[Richas]

[ QUOTE ]
FFS you are confused about so many issues. Listing on a UK stock exchange is utterly irrelevant to any issues of consumer protection.

[/ QUOTE ]

but it is relevant to the credibility of the UK stock Market, City of London and UK financial regulation. It would be politically and economically unacceptable to let Neteller fail because of a "run".

[ QUOTE ]
In any case the funds are in US$ so could not possibly affect UK capital markets.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be the City of London that handles more foreign Exchange transactions in dollars than any other financial centre? The currency the funds are held in is entirely irrelevant in terms of the response.

[ QUOTE ]
As posted above only Neteller UK is regulated.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is one of the reasons why the UK regulator would not allow it to collapse as a result of a run. The only scenario of non payout is a collapse due to a run, nobody believes they are crims who have run off with the money.

This is about consumer protection but it is also about the credibility of the UK and the City of London.

The issue of bank concerns re the legality of Neteller are real but as they have withdrawn from the US and we are only talking about new lines of credit this should not be a real barrier. As for the subpoenas and arrests, if anything this will annoy directors of banks and make them more willing to help, the anger in the City on this is very real.

FFS your post failed to address my point which is that the UK and the City can easily cope with a run on an institution like this and that the credibility of the City depends on making sure it does not fail.

Finally the UK's position on this is clear. The UK is regulating and granting licenses to online operators. UK gov policy is to make the UK the largest centre of online gambling possible via rigorus regulation. The UK gov will not want a collapse due to a run (especially given the recent scandal on Farepak a Christmas saving/buying scheme that went belly up).