Buying game content is one of the fastest ways to grow your casino. It is also one of the easiest ways to quietly destroy margin.
The problem is rarely the headline rev-share. The real money leaks come from “small” items that only show up after you integrate: certification pass-throughs, hosting uplifts, reporting add-ons, minimum guarantees, “premium” RTP configurations, currency fees, or support tiers that make every incident a billable event.
This RFP template is designed to prevent those leaks. It gives you a structured set of questions to send to any slot studio, live dealer studio, or game aggregator so you can compare offers on true total cost of ownership (TCO), not marketing slides.
When you should use this template (and what it optimizes for)
This is a MOFU/BOFU procurement tool. Use it when you are:
- Adding a new game provider to an existing online casino.
- Switching aggregators, or renegotiating current content deals.
- Evaluating fixed-fee vs rev-share proposals.
- Entering a new jurisdiction where certification and content rules change.
The goal is simple: force cost clarity upfront and reduce expensive surprises after go-live.
How to send this RFP so you actually get comparable answers
Most RFPs fail because vendors reply with vague ranges and “it depends.” Fix that with two rules:
1) Ask for answers in a table (not a PDF narrative)
Tell vendors you will score responses and you need:
- A single spreadsheet-style table of answers.
- A separate price sheet with line items.
- A sample contract, or at least the commercial schedule and SLA.
2) Give them your traffic profile (or they will price you defensively)
You do not need perfect forecasts, but you do need consistent assumptions:
- Target jurisdictions
- Estimated monthly active players
- Peak concurrent users (PCU)
- Deposit currencies (fiat, crypto, both)
- Expected game mix (slots, live casino games, originals)
If you want a deeper cost modeling approach, pair this with Spinlab’s guide on the true cost of a game aggregator and the math in how to calculate break-even on fixed-fee game provider deals.
The cost traps this RFP is meant to catch
| Cost trap | What it looks like in the contract | RFP question that exposes it |
|---|---|---|
| Hidden pass-through fees | “Operator pays all third-party costs” | “List every pass-through fee, who invoices it, and when it can change.” |
| Minimum guarantees (MGs) | Guaranteed monthly payment regardless of revenue | “Is there an MG? Can it be netted across brands or jurisdictions?” |
| Hosting surcharges | “Dedicated instance required for performance” | “What hosting model is assumed and what triggers a surcharge?” |
| Reporting and data fees | “Advanced reporting is premium” | “What telemetry and reporting is included, and what costs extra?” |
| Certification surprises | “Certification required per jurisdiction and per game” | “Provide per-jurisdiction certification requirements and typical cost ranges.” |
| Support tiers that become a tax | “24/7 support only on enterprise plan” | “Define incident SLAs and what is billable.” |
| Settlement and FX leakage | Fees on payouts, currency conversion, or wallet transfers | “How are FX rates set and what fees apply per currency?” |
Game Provider RFP Template (copy and send)
Section A: Vendor profile and scope
A1. What exactly are you providing?
- Are you a direct game studio, a live dealer studio, a game aggregator, or a casino software provider offering aggregation?
- Which content types are included (slot games, live casino games, table RNG, crash, instant win)?
- Do you offer “originals” or bespoke titles, and if yes, what is the typical timeline and commercial model?
A2. Where can we operate your content?
- List supported jurisdictions and any restrictions.
- Describe geo-blocking and jurisdictional content controls.
- Confirm whether branding, lobby placement, and marketing usage are restricted.
A3. What is the roadmap impact?
- How often do you release new games?
- What is your policy for sunsetting games?
- What advance notice do you provide for breaking changes?
Section B: Commercials and pricing (the money-saving section)
B1. Provide a full price sheet with line items.
Ask them to itemize:
- Setup fees (integration, certification coordination, project management)
- Ongoing fees (rev-share, fixed monthly, hybrid)
- Minimum guarantees and true-up logic
- Hosting fees (base + overage)
- Jackpot or tournament fees (if applicable)
- Support plan fees
- Reporting, dashboards, or API access fees
B2. Define the revenue base precisely.
- Is rev-share based on GGR or NGR?
- If NGR, which deductions are allowed (bonuses, PSP fees, chargebacks, taxes, affiliate costs)?
- Are deductions capped?
B3. Confirm whether pricing changes by jurisdiction, currency, or payment type.
- Do crypto deposits or stablecoins change settlement fees or terms?
- Is multi-currency support included?
B4. List every pass-through cost and how it can change.
- Certification labs, regulatory fees, or local testing requirements
- Game server hosting providers
- Content delivery network charges
- Third-party jackpot networks
B5. Term, renewal, and exit costs.
- Contract term and auto-renewal conditions
- Termination for convenience (is it allowed?)
- Data export obligations, format, and fees
- Kill fees for incomplete integrations
Section C: Technical integration (where “cheap” becomes expensive)
C1. Integration method and protocol.
- What protocols are supported (REST, WebSocket, etc.)?
- Do you support seamless wallet, transfer wallet, or both?
- Are there known edge cases with rollback, idempotency, or retry behavior?
C2. Environments and testing.
- Do you provide sandbox and staging environments?
- What test tooling is available (test players, test wallets, simulated error codes)?
- What is your release process and how do you communicate changes?
C3. Latency and performance requirements.
- Provide target and real-world P95 latency for game launch and bet settlement.
- What are your uptime commitments and how are they measured?
- What happens during partial outages (degraded mode, queueing, bet freezes)?
C4. Data and events.
- What game events can we consume in real time (bet, win, round end, bonus trigger)?
- Do you support raw event feeds for analytics and fraud?
- What is the retention period for detailed game logs?
C5. Wallet and settlement reconciliation.
- Provide reconciliation files and cadence.
- Describe dispute handling for mismatched rounds.
- Provide typical time-to-resolution metrics.
Section D: Compliance, certification, and auditability
D1. Certification coverage.
- Provide certificates per game, per jurisdiction (or explain coverage limitations).
- Who pays for initial certification and for re-certification after updates?
D2. Responsible gambling and regulatory hooks.
- What controls are available for timeouts, limits, and self-exclusion signals?
- How do you handle jurisdictional restrictions on promotions and bonus mechanics?
D3. Security and audit evidence.
- Do you have a formal security program (pen tests, vulnerability management, incident response)?
- Provide audit artifacts you can share under NDA (security summary, incident history policy, access controls).
If your procurement is crypto-heavy, also ask how they support Travel Rule or blockchain analytics dependencies on the payments side. Even when the game vendor is not responsible for payments, their operational model can force you into higher-risk workflows.
Section E: Operations and support (the silent cost center)
E1. Support model and SLAs.
- 24/7 availability, channels, and escalation paths
- P1/P2 definitions and response/resolve targets
- On-call coverage during your peak hours
E2. What is billable?
- Are incident investigations included?
- Are reconciliation disputes included?
- Are configuration changes included?
E3. Incident transparency.
- Do you provide a status page?
- Do you provide post-mortems for major incidents?
- Do you provide proactive alerts for outages or degraded performance?
Section F: Commercial controls that protect your margin
These questions are specifically designed to save money during renegotiations.
F1. Renegotiation triggers.
- At what monthly GGR or active-player threshold do rates improve?
- Can you lock in tiered pricing in the contract?
F2. Most favored nation (MFN) and parity.
- Will you commit to pricing parity against comparable operators?
- If not, what is your policy for rate reviews?
F3. Marketing commitments.
- Are there co-marketing requirements, featured placement fees, or launch packages?
- Are promotional tools (free spins, tournaments) included or paid add-ons?
A simple scoring sheet you can use internally
Do not let procurement become “who feels safest.” Score it.
| Category | Weight (example) | What “good” looks like |
|---|---|---|
| True TCO clarity | 25% | Fully itemized, minimal pass-throughs, predictable renewals |
| Commercial competitiveness | 20% | Clean rev-share base, no hidden MGs, rational tiers |
| Integration effort | 15% | Clear docs, stable APIs, solid sandbox, defined timeline |
| Performance and reliability | 15% | Strong SLAs, realistic latency, mature incident process |
| Compliance readiness | 15% | Clear certification plan, audit evidence, jurisdiction controls |
| Data and analytics access | 10% | Real-time events, useful logs, no punitive data fees |
Adjust weights to your reality. For example, emerging markets often weight payments and local compliance higher, while mature regulated markets weight auditability and SLAs higher.
Negotiation “red flags” to treat as deal breakers
These are patterns that repeatedly inflate costs after launch:
- Refusal to define the rev-share base (GGR vs NGR) in writing.
- “All third-party costs are pass-through” with no caps or change controls.
- No clear path to export data and logs if you terminate.
- SLAs that measure only response time, not resolution time.
- Vague certification ownership (especially for multi-jurisdiction operations).
If you are evaluating a specific studio, it can help to use a focused add-on checklist. For example, Spinlab’s partner vetting questions before adding new Hacksaw slots shows what to request when content is popular but operationally demanding.
Frequently Asked Questions
What’s the difference between a game provider RFP and an aggregator RFP? A game provider RFP targets a specific studio’s content, commercials, and certification. An aggregator RFP focuses more on integration abstraction, content breadth, pass-through fee structure, and operational tooling (data, reporting, incident handling) across many studios.
How many questions should a good game provider RFP have? Enough to force price clarity and operational details, but not so many that vendors ignore it. Around 35 to 60 well-scoped questions is usually the sweet spot, especially if you require table-format answers.
Should we ask for fixed-fee pricing or rev-share? Ask for both if you can. Fixed fees can be cheaper at scale, but rev-share reduces risk early. The right answer depends on your expected GGR, active players, and game mix. Use a break-even model before signing.
What’s the fastest way to compare two offers fairly? Normalize assumptions (jurisdictions, traffic, currencies) and compute a 12 to 24-month TCO for each offer, including setup, certification, hosting, support, and data fees. Then stress-test with downside and upside scenarios.
How do we prevent vendor lock-in with game content? Require clear exit terms: data export formats, log retention, migration support, and reasonable termination clauses. Operationally, favor platforms with open APIs and modular integrations so you can swap providers without rebuilding your cashier, wallet, or backoffice.
Want to reduce content costs without shrinking your lobby?
If your current stack makes every new provider integration feel like a custom project, it is worth looking at a modular platform approach.
Spinlab Studio builds a crypto-ready, modular iGaming platform with integrated payments, compliance, game aggregation, and a customizable backoffice. The focus is fast onboarding and operational control so you can expand content while keeping TCO predictable.
Explore the platform at spinlab.studio or book a conversation to pressure-test your current provider contracts and game aggregation economics.