Barclays and RBS warn gaming clients on U.S

[BluffTHIS!]

Here's the link btw: reuter's story.


While stars would have clearly been affected under a definition of accepting a bet or wager, neteller shouldn't be. They aren't accepting any bets or wagers. And while US law might prevent US financial institutions from transferring funds to online sites, it can't prohibit neteller from doing so as it is domiciled in europe.

Also, since it was clear that Barclay's and RBS had already been in contact with their clients, and thus didn't spring the news on them about this via just a media release, then neteller's recent statement that they are still in business for US customers has to have already taken their bankers' advisement under consideration. That of course doesn't mean neteller won't seek new banking arrangements in the future, or hasn't already, but it would seem to mean there is no reason for worry about neteller in the short run.

[jimmytrick]

Well, ironic, isn't it. False claims of money laundering, drug and terrorist links by the Bush administration were used to discredit the industry prior to the law being passed. Now, the law itself is driving sites away from reputable banks and closer to the netherworld of international finance where our money may indeed now mix with these elements. Congress is not so much in the business of passing laws as creating criminals out of decent people.

[Todpullen]

Perhaps - this is a wild guess - as the RBS and Barclays are UK based (originally anyway) a fair few of their executives are British. Therefore with the one-way extradition arrangements whereby the US can just ask for any British citizen to be extradited (no evidence required) and they will be extradited, I am guessing the banks are a bit nervous.

[sapsuckah]

Just to confirm the speculation earlier in this thread. I used the "Wayback Machine" to look up an older version of the PokerStars site. The most recent one they have listed was from 2005. At the time, the FAQ entry in question read:

"PokerStars is proud to announce that, under new banking arrangements, an amount covering Players' account balances is held in segregated accounts, not used for any operational expenses. These segregated accounts are managed by the Royal Bank of Scotland plc, one of Europe's leading financial services groups. The arrangements ensure that PokerStars can at all times fulfill its obligations towards Players, and will provide further reassurance that Players' funds are always secure with PokerStars."

So this is pretty telling.

[otctrader]

Nice catch; I wonder how much mula RBS is losing out on now that they lost the Stars account

[Shank]

This really shouldn't surprise anyone. No bank with US assets is going to risk prosecution over this issue.

Go back 7 or 8 years and the first tier banks weren't touching the business anyway. Back when most online casinos were run by one man and his dog out of Antigua, the only banks involved were the small island ones -- the big banks only got involved once they saw that the money was decent and the risks were exaggerated.

So now we've come full circle. Expect to see your checks coming to you in future from the Bank of Nevis or some other small bank with no US presence. Or expect to see Stars convert the currency they pay cashouts to into Euros [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[mattchuk]

[ QUOTE ]
Nice catch; I wonder how much mula RBS is losing out on now that they lost the Stars account

[/ QUOTE ]

well, actually they haven't. i just contacted pokerstars support and got this reply:

[ QUOTE ]

PokerStars is still a customer of Royal Bank of Scotland, and uses them as
a payments processor. We keep all of our customers' account balances
segregated from our operational expenses using RBS accounts.

I think it is unlikely that the Royal Bank of Scotland would be willing to
give up such a good customer as PokerStars, however, any policy that RBS
chooses to put into place will not affect our decision to continue to
accept business from US players. At the moment we do not forsee any reason
for us to switch banks. RBS will not be used to process transactions from
US players in any case.


[/ QUOTE ]

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
Not exactly good news.

This whole issue is a rollercoaster. We get good news followed by bad news followed by good news. Then it all starts over again. Party pulls out, Full Tilt says we are here forever, Firepay surrenders, Neteller says were staying for now, Crypto caves and runs away, Poker Stars stays, Nolan Dalla resigns, Daniel Negreanu says the Republicans can stick it where the sun don't shine, and the whole cycle continues. I wish it was this time next year when we will really have a grasp of what has happened, this rollercoaster of good news and bad news is too much to take at times..

[/ QUOTE ]

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nice catch; I wonder how much mula RBS is losing out on now that they lost the Stars account

[/ QUOTE ]

well, actually they haven't. i just contacted pokerstars support and got this reply:

[ QUOTE ]

PokerStars is still a customer of Royal Bank of Scotland, and uses them as
a payments processor. We keep all of our customers' account balances
segregated from our operational expenses using RBS accounts.

I think it is unlikely that the Royal Bank of Scotland would be willing to
give up such a good customer as PokerStars, however, any policy that RBS
chooses to put into place will not affect our decision to continue to
accept business from US players. At the moment we do not forsee any reason
for us to switch banks. RBS will not be used to process transactions from
US players in any case.


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't put too much faith in this CS response. I have noticed that Stars support, though usually awesome, is not quite as up to date on UIGEA developments as we are, oddly enough.

[TwoNiner]

Would like to know if this quote from Neteller came out after the announcement that was posted in which they stated they were staying.