UIGEA Fallout! Don't Worry about the eWallets: Worry about the Network

[JPFisher55]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

3)nobody is paying that much attention to *withdrawals*, it's the deposits that the legislation focuses on (and ewallets, of course, get screwed by this.)


[/ QUOTE ]

Is it feasible to have withraw only ewallets? If they are targetting deposits, and are not concerned with withdraws, why couldn't a company only allow outgoing transfers from sites?

I know the market is smaller, but this service is needed. I think the sites need to be pursuing a safe conduit for withdraws. The way they are doing it now, allowing deposits then withdraws, and only allowing withdraw through a conduit after a deposit has been made through that conduit, is killing the liklihood of ever having a stable withdraw medium. I can live with not being able to move money between sites easily, but I cannot live without being able to get my money with any certainty.

Also, the sites would do well to work together to form some mechanism of transfering money between sites. They should be able to do this, though it would require working together in an intelligent way to enefit their customers, so that pretty much dooms the idea.

[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely agree with this post. I hope that the major poker sites still accepting US players are working on something like this system.

[MiltonFriedman]

"Also, the sites would do well to work together to form some mechanism of transfering money between sites."

A long time ago, Barry Shulman explained at length not only

Why that would be a good idea, but also why CardPlayer should be the stake-holder.

Think his legal expert will sprinkle holy water on that idea now ?

JP, you seem to like the legal advice CardPlayer posts, why not approach them and see what they say ....

[SplawnDarts]

You guys all do realize it's already over, right? Anyone facilitating deposits from the US at this point is in violation of numerous laws, and will be going to jail where the only funds being transfered will go to Bubba when he loans them out.

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
You do realize that every bank in the US shut out Neteller in one afternoon, yeah?

[/ QUOTE ]

Source? Is my sarcasm detector dead?

[greyhawke54]

It seems to me that there is a lot of putting the cart before the horse talk about ewallets. I mean worrying about withdraw options and ect. Our horse is the recreational player. The guy that just plays to have fun and blow off steam. I believe that the biggest concern we face is having a readily available instant or impulse type of method of making deposits. I think most of us are patient enough to wait for checks or other methods of withdrawl. The rec players or fish are not so patient. If they have to think about it or have to wait, they will most likely go do something else with their time and money.

[BruinEric]

[ QUOTE ]
You guys all do realize it's already over, right? Anyone facilitating deposits from the US at this point is in violation of numerous laws, and will be going to jail where the only funds being transfered will go to Bubba when he loans them out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, this should be loads of fun to watch! Saw some posts in the Zoo about people using major bank debit cards at PokerStars. So, it should be interesting to see major bank owners do the perp walk any day now.

Better make sure my mutual funds don't hold Wamu, BofA, etc. stock!!! [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
So, it should be interesting to see major bank owners do the perp walk any day now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering the regulations aren't drawn up and delivered to financial institutions yet, your statement is insane.

Please stick to posting facts.

[SamG]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For a while, banks wouldn't cash Bodog checks. And Stars' main check processor pulled out on them.

I don't know much about the industry, so let me ask: why can't banks simply start blocking 3rd party check processors that are known to do business with internet gambling sites?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because 1)they likely won't be required to, 2)it'd take them too many resources, and 3)nobody is paying that much attention to *withdrawals*, it's the deposits that the legislation focuses on (and ewallets, of course, get screwed by this.)

[/ QUOTE ]
adanthar, i hope you're right, and i've heard others say make these points as well. but...

1) even if they aren't required to, do we know they won't? banks already voluntarily stopped processing neteller EFTs, for instance. maybe some banks go out of their way to stop gambling transactions to protect themselves legally?

2) i don't see how the process couldn't be easily automated. the bank scans the code at the bottom of a check -- they do this anyway right? -- sees that it is from a blacklisted check processor and rejects the transaction. again, i don't know much about this industry, but surely most of the work during check processing is already automated? and they must already have a process in place to guard against counterfeit/bad checks, yes?

3) why then are neteller withdrawals blocked? why were bodog's checks not honored? why does click2pay no longer let americans make EFT withdrawals? why do electronic withdrawals from poker sites no longer work? it looks to me like people *are* paying attention to withdrawals, not just deposits.

also, how do we know if these 3rd parties who currently issue checks for poker sites won't pull out (like chexx)?

i want to remain optimistic, but recent events have soured my outlook. incidentally, the UIGEA is looking like it's going to be a remarkably effective law -- much more effective than an outright ban on internet gambling (like in washington state).

[adanthar]

Sam,

1)some banks, ie BoA, undoubtedly will do this without being legally required to. No big deal, I have plenty of banks to pick from.

2)check *processors* should basically never be blacklisted, because nobody out there is/was solely cutting checks for gambling sites (not even Chexx). You also don't need check processors to cut a check - it just takes longer to do it yourself. Also, if sites send money as random people via WU, they can cut checks as random people as well.

3)there's no doubt that ewallets of all types that do business with gambling sites/US customers are in trouble long term. they're simply not in trouble because of withdrawals, but rather because the EFT clearing house wants nothing to do with gambling transactions (as they shouldn't given this climate).

in the medium term, EFT's will no longer be an issue.

[Uglyowl]

Couple of points:

1. UIGEA only deals with funding of "unlawful gambling" sites, not withdrawals from.

2. Poker is still a grey area at worst.

Yes, this has turned into a pain in the ass for now.