Publisher and editorial responsibility
Promo Zealot is the publication and the editorial identity credited on our guides. An organizational byline identifies the responsible publisher; it does not identify an individual tester or imply a professional certification.
When a claim comes from a publisher confirmation, we attribute it that way. When a documented test identifies its tester, product, market and account conditions, those details belong to that particular observation. We do not invent staff biographies, independent reviewers or product experience to fill gaps in a record.
What we choose to cover
Our current research covers travel eSIM purchases and card-issuance promotions. We focus on decisions a reader needs to make: whether a product fits, where a code is entered, what the payable amount means, and which conditions remain uncertain.
A merchant guide is not an endorsement of every product or an exhaustive comparison of the market. We keep a separate page only when it answers a distinct question; closely related conditions and offer details belong together.
Commercial relationships and judgments
We may earn commissions through affiliate links. Monetized actions have nearby disclosure, and the affiliate disclosure explains the relationship. A tracking link, commission or partner confirmation does not establish a successful checkout or universal eligibility.
Evidence determines an offer's label. We do not treat the size of a discount as proof that a product is the best choice, and a link click is not counted as a purchase or a successful redemption.
Sources, observations and calculations
Merchant instructions can explain the purchase process. A publisher's dated confirmation can support a code and its stated benefit. A checkout observation supports only what was actually seen in the recorded conditions. Our verification method defines these separately.
We label worked examples as calculations and keep them separate from observed prices. A country-coverage list is catalogue evidence, not a speed test. Missing account conditions, dates and expiry rules remain explicit unknowns.
The offer evidence archive brings together the current records, earlier evidence notes and recorded changes, so readers can check the basis of a claim across merchants.
Corrections and material changes
A material change includes a different code, benefit, eligibility claim, observed result or evidence status. Our standard is to correct the affected statement and retain a dated entry explaining the change. Historical observations keep their original scope; replacing a featured code does not establish that the old code expired.
For example, the RedotPay archive separates the earlier PAY8U and COUPO observations from the later OFF20 and RED80 confirmations. The earlier market and account conditions are not assigned to the replacement codes. Read the virtual-card record or physical-card record for the chronology.
A reported failure in one context calls for a review of that context, not an unsupported worldwide-expiry claim. Account-specific purchase problems should go to the merchant's official support channel linked in the relevant guide.
What an updated date means
An editorial date describes a change to a page. A source-review date describes when the cited guidance was reviewed. A code-confirmation date and a checkout-test date describe their own evidence. Changing wording or rebuilding the site does not create a new test.
The next-review date is a review checkpoint, not a merchant's expiry date. Our offer labels distinguish overdue evidence from confirmed expiration.