Best progressive jackpot slots 2026 in Australia: where the money comes from, and what it costs to chase it

Data current as of 30 October 2026 and cross-checked against the Australian Communications and Media Authority’s published enforcement register.

A progressive jackpot slot reads like a lottery with a spinning reel attached: every losing wager somewhere adds a little, and the prize creeps upward until somebody lands the right combination and the counter resets. The reel, the prize, the size of the prize — that’s the part a player sees. The part that decides whether the game is worth sitting down at is hidden behind the maths: how much of every dollar goes into the pool, how much the game pays back on ordinary spins, and how the casino handles the rules around the big one.

This page lays out what that picture looks like for an Australian player in 2026. The headline matters and so does the catch. The headline: a single Mega Moolah spin in 2021 paid €19.4 million to a player in Belgium, and the network that produced it has paid out more than one eight-figure jackpot since. The catch: that game, and every progressive jackpot slot networked behind an offshore site, is offered to Australians by operators the ACMA has already told to stop. The licensed Australian pokie on a club floor pays a fixed top prize and is a different product altogether. The first thing this page does is separate the two, because they are not in competition with each other.

The legal frame: why every “AU-friendly” progressive slot site is offshore

Australia’s gambling law is unusually clean on this one point. The Interactive Gambling Act 2001, hardened by the Interactive Gambling Amendment Act 2017, makes it an offence for anyone to provide online casino games or online pokies to a person in Australia. The carve-out is narrow: licensed wagering on racing and sport before the event, lotteries and keno, all administered through state and territory regimes (in practice, the Northern Territory Racing and Wagering Commission licences most of the country’s online bookmakers, including Sportsbet, Bet365 and Ladbrokes — a commission that, per an ABC report of 7 April 2026, has no full-time staff and meets once a month in Darwin). Online pokies, online blackjack, online roulette and the networked progressive jackpot slot that advertises a seven-figure top prize are not in that carve-out. No state or territory licenses them.

So when an offshore casino site brands itself “AU-friendly” and shows a Curaçao or Kahnawake badge at the bottom of the page, it is not running a licensed Australian product. It is running a product it is barred from offering to Australians. The IGA targets the provider, not the player, which is why individual Australians are not prosecuted for spinning a reel there. But the consequence flows the other direction: there is no Australian complaints body, no local dispute resolution, and no rule forcing the operator to honour a withdrawal. A site can be blocked with a player balance still on it, and BetStop — the National Self-Exclusion Register, live since August 2023 — binds only Australian-licensed services, so an offshore casino is not even connected to the exclusion system a problem gambler is supposed to be able to walk away from.

Payment rules tell the same story from another angle. Since 11 June 2024, credit cards, credit-related products and digital currency are banned as payment for any licensed Australian online wagering service, with penalties of up to A$247,500 for the operator. The legal deposit routes for a licensed Australian bookmaker are debit card, bank transfer, PayID/Osko and BPAY. A site asking for a credit card number or a Bitcoin wallet is, by that single question, operating outside the Australian rules — whether it carries a Curaçao badge, a Malta badge or no badge at all.

What the ACMA has actually done about it

Enforcement is the lever the IGA leaves on the table, and the ACMA has used it steadily. According to a June 2026 tally reported by industry trade press, 1,751 illegal gambling and affiliate marketing websites have been blocked since the first blocking request was issued in November 2019, and more than 230 unlicensed gambling services have left the Australian market since enforcement was strengthened in 2017. A single round on 26 June 2026 added twelve names to the block list: 7Signs, ChromaBet, Donbet, Duospin, Freshbet, Slots Gem, Jacks Club, Lucky Start, Pointsbetz.com, Spinrise, Vinyl Casino and Wildsino. Some of those are progressive-slot catalogues. Some are sports books that run slot games on the side. The block list is updated as a list, not as a category — and a site that runs progressive jackpot slots can land on it through the same process as any other.

Formal warnings are the step the ACMA takes before a blocking request goes to ISPs. Each one names the operator behind the brand and the Australian-facing URL. The relevant ones for this page:

• March 2026 — Pulsup Ltd, over Rocketplay.com.au.
• April 2026 — Ryker B.V., over Jackbit and CasinOK.
• May 2025 — Dama N.V., over Spirit Casino.
• March 2025 — Dama N.V., over Woo Casino.
• July 2025 — Consolutetish S.R.L., over National Casino and Bizzo Casino (Bizzo had already been the subject of a 2022 warning to TechSolutions Group).
• July 2025 — Bamboo Media, over Ignition Casino.
• April 2025 — Sterplay Holding Ltd, over Casino Intense.
• February 2025 — EOD Code SRL, over Instant Casino.
• May 2022 — Dama N.V., over six brands including Bambet, Dazard, Level Up, Rocketplay, Wild Tornado and Cobra Casinos.
• September 2022 — Hollycorn N.V., over Sky Crown and Blue Leo.

The pattern is the same each time: the ACMA names a corporate entity behind a consumer-facing brand, gives a date, and publishes the warning. A site does not need to be on the block list to be the subject of a warning. A warning is the regulator saying “stop serving Australians”; a blocking request is the regulator telling ISPs to make the site unreachable.

The 2026 reform: what is signed but not yet in force

The Interactive Gambling Amendment (Gambling Reform) Bill 2026 passed Parliament on 19 August 2026. Its advertising and inducement measures commence 1 January 2027, which means the law is enacted but not yet operative on a 2026 page. Treat it as law with a start date, not as a rule that has already changed the marketing an Australian sees today.

What an Australian player actually loses by playing offshore

The arithmetic on the offshore side of this market is published and ugly. H2 Gambling Capital’s 2025 report estimates that Australians lose about A$3.9 billion a year to illegal gambling sites, and that the share of gambling going through legal Australian channels fell from 74% in 2021 to 64% in the same window. The shift is not because Australians stopped gambling — it is because more of the gambling left the regulated side of the fence. That A$3.9 billion sits in offshore balance sheets, in jurisdictions that do not return it to Australian consumer protection, dispute resolution or harm-minimisation funding.

Player wellbeing around progressive jackpot slots

The harm profile of a progressive jackpot slot is not the same as that of a fixed-jackpot pokie on a club floor. Three pieces make the difference. First, the pool is larger and the win cadence is rarer — by design, the prize has to grow large enough to drive play. Second, the game is reachable from a phone, at any hour, with no closing time. Third, the offshore wrapper around the game is outside BetStop. Each of those three pieces stretches the distance between a session and a problem, and the safeguarding system is built for the licensed Australian market it does not cover.

The licensed-Australian safety net

BetStop, the National Self-Exclusion Register, has been live since August 2023. It binds every Australian-licensed online and phone wagering service, so a person who registers is excluded from wagering with Sportsbet, Bet365, Ladbrokes, TAB and the rest of the licensed bookmaker set for the period they nominate. A progressive jackpot slot on an offshore site is not in that set. The same person can register with BetStop on Monday and still spin a reel on Tuesday.

The National Gambling Helpline — 1800 858 858 — is free, runs 24 hours a day, and connects to chat and counselling at Gambling Help Online. The line is for the person who has decided they want help, and the people around them, regardless of where they have been playing. It is not a workaround for an offshore site that refuses to close an account. It is the line a person calls once that has become the only option.

Why this matters more for progressives than for other slots

A fixed-jackpot pokie in an Australian club pays a top prize that is published on the machine and does not grow. A player can sit down with a set budget and know the upper bound of what they are chasing. A progressive jackpot slot pays a top prize that is, by definition, unpublished at the time of play — it grows between wins, and the only known quantity is the seed the operator sets after the last reset. The chase is the point. The maths that produces the chase is also the maths that produces the longest sessions: a higher prize takes longer to fall, which is what the player is paying for in the time they spend spinning. The longer the session, the further the budget stretches, and the more important the safeguards that bound a session become.

What the offshore site does not provide

A licensed Australian venue publishes return-to-player figures on the machine, identifies the game variant, and posts the house edge in plain numbers. A licensed online bookmaker in Australia publishes its house rules, identifies the licence number on the footer, and answers to the regulator if it fails. An offshore progressive-slot site may publish an RTP, may not, and there is no regulator to call. The consumer-protection gap is not theoretical — it is the reason a balance can sit on a blocked site with no path back to it.

How progressive jackpot slots actually work

The mechanism behind a progressive jackpot slot is older than the online version. Progressive jackpots first appeared in large casinos in 1986; International Game Technology’s Megabucks paid its first jackpot of US$4,988,842.17 on 1 February 1987. The structure has not changed since. A small fraction of every wager is diverted into a running prize pool instead of the operator’s normal margin, and the pool grows until somebody wins it. Then the pool resets to a predetermined seed and starts climbing again.

Three pieces of plumbing make the size work. First, the contribution: the operator takes a slice of each spin — usually somewhere between one and four per cent of the wager — and feeds it into the pool instead of the take. Second, the link: machines can be connected locally (within one venue), wide-area across a regional network, or networked online across hundreds of sites running the same game from one provider. The wider the link, the faster the pool climbs, and the larger the headline number a marketing page can quote. Third, the trigger: a combination of symbols on a single spin, sometimes gated behind a separate bonus round, sometimes unlocked by a random number generator.

Standalone versus networked

The mechanical distinction that drives the headline numbers is standalone versus networked. A standalone progressive lives on one machine, in one venue, fed only by the wagers on that machine. The pool grows slowly, and the top prize is bounded by the size of the local audience playing it. A wide-area or online networked progressive is fed by wagers across many sites, so the same Mega Moolah spin in Belgium is funded by Mega Moolah wagers from players in dozens of countries. The record online slot jackpot — €19,430,723.60, won on 27 April 2021 by a Belgian player on Napoleon Sports & Casino playing Microgaming’s Absolootly Mad: Mega Moolah — is the networked format producing what it was built to produce.

There is a third variant worth knowing: the “must-hit-by” progressive, where a random number generator picks the exact payout amount within a preset range (for example, A$1,000–A$3,000) immediately after the previous jackpot is won, and the prize falls once that upper bound is crossed rather than on a specific symbol combination. Mystery jackpots on Australian club pokies use this mechanism. They are smaller and more frequent than networked progressives; the marketing tone is different because the prize is bounded.

Why the base return is lower

A progressive jackpot slot typically pays back a smaller percentage of ordinary wagers than a fixed-jackpot game of the same theme. The reason is structural. In a fixed-jackpot slot, every dollar of house edge stays with the operator. In a progressive, a portion of that edge is redirected into the prize pool, which means the operator keeps less on the spins that do not hit the jackpot and the player gets a smaller base return on the spins that do not. The attraction lies in the potential prize, which far exceeds fixed-jackpot alternatives. A player who would otherwise see a 96% return on a fixed-jackpot game might see a 92% or 93% return on the progressive version of the same theme, with the missing three or four points funding the pool.

The pool itself can, in rare cases, push the game’s theoretical return above 100% — a positive-expectation bet. This is documented for certain video poker and Caribbean Stud Poker variants where the jackpot grows large enough that the math tips the other way. For slot machines, the same break-even calculation is difficult to perform because reel layouts are not published, so the player’s estimate of when the math tips is necessarily rough. That is why a player who is paying close attention to the headline number is also paying close attention to the moment the pool is large enough that ordinary play begins to look like a discount on a jackpot ticket.

How the trigger works on a typical progressive slot

The jackpot round is reached one of two ways. On some games it is gated behind a bonus feature — a wheel spin, a pick-em screen, a free-spins round — that the player enters through a scatter combination. On others it is reached by landing a specific combination of jackpot symbols on a designated line. The trigger is published in the paytable, and the published probability of triggering it is, more often than not, not published at all. The headline prize is presented; the odds of seeing it are not. That is not an accident of any one operator — it is the structural shape of a game whose feature is the size of the prize rather than the frequency of it.

The paytable, in plain terms

A paytable on a progressive slot tells a player three things that matter: the contribution rate to the pool (the slice of every wager that funds it), the trigger condition for the jackpot round, and the seed value the pool resets to after a win. The numbers that matter to a budget — the base return, the house edge on ordinary spins, the volatility of the game — are usually printed on a separate info screen and are sometimes not printed at all. The Mega Moolah network, for instance, publishes the size of the running pools on a ticker visible to players; it does not publish the per-spin contribution rate or the trigger probability. The headline is the part that is visible. The maths behind it is the part a player has to take on trust.

The brands the ACMA has named: what each is and where it sits

The brands below are not a ranking and not a recommendation. Each is on this page because the ACMA itself issued a formal warning over it for offering prohibited services to Australians. The order is the order the ACMA’s published warnings establish; the angle is what each warning adds up to for a reader who is trying to weigh whether to engage with the brand.

What the comparison covers

The empty cells in the right column are not gaps to be filled. They are the brands where research did not turn up an authoritative source confirming the brand carries progressive jackpot slots as a product.

RocketPlay

The ACMA issued a formal warning to Pulsup Ltd over Rocketplay.com.au in March 2026. Earlier, in May 2022, Dama N.V. — the corporate entity behind a wider stable of brands — was warned over six casino sites that included Rocketplay. Two warnings from two operators over the same consumer-facing brand tell a reader that the brand has changed hands at least once and that the change did not move it out of the ACMA’s view. Research did not turn up an authoritative third-party source confirming that the brand carries progressive jackpot slots as a specific product; what is on the page is the regulatory history, not the game catalogue. The verdict: a brand whose corporate history already appears twice on the ACMA register is not a place where a player gets the consumer protection a Curaçao badge implies.

Level Up Casino

The May 2022 Dama N.V. warning included Level Up among six brands. Third-party listings name BGaming among the providers behind the brand’s catalogue; the same listings note the brand runs jackpot titles as a category. What that tells a reader is that the brand is part of an operation the ACMA flagged once for a stable of brands and has not been warned over again since, but the ACMA warning applies to the operator and not to the product line, so the brand’s continued operation as a progressive-jackpot carrier is what the regulator objects to as a category. The verdict: a brand that the ACMA addressed once and has not returned to since, but one whose existence on the Australian-facing side is, by definition, the act the regulator has already called out.

Woo Casino

Dama N.V. received a further warning in March 2025 over Woo Casino. The two-year gap between the May 2022 warning over the Dama stable and the March 2025 warning over Woo is not a sign that Woo fell out of the regulatory picture — it is the regulator returning to the same corporate entity for a different brand. Research did not turn up a third-party listing confirming Woo as a progressive-jackpot carrier; what the page carries is the regulatory event. This is a brand with a recent ACMA warning over it, no independent confirmation of its product line, and no Australian licence to anchor the relationship to a local disputes process.

Spirit Casino

Spirit Casino drew an ACMA warning to Dama N.V. in May 2025, two months after the Woo Casino warning and almost three years after the original Dama warning over the wider stable. The pattern — repeated warnings to the same operator, brand by brand — is how the regulator handles a corporate group that continues to launch new consumer-facing brands under the same parent. No third-party listing in research confirms the brand as a progressive-jackpot carrier. The verdict: a brand the ACMA has addressed within the last twelve months, with no Australian pathway for dispute resolution and no independent confirmation of what its catalogue contains.

National Casino

The July 2025 warning to Consolutetish S.R.L. named National Casino and Bizzo Casino together. Third-party listings identify the brand as one that carries progressive jackpot slots as a category, so this is a brand where the ACMA’s enforcement and the product line line up directly. The verdict: a brand whose product is the product the regulator has already told the operator to stop offering to Australians. The “AU-friendly” framing on the brand’s own marketing is, by definition, the act the warning addresses.

Bizzo Casino

Consolutetish S.R.L. was warned over Bizzo in July 2025, but the brand itself is not new to the register — TechSolutions Group was warned over Bizzo in 2022. Three years between warnings, two different corporate entities, one consumer-facing brand. The change in operator suggests the brand has been transferred between holders, and neither holder has kept it outside the ACMA’s view. No third-party listing in research confirms the brand as a progressive-jackpot carrier specifically, but the regulatory history is what the page carries here. The verdict: a brand whose ownership history has moved it between two ACMA-flagged operators in three years, and whose Australian-facing product has not changed as a result.

Ignition Casino

Bamboo Media received an ACMA warning in July 2025 over Ignition Casino. The brand has a long-standing position in the offshore market targeting Australia, and the warning is the regulator’s most recent move against it. No third-party listing in research confirms Ignition as a progressive-jackpot carrier specifically. The verdict: a brand the ACMA addressed within the last twelve months, with no third-party confirmation of what its catalogue currently contains and no Australian recourse for a player who has an unresolved balance.

Instant Casino

EOD Code SRL drew an ACMA warning in February 2025 over Instant Casino. The brand is a relatively recent entry on the ACMA register, and the warning is the regulator’s first move against the operator. No third-party listing in research confirms the brand’s progressive-jackpot offering. The verdict: a brand on a single ACMA warning, with no third-party confirmation of its product line and no Australian pathway for the kind of complaint a player with a blocked site cannot file.

Jackbit

Ryker B.V. was warned in April 2026 over Jackbit and CasinOK. The April 2026 date is recent enough that the brand is on the regulator’s active list, and the warning covers a brand running progressive jackpot content as part of a wider crypto-friendly catalogue. No third-party listing in research confirms Jackbit as a progressive-jackpot carrier specifically; what the page carries is the regulatory event and the timing. The verdict: a brand with a current-year ACMA warning, operating in the offshore market the regulator has been steadily tightening, and with no Australian pathway for dispute resolution.

Casino Intense

Sterplay Holding Ltd drew an ACMA warning in April 2025. The brand has been named in third-party listings among ACMA-flagged services, but the listings do not confirm progressive jackpot slots as a specific product. What the page carries is the regulatory history and the listing reference. The verdict: a brand with a recent ACMA warning, on third-party lists of flagged services, with no Australian licence to anchor the relationship to a local regulator.

Sky Crown

Hollycorn N.V. was warned in September 2022 over Sky Crown and Blue Leo. The 2022 date is the oldest warning in the table, and the brand has not been re-warned since. That is not a clearance — the ACMA’s warning remains in force — but it is the longest gap in the table between a warning and any further regulatory move. No third-party listing in research confirms Sky Crown as a progressive-jackpot carrier specifically. The verdict: a brand whose regulatory history is older than the others on the list, with no third-party confirmation of its current product line and no Australian pathway for dispute resolution.

The arithmetic behind the chase: what the ACMA blocking rate looks like

The blocking rate is the core figure the page provides — the only calculation the spec puts in front of a reader that comes out of the inputs the page is built on. The inputs are two figures from the ACMA’s published enforcement record: the running total of blocked sites as of June 2026, and the date of the first blocking request, which the regulator places in November 2019. From there:

• First blocking request: November 2019.
• Most recent tally cited: June 2026.
• Total sites blocked across that window: 1,751.

The blocking rate is the running average over the window, and the rate the ACMA has been hitting has not been even. The first years of the regime ran slowly; the 2017 amendment to the Interactive Gambling Act strengthened enforcement and the years since have carried more of the volume. So the average is not the rate a reader should hold in mind — the current rate is, and the average is the band on the slow side of that.

Across the full November 2019 to June 2026 window, the average works out to roughly 270 sites blocked per year — a band the page states as a band, not as a single figure, because the underlying rate is uneven and the average is a way to set expectations rather than a way to predict the next round. What the average does not show is that some months carry a blocking round of a dozen sites, some months carry none, and the December-to-January window is the period the ACMA’s published rounds have most often landed in. A reader looking for the next round of blocks should look there first.

The same calculation expressed as a per-month average lands at roughly 22 sites per month, but again as a band rather than a figure. The honest thing to say is that the regulator is hitting a rate that, if sustained across a typical year, would push the running total above 2,000 within twelve months of the most recent tally, and that the published rounds have run faster than the average since the 2017 amendment. What the page carries is the trajectory. What the regulator’s next round depends on is what it can identify next.

What an Australian player is actually choosing between

The choice this comparison presents is between two products that look the same from a distance and pay out very differently in practice.

The first is the online progressive jackpot slot, networked across an offshore operator, fed by wagers on hundreds of sites, advertising a top prize in the millions, reachable from a phone, paid in a currency the operator chooses, and outside the Australian consumer-protection system. The catch is the one the ACMA has named repeatedly: the offering is prohibited under the Interactive Gambling Act 2001, the operator is offshore, the licence badge at the bottom of the page is a badge in another jurisdiction, the payment rails include credit cards and crypto that are banned for licensed Australian wagering services, and the safety net — BetStop, the National Gambling Helpline, the state-based complaints bodies — does not bind the operator.

The second is the licensed Australian pokie, found in clubs and casinos in every state and territory, paying a fixed top prize that is published on the machine, governed by the state or territory regulator, and bounded by a venue’s opening hours. The progressive jackpot mechanism exists in this market too — mystery jackpots and standalone progressives on individual machines — but the prize is bounded and the operator is local. A win is a win. A dispute is a dispute with a regulator a player can call. The trade-off is the size of the prize: a fixed-jackpot pokie pays in the thousands, a networked offshore progressive pays in the millions, and the difference between the two is the difference between the safety net a player keeps and the safety net a player gives up.

The arithmetic the page is built around is not complicated, but it is the part that decides which side of that trade-off a reader is on. The Mega Moolah network has paid out more than one eight-figure jackpot since the €19.4 million 2021 win — Games Global, the company that now distributes Mega Moolah, has announced later wins of £11.5 million and 13.5 million — and those are real payouts to real players. They are also payouts that happened on a product the ACMA has told every Australian-facing operator to stop offering, and the player who chases the same jackpot from Australia is paying for the chance with no Australian consumer protection on the other end of the spin.

The mechanics of an offshore progressive jackpot slot, end to end

To pull the mechanics together: a player opens an account with an offshore operator, deposits in a currency the operator chooses, picks a progressive slot from the catalogue, and spins. The operator takes a slice of each wager — usually a small percentage — and feeds it into a networked pool instead of the operator’s take. The pool is fed by wagers from players on hundreds of sites running the same game, and it grows until somebody hits the trigger. When somebody does, the operator pays out and the pool resets to its seed value.

The cost to the player on each spin is the wager minus the published RTP, less the slice that goes into the pool. The published RTP on a progressive slot is typically lower than on a fixed-jackpot game of the same theme, because the slice that goes into the pool is revenue the player is not getting back on ordinary spins. The trade-off is the size of the prize when it falls, and the player who understands the trade-off is the player who can decide whether the chase is worth the cost of the chase.

The cost to the player over the long run is what the house edge compounds to across a session. A 95% RTP means a 5% house edge. At A$1 per spin across 1,000 spins, the house edge works out to A$50 in expected loss. At A$5 per spin across 1,000 spins, the expected loss is A$250. Those are statistical estimates over many spins, not guaranteed outcomes for any single session, and the marketing word around them is the one the page declines to repeat. The maths is what it is.

Frequently asked questions

How does a progressive jackpot slot’s prize pool actually grow between wins?

A small slice of every wager is diverted from the operator’s normal margin into a running pool, and the pool climbs until a player lands the trigger combination. Wide-area and online-networked progressives are fed by wagers across many sites at once, which is why networked pools can climb into seven-figure territory while standalone machines in a single venue take much longer. After a win the pool resets to a predetermined seed value and starts accumulating again.

What is the difference between a standalone jackpot and a network-wide progressive jackpot?

A standalone jackpot lives on one machine and is fed only by wagers on that machine, so the pool grows slowly and the top prize is bounded by the size of the local audience. A network-wide progressive is fed by wagers from many sites running the same game from one provider, so the pool grows much faster and the headline number can climb into the millions. The trade-off is the same shape as the trade-off between a fixed-jackpot and a progressive slot: a bigger prize means a smaller base return on the spins that do not win.

Do licensed Australian pokies venues offer progressive jackpot machines?

Yes, but the format is different. Mystery jackpots and standalone progressives on individual machines exist in Australian clubs and casinos, with prize ranges typically published on the machine or in the venue. A networked offshore progressive jackpot slot, with a top prize in the millions, is not a licensed Australian product. The Interactive Gambling Act 2001 makes it an offence to provide online casino games and online pokies to a person in Australia, and the ACMA has been enforcing that prohibition with formal warnings and blocking requests since 2017.

Why do progressive jackpot slots typically have a lower base return-to-player than fixed-jackpot games?

Because the slice of every wager that goes into the prize pool is revenue the player is not getting back on ordinary spins. A fixed-jackpot slot pays back a higher percentage on the spins that do not win because none of the house edge is diverted into a pool. A progressive slot pays back a lower percentage on those same spins because part of the edge is funding the prize. The trade-off is the size of the prize when it falls, and the published RTP on a progressive slot is the number that reflects that trade-off.

How is a record progressive jackpot payout verified?

A record payout is verified by the operator that paid it and by the game provider that runs the networked pool, with the win typically announced by both parties and reported by industry trade press. The €19.4 million Mega Moolah win on 27 April 2021 was verified by the operator (Napoleon Sports & Casino) and by Microgaming, then the distributor of the Mega Moolah network, and was reported across gaming trade outlets at the time. Games Global, the company that now distributes Mega Moolah, has since announced further wins on the network of £11.5 million and 13.5 million.