One old casino cluster. Two affiliate programmes. No proven network link.
What do the WelcomePartners findings change for an affiliate or industry researcher in practice?
Decide what to verify and preserve before sending traffic to WelcomePartners, and avoid false assumptions about historical brand/network continuity.
Two current first-party surfaces disagree: Terms state a standard 21-day CPA Hold while the FAQ states 14 calendar days, and the RevShare descriptions also differ.
Archive both current pages and obtain the applicable Hold / RevShare terms for your account or offer in writing before scaling traffic.
Crystal, ICE and Max were marketed through both WelcomePartners and Gambling Attack, but no reviewed migration, reseller or succession agreement connects the two programmes.
For legacy accounts, acquired sites, migrations or lifetime-RevShare claims, require explicit evidence showing which programme owns the historical referred-player attribution.
Current Terms allow traffic-source review, payout holds during investigations and significant account/balance remedies under specified rule breaches.
Keep dated copies of Terms, approved traffic sources and written confirmations of material account-specific conditions.
Current WelcomePartners Terms identify Cyonix Services Limited #142,483 in Belize, but that does not make Cyonix the operator of the casino brands and does not prove Cyonix was the 2013 programme counterparty.
Use the current Cyonix disclosure for present programme-contract verification, but require period-specific evidence for historical disputes or claims.
The same historical casino cluster appears under two acquisition programmes, while no direct programme-to-programme ownership or succession edge is reviewed.
Model WelcomePartners and Gambling Attack as separate network nodes connected independently to the casino brands unless a future contract, corporate record or migration document proves more.
Case status: Active affiliate programme
Last checked: 26 September 2026
Current programme: WelcomePartners
Current legal disclosure: Cyonix Services Limited · Belize · #142,483
First-party programme history: verified to March 2013
Historical portfolio examined: Crystal Casino · ICE Casino · Max Casino
Historical overlap: Gambling Attack promoted the same three brands
WelcomePartners ↔ Gambling Attack relationship: Unresolved
Sherlock Score: Not published
WelcomePartners looked, at first, like a footnote in the Max Casino investigation.
It is not.
WelcomePartners is still active, and its own public archive takes the programme back to 2013. Its current Terms identify Cyonix Services Limited, registration #142,483 in Belize, as the company operating the site.
The historical casino trail is even more interesting.
By 2014 and early 2015, WelcomePartners was promoting:
Crystal Casino
ICE Casino
Max Casino
We already knew another affiliate programme from the same period with exactly that three-brand portfolio:
Gambling Attack.
Gambling Attack's own 2014 forum account advertised CrystalCasino, MaxCasino and IceCasino.
WelcomePartners' own archive and programme-representative posts place Crystal and ICE inside WelcomePartners, while Max appears in a dated affiliate account, a WelcomePartners representative portfolio list and a historical casino database.
That gives us a verified shared historical portfolio.
It does not give us a verified relationship between the two programmes.
Sherlock found no reviewed evidence that WelcomePartners and Gambling Attack were:
That distinction is the case.
Two affiliate-programme surfaces marketed the same old casino cluster. The overlap is verified. The commercial mechanism behind it is unresolved.
And WelcomePartners' current contract adds an important role boundary. It defines the affiliate programme as a marketing agency and the casinos as client websites.
So this investigation does not conclude:
WelcomePartners owned Crystal, ICE or Max.
It concludes:
WelcomePartners was a verified historical acquisition surface for those brands, while the operator, licence and company layers remained separate.
This is not a closed-network case.
The current WelcomePartners site presents an active affiliate programme with current registration, support, payout and acquisition-model information.
Its public material describes:
The homepage also describes WelcomePartners as a direct advertiser.
Direct-advertiser and affiliate-programme language does not establish casino ownership, gambling operation or licence holding.
That phrase needs care.
In affiliate marketing, “direct advertiser” can describe a commercial relationship in which an affiliate programme supplies offers directly rather than through another middleman.
It does not, by itself, mean:
casino owner
gambling operator
licence holder
The current Terms give us a much cleaner definition of the programme's role.
They describe the casino as a client site offering gambling services and the affiliate programme as a marketing agency that attracts visitors through affiliate arrangements.
That is the role Sherlock publishes.
Evidence status: VERIFIED CURRENT AFFILIATE / ACQUISITION NETWORK
WelcomePartners does not rely only on a modern “founded in 2013” marketing claim.
Its own surviving news archive contains operational affiliate content from 2013.
On 28 March 2013, WelcomePartners published an account notice asking partners to verify payment details.
In September 2013, another first-party post addressed affiliates and announced downloadable software covering multiple casino projects.
In November 2013, WelcomePartners was running an affiliate competition.
The programme later published a 2021 global platform update saying it had operated since 2013 and was celebrating its eighth birthday. That update also said the redesign would not affect existing data and statistics.
This gives us a strong programme-continuity trail.
It does not solve the historical company question.
The programme existed in 2013.
The company disclosed today is Cyonix Services Limited.
Whether that same company was already the legal counterparty at programme inception is a separate question.
Evidence status: PROGRAMME OPERATION VERIFIED TO 2013
Belize · #142,483
35 Barrack Road, 3rd floor, Belize City, Belize
Not a primary incorporation record.
Cyonix Services current homepageWelcomePartners' current Terms identify:
Cyonix Services Limited
Registration #142,483
Belize
35 Barrack Road, 3rd floor, Belize City
Cyonix's own corporate Terms and Privacy Policy repeat the same company number and Belize address.
That is a strong current legal identity match.
Sherlock Graph can therefore safely show:
WelcomePartners
→ CURRENT CONTRACTING / SITE-OPERATING COMPANY
→ Cyonix Services Limited
This edge belongs to the affiliate programme.
It does not make Cyonix the gambling operator of every casino promoted through WelcomePartners.
That would require casino-specific operating and licence evidence.
Evidence status: VERIFIED CURRENT FIRST-PARTY DISCLOSURE
There is one detail we should not smooth over.
WelcomePartners has first-party affiliate activity in 2013.
Cyonix's current corporate site says the Cyonix business was “Launched in 2014.”
That is a clue, not a company-incorporation certificate.
It might mean:
It does not prove when the legal entity itself was incorporated.
And it does not identify who signed WelcomePartners contracts in 2013.
Sherlock therefore does not backdate the current Cyonix relationship.
We publish:
Current Cyonix counterparty: verified
and separately:
WelcomePartners inception-era legal counterparty: unresolved
A primary Belize company extract for #142,483 would be the strongest next document.
Evidence status: HISTORICAL LEGAL IDENTITY UNRESOLVED
Max Casino was the lead that brought us here.
The dedicated Max investigation already contained a historical WelcomePartners mapping, but the evidence at that point was treated more cautiously than the Gambling Attack edge.
The new WelcomePartners pass changes that.
A dated affiliate account from 16 May 2014 describes working with WelcomePartners and promoting MaxCasino.
Then, on 2 February 2015, a WelcomePartners representative account publicly listed its Dynamic RevShare portfolio.
That list included:
CrystalCasino
MaxCasino
IceCasino
A historical WorldCasinoDirectory Max Casino page independently lists:
Affiliate Program: Welcome Partners
The evidence is now strong enough to classify the old Max relationship as:
Max Casino → WelcomePartners
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAMME · VERIFIED
That does not replace the separate Gambling Attack relationship.
Both can be true.
One casino can be sold through more than one acquisition programme.
SAME CASINO ≠ SINGLE AFFILIATE PROGRAMME
Crystal gives us even cleaner evidence.
On 11 December 2014, the WelcomePartners first-party archive told affiliates that new CrystalCasino landing pages had been added.
A week later, the archive again described new CrystalCasino landing pages.
The historical WelcomePartners representative account likewise discussed a CrystalCasino mobile landing.
And in February 2015, CrystalCasino appears in the same Dynamic RevShare portfolio list as MaxCasino and IceCasino.
That is not a vague directory association.
It is programme-level historical marketing evidence.
Safe Graph edge:
WelcomePartners → HISTORICAL_AFFILIATE_PROGRAM_FOR → Crystal Casino
It says nothing by itself about Crystal's operator, parent company or licence.
Those layers remain governed by the separate Crystal Casino investigation.
ICE Casino completes the triangle.
The December 2014 WelcomePartners archive contains affiliate-facing IceCasino promotional material.
The February 2015 WelcomePartners representative portfolio includes IceCasino.
The relationship is therefore also strong enough for:
WelcomePartners → HISTORICAL_AFFILIATE_PROGRAM_FOR → ICE Casino
ICE is especially interesting because it survives into later affiliate eras.
We already know:
ICE → historical Gambling Attack
and later:
ICE → V.Partners
Now we can add:
ICE → historical WelcomePartners
Those edges describe acquisition programmes at different points and possibly overlapping periods.
They do not collapse into one owner.
NO DIRECT NETWORK RELATIONSHIP PROVEN
Now put the two historical programme records next to each other.
By 2014–15:
Crystal Casino
ICE Casino
Max Casino
On 8 August 2014, the programme-authored Gambling Attack thread advertised:
CrystalCasino
IceCasino
MaxCasino
The overlap is exact.
And the dates matter.
WelcomePartners was already operational before Gambling Attack's public launch-era material.
The old Max account places Max with WelcomePartners in May 2014.
Gambling Attack advertises the trio in August 2014.
WelcomePartners then publicly promotes Crystal and ICE again in December 2014 and lists all three in February 2015.
The evidence therefore does not fit a simple story in which:
WelcomePartners ended → Gambling Attack replaced it
or:
Gambling Attack ended → WelcomePartners replaced it
The records overlap.
That is why Sherlock does not create a succession edge.
What could explain the overlap?
Several commercial models are possible in principle:
But “possible” is not evidence.
Sherlock did not capture a contract or first-party statement identifying which model applied.
So the Graph does not show a direct WelcomePartners ↔ Gambling Attack relationship.
Instead, it shows the evidence we actually have:
WelcomePartners → Crystal
WelcomePartners → ICE
WelcomePartners → Max
and independently:
Gambling Attack → Crystal
Gambling Attack → ICE
Gambling Attack → Max
That graph says more than an invented merger arrow would.
It shows the overlap while preserving the unanswered question.
Evidence status: SHARED HISTORICAL PORTFOLIO VERIFIED · NETWORK RELATIONSHIP UNRESOLVED
Crystal, ICE and the old Max Casino sit inside a historical corporate environment already covered by Sherlock.
The individual cases connect them to entities such as:
Invicta Networks N.V.
Brivio Limited
But those casino-company relationships cannot be inherited upward into WelcomePartners.
The evidence does not say:
WelcomePartners owned by Invicta
or:
WelcomePartners owned by Brivio
or:
Cyonix operated those casinos
The clean model remains:
NETWORK ≠ OPERATOR ≠ LICENCE HOLDER ≠ PAYMENT COMPANY ≠ BRAND IP
WelcomePartners is the acquisition-programme layer unless separate evidence establishes another role.
Only reviewed public contract terms are shown. Private account-specific commercial terms are excluded.
WelcomePartners' current Terms are unusually useful because they expose much of the programme's control framework.
They say the Terms can be changed without prior notification and that the programme does not provide a chronology of changes.
They allow WelcomePartners to refuse cooperation without explaining why.
The programme can request disclosure of traffic sources and end cooperation if an affiliate refuses to provide them.
Where fraud or rule breaches are suspected, payouts may be held while the issue is investigated.
The Terms also contain several provisions under which an account can be terminated and its balance zeroed.
That includes specific language around:
CPA traffic has a separate qualification system.
The standard public Terms describe a 21-day hold, while also allowing the administration to change that period. Leads can be rejected under specified qualification/fraud conditions, and the Terms say CPA credits may be withheld under the programme's rules.
The current public RevShare language gives a range of 25%–60% of casino net profit, with the warning that ratios may vary.
The normal reporting period is one week and public payout language says payments are made on Mondays.
The stated minimum payout is currently $280.
For disputes, the Terms give a 14-business-day review period and state that the programme's decision is final.
These are contract powers.
They are not proof that WelcomePartners used them improperly in a particular dispute.
Sherlock's conclusion is contractual:
CURRENT AFFILIATE CONTRACT · HIGH PROGRAMME DISCRETION
Not:
misconduct proven
and not a numeric rating.
The contract review produced one more useful finding.
Two current WelcomePartners first-party surfaces give different default commercial guidance.
The current Terms describe the standard CPA Hold as 21 days, with a maximum lead time in Hold of 28 days and an explicit right for the administration to change the Hold period.
The current FAQ says the Hold period defaults to 14 calendar days.
The RevShare descriptions also use different framing.
The Terms state 25%–60% of casino net profit, subject to variation.
The FAQ says projects work at 40%–60%, separately describes basic RevShare as 40%, and gives Dynamic RevShare example thresholds of 30% / 45% / 55%.
There may be a legitimate explanation.
The pages may describe different programme modes, offer-level conditions or content versions.
But Sherlock does not silently reconcile conflicting current documents.
We publish the disagreement itself:
CURRENT FIRST-PARTY DOCUMENT DRIFT
That is not evidence of fraud.
It is evidence that an affiliate checking the current public documentation can receive different answers depending on which first-party page they read.
Do not convert user allegations such as shaving, fraud misclassification or unpaid leads into factual misconduct findings; do not convert programme replies into automatic exoneration.
There is a current public affiliate-review record.
Partnerkin preserves negative reviews alleging issues including:
WelcomePartners has responded publicly to several complaints on the same platform.
Some replies refer to traffic-source mismatch, antifraud findings or requests to contact support.
The existence of the complaints is a fact.
The truth of each underlying allegation is not independently established by the review page.
So Sherlock does not publish:
“WelcomePartners shaves affiliates.”
Nor do we publish:
“all complaints are false.”
The correct status is:
MIXED AFFILIATE DISPUTES · NO INDEPENDENT ADJUDICATION CAPTURED
A different historical controversy appears in 2017.
A WelcomePartners representative introduced the programme on Affiliate Guard Dog.
Soon after, an administrator linked to an LCB investigation warning readers about casino sites associated with the programme.
LCB described a later group of WelcomePartners-promoted casinos in severe terms and alleged issues including unlicensed operation, false licence presentation and pirated/fake game software.
Those allegations are significant enough to preserve.
They are not strong enough to rewrite the corporate graph.
Sherlock did not capture, in this pass, a regulator decision, court judgment or provider enforcement record confirming the whole LCB theory.
And the later 2017 portfolio is not the same evidence object as the older Crystal / ICE / Max trio.
So we keep it in the correct state:
DISPUTED THIRD-PARTY HISTORICAL ALLEGATIONS
Not:
WelcomePartners owned a criminal casino group
Not:
Cyonix operated those casinos
Not:
all brands used pirated games
This is exactly why Sherlock separates observation, allegation and corporate identity.
Holder / applicant signal: Cyonix Services Limited
Establishes the register/API framework, not the exact trademark record.
Ukrainian NIPO SIS API documentationTrademark evidence gives us another useful date boundary.
A Ukrainian trademark-registry mirror records a welcome partners application filed on 7 April 2021 and registered on 15 February 2023, with Cyonix Services Limited identified as owner/applicant.
A Russian trademark-registry mirror records WELCOME PARTNERS, filed 11 April 2021 and registered 23 December 2021, again identifying Cyonix as the right holder.
Sherlock also checked the Ukrainian NIPO public system documentation, which confirms the official trademark-register/API framework.
But we did not capture the exact primary Ukrainian or Russian registry object directly from the underlying IP offices in this pass.
So the IP conclusion is:
Cyonix → Welcome Partners trademark holder/applicant signal from 2021 onward
Status: SUPPORTED-HIGH SECONDARY REGISTRY EVIDENCE
We do not backdate it to 2013.
The IP owner at programme inception remains open.
WelcomePartners' first-party archive shows active affiliate accounts, payment administration and programme activity.
A dated affiliate account describes promoting MaxCasino through WelcomePartners.
Gambling Attack's own account advertises CrystalCasino, MaxCasino and IceCasino.
WelcomePartners' first-party archive promotes CrystalCasino landing pages and IceCasino campaigns.
WelcomePartners' representative lists CrystalCasino, MaxCasino and IceCasino inside the same Dynamic RevShare programme.
WelcomePartners continues with a broader and changing casino portfolio.
Affiliate Guard Dog and LCB publish warnings/allegations concerning a later WelcomePartners-associated portfolio.
WelcomePartners says it has operated since 2013 and is celebrating its eighth birthday while launching a redesigned platform.
Cyonix is also named in 2021 Welcome Partners trademark filings preserved by registry mirrors.
Russian and Ukrainian Welcome Partners trademark registrations identify Cyonix Services Limited as right holder / owner.
WelcomePartners remains active.
Its Terms identify Cyonix Services Limited #142,483, Belize as site operator.
Cyonix is the current disclosed company.
The programme was already active before the launch date described on Cyonix's current corporate site.
Status: current fact + historical gap
Crystal / ICE / Max appear under both.
Status: verified historical overlap
Mechanism: unresolved
The Terms describe casinos as client sites and the affiliate programme as a marketing agency.
Status: verified current contract role
Rules cover payout holds, traffic-source disclosure, CPA qualification, account termination and balance-zeroing scenarios.
Status: verified contract terms
Misconduct: not inferred
LCB/AGD and affiliate reviewers preserve negative claims.
Status: disputed / not independently adjudicated in this evidence pass
The investigation remains open on several important points:
These are unresolved leads, not implied conclusions.
WelcomePartners adds an important missing layer to the old Crystal / ICE / Max story.
The programme itself is real, current and historically deep.
Its first-party archive verifies affiliate activity in 2013.
Its current Terms identify Cyonix Services Limited #142,483 in Belize.
Its historical materials place Crystal Casino, ICE Casino and Max Casino in the WelcomePartners acquisition portfolio.
And Gambling Attack independently promoted the same three brands.
That overlap is now a fact.
What it means corporately is not.
The evidence does not support a direct arrow saying:
WelcomePartners = Gambling Attack
or:
WelcomePartners owned the casinos
or:
Gambling Attack succeeded WelcomePartners
or:
Cyonix operated the old casino cluster
The strongest conclusion is more precise:
The same casino cluster was distributed through two historical affiliate-programme surfaces. WelcomePartners has its own programme continuity back to 2013. The legal and commercial mechanism connecting the overlapping acquisition fronts remains unresolved.
Sherlock status: WELCOMEPARTNERS ACTIVE · PROGRAMME HISTORY VERIFIED TO 2013 · CURRENT CYONIX COUNTERPARTY VERIFIED · INCEPTION LEGAL ENTITY UNRESOLVED · CRYSTAL/ICE/MAX HISTORICAL AFFILIATE EDGES VERIFIED · GAMBLING ATTACK PORTFOLIO OVERLAP VERIFIED · DIRECT NETWORK-TO-NETWORK EDGE WITHHELD · CURRENT CASINO OWNERSHIP NOT INFERRED · CYONIX BRAND-IP SIGNAL SUPPORTED FROM 2021.
welcome.partners
WelcomePartners is a current active affiliate programme.
welcome.partners
WelcomePartners is a current active affiliate programme.
Current WelcomePartners Terms name Cyonix Services Limited #142,483, Belize, as site operator.
WelcomePartners' current Terms describe the affiliate programme as a marketing agency and casinos as client sites.
Current WelcomePartners Terms give the programme broad discretion over rule changes, traffic-source review, payout holds, CPA qualification and account/balance remedies.
Current WelcomePartners Terms and FAQ disagree on the default CPA Hold and present RevShare economics differently.
CONTRACTING ENTITY · VERIFIED
welcome.partners
WelcomePartners was operational as an affiliate programme by 28 March 2013.
The incorporated legal counterparty behind WelcomePartners at its 2013 inception is unresolved.
welcome.partners
WelcomePartners was operational as an affiliate programme by 28 March 2013.
welcome.partners
WelcomePartners was operational as an affiliate programme by 28 March 2013.
welcome-partners.com
welcome.partners
Crystal Casino was historically promoted through WelcomePartners.
ICE Casino was historically promoted through WelcomePartners.
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAM FOR · VERIFIED-HISTORICAL
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAM FOR · VERIFIED-HISTORICAL
welcome.partners
WelcomePartners was operational as an affiliate programme by 28 March 2013.
welcome.partners
WelcomePartners is a current active affiliate programme.
Current WelcomePartners Terms and FAQ disagree on the default CPA Hold and present RevShare economics differently.
searchengines.guru
Max Casino was historically promoted through WelcomePartners.
Crystal Casino was historically promoted through WelcomePartners.
ICE Casino was historically promoted through WelcomePartners.
No reviewed direct ownership, acquisition, rebrand, reseller or succession relationship between WelcomePartners and Gambling Attack was established.
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAM FOR · VERIFIED-HISTORICAL
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAM FOR · VERIFIED-HISTORICAL
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAM FOR · VERIFIED-HISTORICAL
affiliatefix.com
Gambling Attack independently marketed the same Crystal Casino / ICE Casino / Max Casino trio.
No reviewed direct ownership, acquisition, rebrand, reseller or succession relationship between WelcomePartners and Gambling Attack was established.
searchengines.guru
tods-blog.com.ua
Max Casino was historically promoted through WelcomePartners.
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAM FOR · VERIFIED-HISTORICAL
online.worldcasinodirectory.com
Max Casino was historically promoted through WelcomePartners.
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAM FOR · VERIFIED-HISTORICAL
whois.com
cyonixservices.com
The incorporated legal counterparty behind WelcomePartners at its 2013 inception is unresolved.
cyonixservices.com
Current WelcomePartners Terms name Cyonix Services Limited #142,483, Belize, as site operator.
CONTRACTING ENTITY · VERIFIED
opendatabot.ua
2021+ Ukrainian and Russian registry mirrors identify Cyonix Services Limited as Welcome Partners trademark holder/applicant.
TRADEMARK REGISTERED TO · SUPPORTED-HIGH-SECONDARY-REGISTRY-2021-PLUS
companies.rbc.ru
2021+ Ukrainian and Russian registry mirrors identify Cyonix Services Limited as Welcome Partners trademark holder/applicant.
TRADEMARK REGISTERED TO · SUPPORTED-HIGH-SECONDARY-REGISTRY-2021-PLUS
affiliateguarddog.com
LCB and Affiliate Guard Dog published severe 2017 allegations concerning a later WelcomePartners-promoted casino portfolio.
lcb.org
LCB and Affiliate Guard Dog published severe 2017 allegations concerning a later WelcomePartners-promoted casino portfolio.
sherlock.casino
sherlock.casino
Gambling Attack independently marketed the same Crystal Casino / ICE Casino / Max Casino trio.
No reviewed direct ownership, acquisition, rebrand, reseller or succession relationship between WelcomePartners and Gambling Attack was established.
sherlock.casino
sherlock.casino
Published files connected by reviewed structured relationships. A link reveals evidence already in the graph; it does not create a new relationship.
