Kindred Group Completes Exit from Polish Market Amid Regulatory Pressures

by

After being taken over by the French gaming group La Française des Jeux (FDJ), The Kindred Group, which operates Unibet, has now officially ceased its activities in Poland. This move represents a significant change in their global strategy.

Kindred Group, well-known for its management of Unibet, has officially concluded its departure from the Polish gambling market. This move isn’t just about a change in operations; it represents a strategic adjustment that aligns with the policies and values of its new parent company, La Française des Jeux (FDJ), which took over Kindred in 2024.

Instead of a sudden departure, Kindred gradually winded down its online gambling activities in Poland starting October 2024. This process included the closure of betting, poker, and bingo services. The full phase-out culminated with the termination of sports betting operations by late November.

In line with FDJ’s approach of working exclusively in markets that have local regulations, they have made it clear they won’t back ventures where regulatory risks and possible non-compliance are a concern. Given Poland’s strict gambling laws and stringent control over foreign operators, it was an expected decision for Kindred to exclude this country from their strategic plans.

Regulatory Challenges and Legal Pressure

Historically, Kindred’s activities in Poland have been met with considerable debate. Despite functioning without a Polish operating license for extended periods, the company faced harsh criticisms from both industry advocates and regulatory bodies. Leading the charge against the company was Graj Legalnie, an organization that strongly advocated for lawful and licensed gambling within Poland’s borders.

Foreign tour operators have levied severe accusations against Kindred, claiming they undermine the local market and fail to pay taxes to the Polish State Treasury. These allegations, if true, create tension among foreign operators. They argue that offshore gaming companies give an unfair advantage to those who comply with the legal procedures for obtaining a license in Poland.

To compound their troubles, it turned out that Kindred (Unibet) was embroiled in a legal dispute with STS, the largest licensed bookmaker in Poland. STS alleged that Unibet was conducting unlawful activities towards Polish customers, failing to meet its tax obligations and disregarding advertising rules.

The Role of Free Spins No Deposit in Poland

The allure of offers like “free spins with no deposit” in Poland is significantly strong and hard to exaggerate. Offshore operators have widely employed such promotional strategies to attract new clients, particularly in markets lacking a robust selection of licensed options for competition.

Despite its appeal to players, this promotion remains questionable under the law. In regulated markets, similar promotions are tightly managed to prevent gaming from becoming unbalanced and imprudent. The stringent gambling advertising laws in Poland made it hard to maintain such promotions legally, and Kindred’s persistent use of them has exacerbated regulatory concerns.

Over time, relying excessively on unlicensed platforms offering free spins could potentially give rise to suspicions that Kindred was breaking local laws, adding more fuel to the fire as both regulatory bodies and competing companies put increased pressure.

User Impact and Transition Strategy

For the Polish athletes utilizing Unibet, the shift occurred seamlessly, given the situation’s constraints. The company had previously warned everyone, ensuring that no one was taken aback by the announcement.

As a gamer, I received the payout for all active sports bets by November 25, 2024, and they were duly settled. According to Unibet’s terms and conditions, any remaining open bets were voided. From then until December 30, we could withdraw our earnings, but after that date, our accounts would be permanently closed for good.

The customer service avenues remained accessible during the entire procedure to help with closing processes, transferring funds, and resolving any remaining concerns. This smooth, organized departure is not common when lenders leave markets under regulatory strain, making this an exception.

Industry Responses and the Broader Picture

Kindred Group’s departure from Poland was not a solitary event. This action is seen by industry insiders as part of an ongoing shift among leading European gaming operators. As regulatory frameworks evolve and enforcement becomes more stringent, particularly in regions like Poland, the appetite for risk in “grey markets” is decreasing.

To some, Poland’s firm stance towards offshore operators signals a trend that may influence choices throughout the region. While the monetary fines are substantial, the potential long-term expense of being labeled as an unauthorized player in terms of reputation could be even steeper.

Actions taken by Kindred could set a pattern. Other operators, who at present are avoiding Polish laws – some yet uncertain about acquiring local permits – might follow suit and depart before they’re forced to comply.

The New Roadmap

Given Poland’s current prominence, Kindred Group intends to strengthen its focus in regions where legal and transparent operations are allowed. With FDJ at the helm, the goal is clear: to pursue a balanced approach that prioritizes stability, adherence to regulations, and long-term growth in markets governed by regulation.

The company holds licenses in Sweden, the UK, and specific U.S. states, areas with well-established legal frameworks and fewer doubts about promotions and taxation. By concentrating its efforts on these markets, Kindred aims to strengthen investor confidence and align more closely with evolving industry practices.

The story of Kindred in Poland may be concluded, yet the strategic impacts are just beginning to create waves throughout the European gaming sector. This significant event serves as another milestone in the continuous evolution of international gambling regulations, with potential consequences for consumers, regulatory bodies, and competing entities alike.

Read More

2025-06-16 16:12