Balance” for casino operations, which prevented the use of standard promotional mechanics commonly used in the industry.

These limitations made it difficult to operate the platform in the way we initially expected.

4. Billing and Transparency Concerns

Several billing elements also raised questions during the partnership.

For example, a fee of approximately $5.50 was charged for every $10 lottery ticket sold, described as covering ticket purchasing and insurance. When we requested supporting documentation or third-party invoices confirming these purchases, we did not receive detailed verification.

5. Compliance Observations

During our own due diligence process we also noticed that some domains associated with the infrastructure used in the project appear in publicly accessible regulatory domain registers in certain jurisdictions. Businesses considering a similar partnership may wish to independently verify regulatory status and licensing requirements.

6. Documentation

Throughout this project we preserved extensive documentation including signed agreements, email communication, and WhatsApp discussions with the project team. These records document the timelines, contractual changes, and operational challenges we experienced.

Conclusion

Based on our experience, this partnership involved substantial delays, contract changes, and several operational concerns. Companies considering a similar white-label arrangement may wish to carefully review platform capabilities, contractual terms, and regulatory status before committing to a long-term agreement.

March 13, 2026
Unprompted review
White Lotto logo

Reply from White Lotto

For nearly two decades of operations, this is the first time White Lotto has had to deal with this type of pressure campaign.

We encourage everyone to visit our website, review our live projects, check the quality of our work, and make their own judgment based on facts.

Now, to respond to the review directly:

Milen Nikolov has never interacted with the White Lotto project in any business, technical, operational, or contractual capacity.

Based on the timing, wording, and context of the review, we have reason to believe that this may be connected to Alex Dragomirov, Martin Ivanov and Georgi Kosturkov.

All three made a very good first impression on a personal level. However, from a business perspective, it appears that they are attempting to place responsibility for their own commercial failure on White Lotto.

They received a White Label platform from White Lotto, and the platform was fully operational within weeks.

After approximately seven months of being live, they delivered no meaningful results in terms of customer acquisition. Instead of taking responsibility for their own marketing performance, they started blaming others for the lack of results.

It is also important to add that White Lotto did not charge them any monthly minimums during that period. On the contrary, White Lotto continued covering their monthly maintenance costs in good faith, based on the understanding that these costs would eventually be repaid.

They never repaid those costs.

Despite this, after approximately seven months of operating the platform, they began demanding a refund. White Lotto refused because the service had been delivered, the platform had been operational, and White Lotto had already absorbed ongoing costs on their behalf.

After that refusal, negative content started appearing online. In our opinion, this appears to be an attempt to pressure White Lotto into granting an unjustified refund.

The key questions are simple:

Why was no refund requested during the seven months when the platform was live and operational?

How many real customers did they actually bring to the platform?

What specific marketing actions did they personally execute during that period?

What evidence do they have of an actual platform failure?

Why should White Lotto be held responsible for their failure to acquire users?

And finally, why are public accusations being posted now instead of presenting verifiable business results, traffic data, customer numbers, or evidence of a technical or operational failure?

The Trustpilot Experience

Anyone can write a Trustpilot review. People who write reviews have ownership to edit or delete them at any time, and they’ll be displayed as long as an account is active.

Companies can ask for reviews via automatic invitations. Labeled Verified, they’re about genuine experiences.

Learn more about other kinds of reviews.

We use dedicated people and clever technology to safeguard our platform. Find out how we combat fake reviews.

Learn about Trustpilot’s review process.

Here are 8 tips for writing great reviews.

Verification can help ensure real people are writing the reviews you read on Trustpilot.

Offering incentives for reviews or asking for them selectively can bias the TrustScore, which goes against our guidelines.

Take a closer look