01 · The casinos
Two names, one operator
MonteCryptos opened in 2018 as a casino built around crypto. Cabarino came later and was pointed mainly at French speaking players. They looked like two different companies.
They were not. The Australian media watchdog, the ACMA, issued a formal warning in 2022. It named both brands together. It also named the companies behind them: Mountberg Limited and Mountberg B.V. The warning was about taking bets from Australians with no licence. It is also the clearest public document tying the two casinos to one group.
A third related company, Mountberg N.V., held the Curacao licence. Three company names, two casino brands, one operation. That kind of structure is normal in the offshore market. It is exactly what makes it hard to trace money when things go wrong.
02 · The shutdown
Dark first, licence handed back later
Both casinos closed around March 2025. No closure notice, no deadline, no reason given. Directory and review sites that had tracked them for years simply changed their status to closed.
The paperwork followed seven months later. On 28 October 2025 the Curacao licence held by Mountberg N.V. was cancelled. The detail that matters is why. The record shows it was cancelled at its own request. It was not taken away as a punishment.
That order of events tells you something. The sites went off first. The licence was handed back later. This is the pattern you see when a company closes itself down, not when someone shuts it down. It also means there was a seven month gap. During that time, a player looking up the licence would have found it still listed as valid. But the casino no longer existed.
No reason for the closure has ever been published. We looked for one and the honest answer is that nobody outside the company knows.
03 · The money
Complaints before the end, silence after it
Reviews written while MonteCryptos was live describe three problems. One player says a payout of about three hundred and fifty dollars was refused with no reason given. He had already met the wagering requirements. Another player says five dollars and fifty cents was taken across thirteen deposits and blamed on a glitch. Other reviews say bonuses kept failing to appear. Support was described as slow and rude.
Those are small sums and they are player accounts rather than proven facts. We record them because they are the only public picture of how this company handled disputes. A site that argues over five dollars and fifty cents is telling you something about itself.
What happened to balances still sitting on either site in March 2025, we do not know. There was no notice and no deadline. Nobody has come forward to say they were paid, and nobody has come forward to say they were not.
The Curacao licence was cancelled in October 2025, so even the weak complaint route that a Curacao licence offers is gone. Both addresses are dead. MonteCryptos does not resolve at all and Cabarino returns a not found error.
04 · The receipts
How we verified this record
Every claim on this page is graded by how firmly we could check it. Confirmed means we saw it in the company’s own notice or in a document that cannot easily be faked. Observed means we saw it ourselves on the live site or domain on the date given. Unconfirmed means it has been reported but we could not prove it.
05 · The questions
MonteCryptos and Cabarino – the questions still open
Q. Were MonteCryptos and Cabarino the same company?
Yes. An Australian regulator warning from 2022 names both brands and the Mountberg companies behind them in the same document.
Q. When did they close?
Around March 2025. Neither published a closure notice.
Q. What happened to the licence?
The Curacao licence was cancelled on 28 October 2025, seven months after the sites stopped working, and the record says this was at the operator own request.
Q. Can I still get money out?
No. Both addresses are dead and the licence has been cancelled, so there is no site and no regulator route left.
Q. Why did they close?
No reason has ever been published.
Q. Were there complaints?
Yes, while the sites were live. A refused withdrawal of about 350 dollars after wagering was met, a small deduction dispute, and bonuses that failed to appear. All are player accounts, none confirmed.