Pure jackpot resale has structural limits. The underlying brand is often shared. The product can be compared across multiple sites. Promotional flexibility may be narrower. The operator benefits from demand, but does not necessarily control much of what creates that demand. That can make margin, positioning, and retention harder than they first appear.
Custom games change the equation because they create owned intellectual property. When an operator controls the game concept, frequency, rules, themes, and promotional architecture, the brand gains room to differentiate. It can build products around local habits, calendar moments, specific audience segments, or broader entertainment positioning without relying entirely on someone else’s global jackpot identity.
Custom products can also improve portfolio balance. Big-jackpot resale is often strongest at acquiring attention. Proprietary games are often stronger at creating habit and commercial flexibility. Daily draws, thematic games, or locally relevant experiences can keep the brand active between headline jackpot moments and reduce dependence on external event cycles.
That does not mean operators should replace established jackpots with homemade alternatives. The strongest portfolio is rarely binary. International jackpots can anchor credibility and top-of-funnel reach. Custom games can then create the owned middle layer where brand memory, higher-margin play, and long-term differentiation actually compound.
In crowded markets, the most valuable product is not always the most famous one. It is often the one that sits inside your own economics, your own CRM logic, and your own story. That is why custom game capability matters so much more than many operators initially assume.
The strongest lottery portfolio combines borrowed attention with owned differentiation.
Compare custom games and jackpot resale using the same cost boundary
Custom games can create differentiation and commercial flexibility, but those benefits do not automatically produce a higher profit. Compare both routes with the same definition of sales, retained economic value, direct costs and allocated fixed costs. For owned draws, distinguish expected prize cost from actual prize liability; for resale, identify the supplier price and the operator’s retained amount under the real agreement.
| Cost or dependency | Custom game questions | Jackpot resale questions |
|---|---|---|
| Initial delivery | Who funds design, mathematics, development, testing and required certification? | What setup, integration and catalogue-access costs apply? |
| Variable economics | What prize obligation and supplier/payment costs arise from each sale? | What purchase cost, commission or revenue-share definition applies? |
| Operating work | Who manages draws, configuration changes, results, incidents and customer support? | Which functions depend on the upstream supplier, and who resolves exceptions? |
| Commercial control | What changes to rules, frequency, promotion and intellectual property are permitted? | What restrictions apply to pricing, marketing and geographic availability? |
| Risk and exit | Who carries prize exposure and owns usable game assets on exit? | What happens if access, supplier terms or product availability changes? |
A transparent hypothetical break-even calculation
Assume, solely for comparison, that both products produce 100,000 currency units of monthly sales. After all model-specific variable obligations, resale retains 12% and a custom game retains 18%. Assume incremental fixed monthly operating costs of 2,000 for resale and 5,000 for custom. The resulting management contribution is 10,000 for resale and 13,000 for custom, before common overhead, tax, financing and any initial investment recovery.
The incremental fixed-cost difference is 3,000 and the retained-rate difference is six percentage points. If sales are equal and these assumptions stay constant, incremental contribution breaks even at 3,000 ÷ 0.06 = 50,000 in monthly sales. At 40,000, resale contributes 2,800 and custom contributes 2,200; at 100,000, custom contributes 3,000 more. These invented assumptions demonstrate the calculation only. They are not quotations, observed margins, prize-return promises or a revenue forecast.
Stress-test the assumptions instead of relying on one case
Change sales volume, retained rate, payment costs, support demand and initial development recovery independently. Test lower custom-game demand rather than assuming both products attract identical sales. Include working capital and possible prize volatility where the operator carries that exposure. A product can show a positive expected margin while still needing liquidity to meet its obligations.
Also test cannibalisation: new custom sales may partly replace existing jackpot sales rather than add to them. Use defined player cohorts and product contribution in the operator KPI framework before attributing a portfolio improvement to one game.
Discuss the model alongside the platform TCO guide, the Keno solution and the portfolio and UX guide. Relevant testing and operating requirements should be agreed before delivery; the World Lottery Association security standard provides industry background, not a claim that a particular custom game or deployment is certified.
Separate the revenue model from prize funding
Before using a retained percentage in the comparison, agree what its base contains. Accepted stakes, collected cash, modelled net revenue and prize obligations answer different questions. Give each measure an explicit definition and reporting period in the operator KPI framework. The labels below are planning boundaries to agree with finance, not universal accounting definitions.
| Measure | Boundary to specify | Distinction to preserve |
|---|---|---|
| Accepted stakes | Value of eligible participation in the defined period | A wallet deposit is not automatically an accepted game purchase. |
| Gross cash receipts | Cash collected through the included channels | Collection timing need not match the draw or purchase period. |
| Modelled net revenue | The specified base after the model’s agreed deductions | Show deductions explicitly rather than importing another supplier’s label. |
| Payable prizes | Awards determined under the applicable rules | An expected prize-cost allowance is not a record of actual awards. |
| Carried prize balance | Amount carried under the agreed rollover rule | An unpaid or carried allocation is not automatically free operating cash. |
Use the custom-draw operating brief to establish whether prizes follow a defined table or a shared-pool allocation. Record who funds any promised starting amount or supplementary allocation. The prize-funding and exposure guide helps structure those responsibility questions; a favourable expected contribution does not answer them.
Trace a rollover through allocation, obligation and payment
If the proposed rules carry an amount to another draw, identify the opening carried balance, current allocation, any additional funding, amounts awarded and closing carried balance. Require finance to explain how each movement appears in the planning model and operating records. Do not treat a no-winner draw as an unrestricted margin improvement or count the same carried amount as a new contribution every period.
Keep the timetable separate: when receipts become available, when an award becomes determined and when payment is due under the agreed process. Connect the draw and settlement references to the payment records. Include a rollover followed by an award, a cancelled draw and delayed collection in the acceptance checklist, using test records rather than live funds.
Bring the revenue definitions and funding responsibilities to WhiteLotto. CONTACT to discuss the custom-game platform scope.
Questions to take into procurement
- Is the retained-rate definition consistent across both products?
- Are prize obligations, supplier fees, payment costs and bonuses included without double counting?
- Who owns the game assets, change rights and operational responsibilities?
- Which sales assumptions are incremental, and which replace existing products?
- How much fixed investment, recovery time and liquidity does each scenario require?
Bring your product assumptions and responsibility boundaries to the operator readiness discussion. CONTACT.
Wojciech Lysak is the Managing Director of WhiteLotto.com. LinkedIn