ASA reverses decision on Ladbrokes “Ladbucks” ads

Introduction

The Advertising Standards Authority (“ASA”) has reversed its earlier decision and ruled that two complaints made against Ladbrokes in relation to TV and video on demand (“VOD”) ads promoting its “Ladbucks” rewards programme are not upheld. The ruling, published on 15 April 2026, replaces the ASA’s original decision of 11 June 2025, in which the ASA found the ads to be in breach of the CAP and BCAP Codes on the basis that the content was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s (our article on that original decision can be found here). Having reconsidered the matter, the ASA has now concluded that the ads were not likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.

Background

As covered in our previous article, a TV ad seen on 17 December 2024 and a VOD ad seen on Channel 4 on Demand on 23 December 2024 promoted “Ladbucks” as a new way to be rewarded at Ladbrokes. The ads featured imagery of coins displaying the initials ‘Lb’, along with references to “100m LADBUCKS”, “FREE BETS” and “FREE SPINS”. Users could collect Ladbucks for free by participating in selected promotions and redeem them for limited-time offers within the Ladbucks Store or the Ladbucks Arcade.

Two complainants believed the term “Ladbucks” was likely to be of strong appeal to those under 18 years of age, and challenged whether the TV ad breached the BCAP Code and the VOD ad breached the CAP Code. In the original June 2025 decision, the ASA upheld those complaints, finding that the term “Ladbucks” in conjunction with the token imagery was likely to be recognisable and perceived to be similar to V-Bucks and Robux currencies by under-18s. The ASA has now reconsidered and reversed that decision.

Decision

The ASA reiterated that gambling ads must not be likely to be of strong appeal to children or young persons, especially by reflecting or being associated with youth culture. However, it noted that where appropriate steps had been taken to limit the potential for an ad to appeal strongly to under-18s, the rules did not prevent the advertising of gambling products associated with activities that were themselves of strong appeal to under-18s (such as playing video games).

The ASA indicated that advertising for gambling products that have characteristics likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s may include “generic depictions or references to the creative content or gameplay of the product”. However, BCAP and CAP guidance specifically states that such generic depictions must not, of themselves, be likely to appeal strongly to under-18s, “for instance, because they invite obvious comparisons with video games or online games popular with under-18s”. The ASA therefore considered it was acceptable to depict the Ladbucks reward tokens and wider promotion, even if the service resembled video games popular with under-18s, provided the depiction did not invite obvious comparison with such games.

The ASA first considered that the word “Ladbuck”, in isolation, was unlikely to draw obvious comparisons with the online currencies V-Bucks and Robux. It then assessed whether the depiction of the token, in combination with the name, created an obvious comparison. The ASA acknowledged that the appearance of the Ladbuck shared some generic features with in-game currencies. However, the ASA considered that poker-chip styling primarily reflected long-established gambling conventions which were adult-oriented, and that bespoke coin-style tokens were widely used to illustrate rewards and loyalty schemes in adult-facing sectors.

The ASA also identified material differences between the coins: the Ladbuck was translucent and dark red, the V-Buck was bright, futuristic in style and blue, and the most recent Robux depiction was a geometric icon without internal lettering. More generally, the plain red-and-white setting and plain typography of the ads were distinct from the bright, varied and highly animated environments of Fortnite and Roblox.

The ASA concluded that although the name “Ladbuck” alongside the token’s imagery created some parallels with in-game currencies popular with under-18s, those similarities were not obvious enough to make the ads likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s. 

Comment

The reversal of the original decision is significant. In our previous article, we noted that the ASA’s previous ruling reinforced a zero-tolerance stance in the context of gambling advertising and its appeal to under-18s, and that branding strategies had to consider youth associations, not solely intent or the targeted audience. Whilst the revised ruling does not depart from that principle, it does introduce a more nuanced analytical framework. The decisive question appears to be whether an invites an “obvious comparison” with content popular among under-18s, not merely whether generic similarities exist.

The revised ruling makes clear that poker-chip styling, tokenised rewards and arcade-style mechanics are not automatically prohibited in gambling advertising, provided they are presented in an adult-oriented manner and do not invite obvious visual or contextual links to youth culture. 

The ASA’s underlying focus remains on preventing gambling advertising from crossing the line into content that is likely to resonate with under-18s. Gambling operators and marketers designing rewards schemes or token-based mechanics should continue to document their assessment of whether any branding features could be linked to youth culture, and should ensure that design choices are clearly tailored to an adult market.

Co-authored by Zahra Mahmood, Solicitor Apprentice