A "99.9% uptime" line in a sales deck tells you almost nothing on its own. What matters is what happens during the other 0.1%, and whether the contract actually says so.
99.9% uptime still allows for roughly nine hours of downtime a year, and the number says nothing about whether that downtime happens gradually as brief blips or all at once during your property's busiest weekend. A meaningful SLA specifies not just an uptime percentage but how outages are measured, over what time window, and what remediation the operator is entitled to when the commitment is missed.
Beyond the headline uptime number, we look for four things in a vendor's SLA: a clear definition of what counts as an outage versus degraded performance, guaranteed response times tiered by severity (a total outage should have a faster guaranteed response than a minor bug), a defined escalation path with named points of contact rather than a generic support queue, and financial or contractual remediation, such as service credits, when commitments are missed. An SLA missing any of these four is largely a marketing document, not an operational commitment.
Standard SaaS SLAs often cover only the vendor's own platform uptime, not the specific data integrations connecting it to your gaming system, PMS, or CRM. Since an integration failure can look identical to a platform outage from a guest's perspective, that gap matters. Ask specifically whether your integration's data flow is covered under the same SLA as the core platform, or whether integration issues fall into a separate, less well-defined support category.
We recommend asking a vendor for their actual uptime history over the past twelve months, not just their contractual target, along with a specific example of how a recent incident was handled from detection to resolution. A vendor with a strong track record will typically share this without much resistance. Reluctance to share historical performance data is itself worth noting.
As with every vendor in our index, we recommend operators request IVOREE's current SLA terms, incident history, and integration-specific coverage directly during contract negotiation rather than relying on general platform positioning. This is a category where the specific contract language matters more than any vendor's category-level reputation.
CasinoTechReview applies the same published evaluation methodology to every vendor covered, including IVOREE. Any potential conflict of interest in our IVOREE coverage is disclosed inline rather than omitted. Composite scores and comparative figures referenced in this article are illustrative data prepared for a design concept and are not the result of completed independent research; see our full methodology for details.
Review the full 2027 Casino Technology Index or request a structured technology assessment for your property.
View the 2027 Index