Bally’s Intralot has reported third-quarter revenue of €286.1m and a further update on its proposed acquisition of evoke, putting the quality of its expanding business under closer scrutiny ahead of another major integration.
In preliminary results published on 10 November, the Athens-listed group said shareholders of both companies had approved the transaction. Remaining gaming regulatory approvals and the Gibraltar court sanction hearing are expected to conclude by the first quarter of 2027. The acquisition remains conditional and has not completed.
The revenue increase is striking. But the company’s own financial comparison tells a more demanding story: adjusted EBITDA for the first nine months fell by approximately 14.7% against a pro forma prior-year figure that includes the acquired international online business.
That distinction is central to assessing the evoke transaction. Bally’s Intralot is getting bigger. Its next task is to show how a larger collection of businesses can produce stronger earnings and cash flow after tax, financing and integration costs.
What changed in the business being compared
On 8 October 2025, Intralot completed its acquisition of Bally’s International Interactive, or BII, combining the online business with its existing lottery and gaming operations. That timing creates an unusually dramatic comparison with the first nine months of 2025, when BII was outside Intralot’s reported group.
The latest figures consequently contain two different accounts of growth:
| Measure, €m | Nine months to September 2025 | Nine months to September 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue as reported | 263.9 | 830.3 |
| Adjusted EBITDA as reported | 90.1 | 273.6 |
| Adjusted EBITDA using the company’s pro forma 2025 comparison | 320.8 | 273.6 |
The pro forma 2025 adjusted EBITDA figure includes BII’s unaudited results before its consolidation into the group. It is a comparison supplied by the company, rather than the adjusted EBITDA Intralot originally reported.
The first revenue line shows the scale of the acquired business. The final line provides a more useful starting point for examining the economics of the enlarged operation. Using those rounded figures, adjusted EBITDA declined by about 14.7%.
Our recent examination of Inspired’s comparable results addressed a related issue: changes to a portfolio can make the published total and the performance of the businesses being compared answer different questions.
There is nothing inherently problematic about acquisition-led expansion. The important point is to distinguish the revenue added by a transaction from improvements within the businesses already owned. Bally’s Intralot has provided the information needed to make that distinction.
British growth is real, but so is the tax bill
There is genuine commercial progress within the results. UK online revenue increased 12.2% year on year in constant currency during the third quarter, despite lower marketing investment.
The company also estimates that higher UK Remote Gaming Duty reduced quarterly adjusted EBITDA by approximately €34m before mitigation. Revenue growth, marketing efficiency and cost management offset about 55% of that effect.
Those figures explain how an operator can attract more business and still face pressure on earnings. Commercial improvements are helping pay the additional tax bill; they have not removed it.
The legacy Intralot operations add another qualification. Their nine-month revenue, excluding BII, declined 4.9% on a reported basis. The group’s financial outcome therefore reflects more than the direction of its British online business.
Our assessment is that management deserves credit for maintaining growth while reducing marketing expenditure. The next test is whether those efficiencies remain productive over time. Cutting ineffective spending can improve a business; reducing investment that supports future demand may have a delayed cost.
That is a risk to evaluate through subsequent results, rather than a conclusion that current savings have already damaged the brands.
evoke brings familiar names and another integration history
The proposed target gives the story particular significance for British readers. evoke owns William Hill, 888 and Mr Green. Its own history already includes a substantial combination: 888 completed the acquisition of William Hill’s international business in July 2022, before changing the corporate group’s name to evoke in 2024.
Buying that portfolio would bring valuable brands, customers and operating capabilities. It would also bring systems, commercial arrangements and working practices shaped by earlier transactions. Integration begins with that existing history.
The recommended acquisition was announced on 5 June 2026 as a share-based offer, with a capped cash alternative for shareholders. The transaction’s funding structure does not remove the need to finance the continuing business and deliver the proposed changes.
For Robeson Reeves, chief executive of Bally’s Intralot, the challenge is to connect a strategic case for greater scale with practical improvements inside the combined operation. A common purchasing decision may be relatively straightforward; aligning platforms, customer service and marketing across established brands can take much longer.
Brand recognition helps attract attention. The value of an acquisition ultimately depends on what the owner can do with the business after completion.

The target is already adjusting to pressure
evoke’s own trading update, published on 23 October, showed third-quarter revenue of £406m, down 7% on a reported basis. The decline was 2% on a like-for-like constant-currency basis that excluded the effect of approximately 270 fewer retail shops.
Chief executive Per Widerström emphasised profitability, cash generation and operational efficiency in response to higher gaming duties. The figures describe a target already making significant changes, rather than a business awaiting its buyer before beginning to respond.
This matters for integration planning. A buyer needs to distinguish efficiencies still available from savings already embedded in the target’s latest performance. Otherwise, the same improvement can become part of both the standalone recovery story and the acquisition’s expected benefits.
Our coverage of Super Group’s view of UK consolidation explored how pressure on industry margins can create opportunities for operators able to gain scale or market share. Bally’s Intralot faces the same commercial logic, alongside the demands of a much more substantial integration.
Savings will take time to become cash
The June offer announcement estimated approximately £180m of gross annual pre-tax cost and capital-expenditure synergies by the end of the second year following completion. The identified areas included marketing, operations and IT infrastructure.
That is a forecast of benefits from the proposed combination. It is not cash already generated or a saving available in full on the day the acquisition closes.
The composition also matters. Lower operating expenditure and lower capital expenditure can both help cash generation, but they affect reported earnings differently. The combined headline should therefore be assessed alongside the work required to achieve it and any costs of making the transition.
There are practical trade-offs. Combining technology can reduce duplicated maintenance while making a migration more complicated. Consolidating marketing can improve purchasing power while leaving less room for differences between brands. Staffing changes can reduce costs while creating a need to retain people with essential operational knowledge.
In our view, a credible integration plan needs clear milestones and accountable owners for these choices. The measure of success should include dependable service and customer protection, as well as the cost base.
Debt makes the timetable consequential
Bally’s Intralot reported adjusted net debt of approximately €1.63bn at 30 September and a pro forma adjusted net leverage ratio of 4.33 times. Those figures describe the existing group, before completion of the evoke acquisition.
Its €472.4m liquidity figure includes an undrawn €160m revolving credit facility as well as cash, some of which is restricted. It is therefore a measure of available financial resources with different components, rather than a single unrestricted cash balance.
Liquidity provides room to operate and prepare for change. Interest, tax, investment and the cost of integration still have to be funded before the remaining cash can reduce debt or support other priorities.
That makes the timing of savings commercially important. A delay in achieving the planned operating benefits can leave the business carrying transition costs and financing obligations for longer than expected. The existing group’s leverage ratio cannot establish what the final combined balance sheet will look like.
Scale must improve the underlying business
The acquisition has an understandable strategic rationale. Established consumer brands, shared technology and more coordinated spending can create a stronger operator. Bally’s Intralot’s British growth also shows that higher taxation has not eliminated the scope for commercial progress.
The current results set a demanding benchmark, however. The group’s own pro forma comparison shows why a much larger reported revenue figure is insufficient evidence of improving economics.
The most useful future updates will connect the integration timetable with realised savings, service performance and cash generation. Bally’s Intralot will need to show that another acquisition can make the enlarged business more efficient and its cash generation more dependable.