In brief
The supplied BET FALCONS record says 3 games changed. Its summary reports 2 increases, 1 decrease and an average change of -0.26 percentage points. The record concerns RTP figures shown in the operator’s lobby before play begins.
The detailed BET FALCONS entries point in one direction. Golden Empire, Ali Baba and Lucky Jungle 1024 each have a lower new RTP figure than their earlier figure. The source does not explain why its summary reports a mixed result.
What happened
BET FALCONS published changed RTP figures for Golden Empire, Ali Baba and Lucky Jungle 1024. The observations came from the operator’s own lobby before a game session started. Each listed game shows a decline between the earlier and newer published values.
The newsroom reads the lobby value before a session, as required by clause 29 of Portaria SPA/MF 1.207/2024. It stores each value with the raw response that supplied it. A changed value becomes a new observation, while the earlier observation remains in the record.
The evidence confirms a change in the RTP figures that BET FALCONS published at the time of each check. It does not identify the reason for any change. It also does not establish whether a technical, commercial or other process caused the revised display.
What this changes for players
For players, the immediate change is the RTP figure displayed in the BET FALCONS lobby for the affected games. That figure is a pre-session publication. The record does not explain how BET FALCONS selected the figure or why it changed.
The detailed observations support a narrow conclusion: the displayed RTP figures for all named games moved lower. The supplied summary creates uncertainty about the overall classification because it reports increases that do not appear in those detailed entries.
The source does not describe changes to game availability, rules, access conditions or the wider BET FALCONS catalogue. It does not say whether players encountered the revised figures at the same time. A published lobby value should therefore not be read as evidence of other game changes.
What is known and what the source does not say
Known facts include the operator, its Brazilian licence, the named games, the published lobby figures and the collection method. The stored raw responses preserve the observations behind each recorded value. Earlier observations are retained rather than overwritten.
The record reflects what BET FALCONS published when the newsroom checked its lobby. It does not claim that the figure remained unchanged outside that moment. A later check could produce another observation if the operator’s published value changes again.
The source gives no reason for the revisions. It does not allege that BET FALCONS hides anything. It also does not reconcile the summary’s stated split with detailed records that show lower new values for every named game.
The stated average is negative, but the material does not explain its calculation or its relationship to the individual entries. That missing explanation limits conclusions about the summary figure. The game-level records remain clearer on the direction shown for the affected titles.
What the RTP Index newsroom thinks
The BET FALCONS record is useful because it preserves both the earlier and later lobby observations with their raw responses. That approach creates an audit trail for published RTP figures. It lets readers distinguish an observed display change from an assumption about the operator’s reasons.
The mismatch between the summary and the detailed entries is material. The strongest supported conclusion is limited: BET FALCONS published changed lobby RTP figures, and every named game entry shows a lower new value. The source needs further explanation before its reported overall split can be treated as consistent with those entries.
