Your Input Please Bonuses NOT Available With Neteller/Skrill Deposits

brianmon

Ueber Meister
webby
mm4
Joined
May 22, 2013
Location
Cumbria
I try to use neteller as much as I can, and I enjoy the challenge of a bonus WR.

I do not like using my bank cards too much, since a lot of gambling transactions on my account could and would damage my credit rating. which since i'm in business, is a big deal for me.

But some casinos are now disallowing bonuses with web wallet deposits, citing fraud as the reason.

which got me thinking....


1) Why don't ALL casinos feel the need to 'protect' themselves from this 'fraud'?

2) Are the casinos with restrictions gaining more from not paying the 'fraudsters, than they're losing from new and existing customers?

3) For those casinos, who feel the restrictions are really necessary. Why not just limit those restrictions to the welcome bonus, where you're dealing with unverified new customers, rather than verified regular customers?

4) Why not make verification compulsory before accepting a first deposit from a web wallet?

4) Are the criminal elements really interested in a 50% up to $£€50 reload bonus?

5) Or is it a case of... with a lot of the casinos who impose web wallet restrictions, they charge for credit and debit card deposits, where as web wallets are free?
 

goatwack

Get dunked, big buns!
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Location
Londonia
Never understood casinos' aversion to e-wallets myself either. Surely it can't be for fraudulent purposes as I always thought having a web wallet was a form of legal verification anyway. :confused:

I assume there is a fee-based saving the casinos make when not allowing them, or perhaps the welcome bonus restriction is to avoid the fast payment of fly-by-night crooks and scammers who want to make a fast buck and get paid within minutes.
 

Harry_BKK

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Location
Balcony
I am pretty sure the financials are the main reason.

I remember that up to not too long ago casinos would be pushing the e-wallets, many even giving an extra 10% for the first deposit using them. Suddenly they do a U-turn and push people to credit/debit cards.

Hmmm....now why is that so? Fraudsters? - paah, it is easier to get your hands on some fake credit cards than getting a Neteller/Skrill account verified.

My only deposit options are the e-wallets as Thai cards decline gaming transactions, hence any casino not allowing them won't see me registering with them or making a deposit.
 

EbeeDog

Dormant account
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Location
Akron OH
Jon- you're asking questions like I do - that you'll never get a straight answer to....unless it's a response from Mr. Pickles :lolup::eek:

new mack pic 008.jpg

Sorry, it's Brian not Jon.:oops: I get you guys mixed up.

Also, sorry for derailing the thread - I didn't think the pic would be that big yeesh!
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
I try to use neteller as much as I can, and I enjoy the challenge of a bonus WR.

I do not like using my bank cards too much, since a lot of gambling transactions on my account could and would damage my credit rating. which since i'm in business, is a big deal for me.

But some casinos are now disallowing bonuses with web wallet deposits, citing fraud as the reason.

which got me thinking....


1) Why don't ALL casinos feel the need to 'protect' themselves from this 'fraud'?

2) Are the casinos with restrictions gaining more from not paying the 'fraudsters, than they're losing from new and existing customers?

3) For those casinos, who feel the restrictions are really necessary. Why not just limit those restrictions to the welcome bonus, where you're dealing with unverified new customers, rather than verified regular customers?

4) Why not make verification compulsory before accepting a first deposit from a web wallet?

4) Are the criminal elements really interested in a 50% up to $£€50 reload bonus?

5) Or is it a case of... with a lot of the casinos who impose web wallet restrictions, they charge for credit and debit card deposits, where as web wallets are free?

This is the biggest contradiction. Surely if they wanted to push players away from web wallets and towards cards, they would make card deposits free and charge for web wallets. Both methods incur fees for the casino, and when they offer free deposits they are absorbing these fees, yet they choose to absorb web wallet fees but not card fees. If anything, they charge MORE for card deposits than it actually costs, so far from subsidising these fees, they are adding a mark up, and for debit cards almost the whole of what the casino charges is a mark up, because the transaction itself is pennies. It's only credit cards where the fee is a percentage of the transaction.

There are some other oddities too, the other method that is also free to deposit, AND is eligible for bonuses, is the cash substitute eVoucher, which is bought, for cash, over the counter with a shop clerk doing the KYC on the fly, which often means little more than checking that the notes you hand over are genuine before generating the voucher. It may well be limited to £150, but this is per person per shop per day, and simply by going to several shops it's easy to launder a couple of thousand in cash, then use the vouchers for depositing into the casino, and because it's impossible for the casino to pay out by this deposit method, another has to be used, even if this is a cheque through the post to the registered address. This might satisfy KYC regulations, but it does not "follow the money" right from source to payout, hence it's a money laundering risk - a surprisingly lax "loophole" for an industry that has a reputation for being far stricter about anti money laundering than any other industry.

If fraud is taking place within the Neteller environment, then it's Neteller that is risking the wrath of regulators in doing so little about the problem that it has caused merchants to start losing trust to the extent that Neteller deposits are being discouraged in favour of cards and even vouchers.

Oddly enough, PayPal isn't included in this ban, yet it's a web wallet that runs on similar lines to Neteller, and is available for gambling deposits in the UK at least where the casino has a UK license.

Far from a "temporary" situation, this problem with Neteller is steadily getting worse, and unless Neteller take action to address the concerns of it's merchants it risks a steady decline in turnover as more and more users are told by merchants that they will get a much better deal by abandoning Neteller and using alternative deposit methods.

Opening another bank account with a different bank for use with casinos prevents your main bank from finding out. Whilst the other bank account and how you manage it may show on your credit file, the individual transactions don't, not even general information about the type. Sharing this level of detail could get banks into trouble over the Data Protection Act, and this act says that only as much data as is "necessary" should be collected and processed, and when it comes to sharing with third parties, this "necessary" is very important, and credit reference agencies don't need to know what you spend your money on, they just need to know how well you manage your affairs.

The time has probably come for a new deposit method, as convenient as Neteller, and with the same low fees (mostly free) for transacting with merchants, but without all the baggage that Neteller has accumulated that has merchants seriously worried that Neteller are allowing organised fraud to thrive, and are not doing much about it because it's the merchants that suffer, whereas Neteller makes even more in fees by being the fraudster's method of choice.
 

ternur

Destroying castles in the sky
webby
CAG
mm3
Joined
Nov 25, 2004
Location
Finland
I prefer Neteller as I have over the past 10+ years.

If the casinos would be concerned about fraud when this method is used, they should not allow it to be used at all. Just disallowing bonuses with Neteller deposits doesn't make any sense in regards to possible fraud or other financial criminal activities.

I trust Neteller over a newly established casino any day of the week. It would be nice to see casinos openly discuss the reason why they don't like webwallets. Transparency works both ways.
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
In total agreement with the hindrance they've started to push towards WW.

A short term fix on occasions is a quick PM to the casino rep (if they have one) if a certain bonus/offer takes your liking.

I know Trada have even imposed a £2 max bet if a player used Skrill/Neteller due to fraud reasons but their email states this can be addressed via support once they see you/we are genuine players.

Would have thought other places would do the same, also in relation to SUB's/bonuses.
 

ThePOGG

Meister Member
webmeister
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Location
UK
1) Why don't ALL casinos feel the need to 'protect' themselves from this 'fraud'?

Operators tend to impose this type of restriction as/when they've experienced a specific problem with large scale multi-accounting rings. This is a problem that comes and goes and as such is required at all times by all operators.

2) Are the casinos with restrictions gaining more from not paying the 'fraudsters, than they're losing from new and existing customers?

In short bursts this can be very costly for the operator. It's also very time consuming to confirm that an account is multi-accounting and as this is done by more qualified security staff rather than low paid CS staff, having to deal with a high case load of accounts that require full investigations can become a significant resource drain. Of course operators make money overall via ewallets, but in the short run it can be very effective to put entire groups off by simply shutting off ewallet access to bonuses.

3) For those casinos, who feel the restrictions are really necessary. Why not just limit those restrictions to the welcome bonus, where you're dealing with unverified new customers, rather than verified regular customers?

4) Why not make verification compulsory before accepting a first deposit from a web wallet?

Because verification isn't everything. Verification is just the basic checks on ID documents. Many multi-accounting rings have access to legitimate ID documents or high quality fakes that will pass a surface level inspection. It's relatively common for accounts to make it through verification only to highlighted as a concern due to other activity further down the line and subsequently require more in depth review.

And while I agree with pre-verification, I'd love ALL operators to switch to this, players are impatient and find verification irritating even when they've got a reason to engage with it. If you start demanding documents off players when they've no financial reason to provide them, many of them will simply go somewhere else. This becomes even more of an issue when you take into account that unlike CS the security department will usually operate standard business hours. If you sign-up looking for a few spins one evening only to be told that your account requires verification before you can play and that won't happen until tomorrow, chances are you'll sign-up somewhere else and the initial operator loses the customer.

Pre-verification is how things should work for ALL customers, but for any operator functioning in a market where their competitors don't require pre-verification to implement pre-verification would put them at a significant disadvantage.



4) Are the criminal elements really interested in a 50% up to $£€50 reload bonus?

Depends on how many times you can play it. I'm not going to go into the details of multi-accounting for obvious reasons, but if you can make £25 EV on a bonus and play it 10 times, and you can find 10 casinos with similar opportunities over a month the potential gains add up quickly.

5) Or is it a case of... with a lot of the casinos who impose web wallet restrictions, they charge for credit and debit card deposits, where as web wallets are free?

Overall most operators don't much care about the fees. Regular players will more than compensate them for the processor fees. Like game restrictions and betting limits, most operators would rather not have payment method restrictions. Unfortunately there are good reasons that multi-accounters tend towards ewallets and there's a higher proportion of this type of fraud with these payment devices.

TP
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
As far as gambling transactions on your bank account won't affect your credit score as no other institutions can see them, it can with the bank you are using. I recently applied for a Halifax credit card, my credit history is perfect, was approved for a £3000 limit instantly online, 3 days later got a letter saying I had been declined, I rang and asked why, and was told it was because my account shows a history of gambling, but if I go 12 months without any they will happily accept another application and there won't be a problem.
This is from my everyday account that I use for petrol, shopping etc, and has never in about 4 years I have held it shown less than about £5k balance, so more than enough to cover a full payment for the card I was applying for.
 

TradaCasino

Official rep for Trada Casino
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Location
Dublin, Ireland
ThePOGG is right, huge resources are needed to keep on top of these fraud rings.

A few weeks back I spent over half my week investigating fraudulent accounts, and it got extremely difficult to keep up with.

I appreciate your points regarding the ease of getting temporary credit cards etc. I understand that on the face of it, it doesn't make sense that they're not using other deposit methods. The simple fact is that these fraud rings are currently exclusively using e-wallets.

Some casinos continue to offer bonuses on e-wallets, while others are forced to remove them. It's an extremely difficult decision to make, as you are alienating a huge proportion of your potential customer base. This is why we implemented a £/$/€2 maximum bet when playing with e-wallets, we had to do something drastic and I really wanted to avoid removing e-wallet bonuses altogether. As Jon explained earlier, Trada will raise your maximum bet level once you obtain prior permission and that seems to be working well so far.

Brianmon asked Why don't ALL casinos feel the need to 'protect' themselves from this 'fraud'?.
Some casinos are not targeted as aggressively as others, casinos with a higher wagering requirement on welcome bonuses don't attract this kind of fraudulent activity, and in other cases they simply haven't realised the scale of the problem.

It took me over six months to realise how widespread this activity was, and the financial impact of what had been going on was quite significant.

Essentially what I'm trying to say is, if a casino removes e-wallet bonuses they are not taking that decision lightly. It is a pain for us too.

Rachel.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
ThePOGG is right, huge resources are needed to keep on top of these fraud rings.

A few weeks back I spent over half my week investigating fraudulent accounts, and it got extremely difficult to keep up with.

I appreciate your points regarding the ease of getting temporary credit cards etc. I understand that on the face of it, it doesn't make sense that they're not using other deposit methods. The simple fact is that these fraud rings are currently exclusively using e-wallets.

Some casinos continue to offer bonuses on e-wallets, while others are forced to remove them. It's an extremely difficult decision to make, as you are alienating a huge proportion of your potential customer base. This is why we implemented a £/$/€2 maximum bet when playing with e-wallets, we had to do something drastic and I really wanted to avoid removing e-wallet bonuses altogether. As Jon explained earlier, Trada will raise your maximum bet level once you obtain prior permission and that seems to be working well so far.

Brianmon asked Why don't ALL casinos feel the need to 'protect' themselves from this 'fraud'?.
Some casinos are not targeted as aggressively as others, casinos with a higher wagering requirement on welcome bonuses don't attract this kind of fraudulent activity, and in other cases they simply haven't realised the scale of the problem.

It took me over six months to realise how widespread this activity was, and the financial impact of what had been going on was quite significant.

Essentially what I'm trying to say is, if a casino removes e-wallet bonuses they are not taking that decision lightly. It is a pain for us too.

Rachel.

This is clearly a big problem, because most potential players just think the casino is setting unnecessary "traps" on top of the minefield players already have to pick their way through.

I recently applied for a Halifax credit card, my credit history is perfect, was approved for a £3000 limit instantly online, 3 days later got a letter saying I had been declined, I rang and asked why, and was told it was because my account shows a history of gambling

This is WHY this alienation is getting a whole lot worse, because using one's bank account or cards leads to situations like this, and this is where the ordinary player values the web wallet, not to commit fraud, but to keep their gambling private from the prying eyes of their bank manager. It's even worse when it's not a credit card, but your mortgage application, that is declined right at the last minute due to "gambling on your account".

It seems very odd that even now the fraudsters are still "exclusively" using the web wallets, or could it be that this is what has been detected and confirmed so far, and that their use of other methods and strategies has yet to be spotted.

What the ordinary player needs is a solution that has the benefits of keeping their gambling transactions out of their bank manager's sight, but which is better protected against these big fraud rings such that they don't ruin the solution as they have with web wallets.

If fees are not an issue for operators, why can't they make card deposits fee free where they need to restrict web wallets because of the fraud. It seems strange that the fraudsters can deposit fee free, but ordinary players who are being asked to switch to using cards are being charged fees when they would ordinarily use their web wallets fee free if it hadn't been ruined by the fraudsters.

I am even more surprised that Neteller see no reason to tighten up their own systems so that the fraudsters don't all flock "exclusively" to their product. For every £100 that ordinary players deposit by card because operators have restricted Neteller is a loss to Neteller of the revenue for transacting that deposit. Neteller will also lose revenue for the withdrawals some players manage because these cannot normally go back to Neteller if the deposits are coming from a card.

I can see a failure on the part of Neteller to tackle this problem leading to so many operators restricting Neteller that they suffer such a significant drop in revenue that the business can no longer turn a profit. Other web wallets have come and gone, and Neteller almost copped it due to the US action of confiscating a huge amount of it's customers' funds as well as demanding a significant sum in order to drop charges and release two former execs.
 

hedgehok

Meister Member
mm3
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Location
Germany
(...)
Essentially what I'm trying to say is, if a casino removes e-wallet bonuses they are not taking that decision lightly. It is a pain for us too.
(...)
Rachel.

What about the possibility to restrict certain geo-locations where this fraud occurs more frequently?
 

TradaCasino

Official rep for Trada Casino
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Location
Dublin, Ireland
What about the possibility to restrict certain geo-locations where this fraud occurs more frequently?

Unfortunately it's not that simple, at least not for us. This fraud is originating from a number of different regions, from obscure regions (where we have never had depositors from in the past), to the regions where we obtain the most traffic. Blocking e-wallet bonuses based on location would still affect almost 75% of our player base.

The solution we decided on was the only one that would have almost no effect on our genuine customers (other than the fact that they have to request permission from live chat to bet higher than £/$/€2 - once permission is granted the first time, you have permission for all future bonuses).

Thanks for the feedback, we really appreciate any ideas/suggestions you may have,

Rachel.
 

ThePOGG

Meister Member
webmeister
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Location
UK
I am even more surprised that Neteller see no reason to tighten up their own systems so that the fraudsters don't all flock "exclusively" to their product. For every £100 that ordinary players deposit by card because operators have restricted Neteller is a loss to Neteller of the revenue for transacting that deposit. Neteller will also lose revenue for the withdrawals some players manage because these cannot normally go back to Neteller if the deposits are coming from a card.

I can see a failure on the part of Neteller to tackle this problem leading to so many operators restricting Neteller that they suffer such a significant drop in revenue that the business can no longer turn a profit. Other web wallets have come and gone, and Neteller almost copped it due to the US action of confiscating a huge amount of it's customers' funds as well as demanding a significant sum in order to drop charges and release two former execs.

When it comes to ewallets, while they have a regulatory responsibility to ensure that the accounts they manage are operated by the named account holder, my opinion is they do just enough to meet their regulatory requirements and no more. The simple truth is that these types of accounts are very profitable to an ewallet that receives a fee for every transaction. They tend to make far more transactions than an average account, are more inclined towards a rising balance rather than a falling one (meaning they don't run out of funds as often and stop playing) and quite often the transactions they engage in are larger than the average transaction to maximise the opportunity the account operator has found. In short, there's incentive for the ewallet to turn a blind eye.

There are reasons that these groups tend towards using ewallets over other deposit methods. I'm not going to go into them as I don't particularly want to give anyone ideas, but this isn't happening by chance.

As to credit card deposit fees - you've got me on that one. I've no idea why operators need to charge for this deposit method unless the transactions fees are significantly higher than those being charged for ewallets. I have been privy to the deals a few operators have had with Neteller/Skrill over the years and while the fees do vary they can be quite significant over time. If card processors were to charge more this would become a significant burden, but I'd stress that's just a guess.

TP
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
I simply won't play at a casino who has a card fee, I used debit cards and they shouldn't be paying more than 50p for that, and that should be absorbed into the profits. However when I see a £2.50 deposit charge for a 50p actual charge (less in most cases I suspect) I just don't deposit.

All the fraud reports I see usually are to do with neteller, so not sure skrill and the others should be bonus banned, unless they are targeted as much, just not mentioned.
 

TradaCasino

Official rep for Trada Casino
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Location
Dublin, Ireland
I simply won't play at a casino who has a card fee, I used debit cards and they shouldn't be paying more than 50p for that, and that should be absorbed into the profits. However when I see a £2.50 deposit charge for a 50p actual charge (less in most cases I suspect) I just don't deposit.

All the fraud reports I see usually are to do with neteller, so not sure skrill and the others should be bonus banned, unless they are targeted as much, just not mentioned.


Skrill is also targeted, though in our case not as often as Neteller.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Skrill is also targeted, though in our case not as often as Neteller.

Perhaps Neteller need some healthy competition. At present, having bought out Skrill, Neteller have a monopoly on eWallet provision for the online gambling industry. PayPal does not really count as competition as they tend not to allow gambling transactions in most countries, even though they will now allow gambling transactions in the UK by their UK customers to casinos with a UK license.

Any competing service needs to offer players the convenience they currently get with Neteller, but have better protections in place against fraud against merchants. Once in place, the bonus ban for Neteller users can be countered by allowing bonuses for the competing eWallet service that better meets the operator's anti fraud standards. Neteller will either have to change it's current "look the other way" attitude towards misuse of it's services or face a flight of customers to the new service, which will be attractive to regular players but not so attractive to fraudsters who will face a higher degree of vetting.

As for card fees, these date back to a time when most casinos listed Neteller as their "preferred deposit option", and not only was it free, there was often an additional incentive for using it. The card fees were designed to put players off from using cards, and casinos would often promote the eWallets to players who used cards by telling them they would not be charged any fees and would also be eligible for additional incentives exclusive for eWallet users.

Now, it's cards that have become the "preferred deposit option", yet perversely fees are not being switched over to match so as to act as an additional incentive for players to switch to cards from the eWallets.

If fraudsters are staying clear of cards despite the possibilities, incentivising players to switch to cards by dropping fees, and even having further incentives for using cards, could tip the balance such that instead of alienating players, these players see the benefits of switching to cards. A rapid fall in turnover for Neteller might be enough for them to make the kind of changes operators are looking for to tackle fraud.

The current situation seems to be having the effect of pushing away the average player, a deterrent to signing up and depositing rather than an incentive to switch to using a card. The fraudsters will keep on using Neteller, and even without bonuses, they will be looking out for alternative opportunities to beat the casinos, such as "zero day" exploits in the casino games or platform software, or "emptiers" to use the fruit machine players' terminology.
 

spoton

Senior Member
webmeister
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Location
Right behind you
The reasons why (prepaid) credit cards aren't banned in the same way is probably due to scammers having a harder time getting hold of unique bank accounts to receive the cash to. So I guess either the casinos could allow bonuses if people withdraw by bank act only? Or just get a prepaid/reloadable virtual credit card OP. Usually they have a bit bigger fees though.
 

Harry_BKK

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Location
Balcony
Perhaps Neteller need some healthy competition. At present, having bought out Skrill, Neteller have a monopoly on eWallet provision for the online gambling industry. PayPal does not really count as competition as they tend not to allow gambling transactions in most countries, even though they will now allow gambling transactions in the UK by their UK customers to casinos with a UK license.

Any competing service needs to offer players the convenience they currently get with Neteller, but have better protections in place against fraud against merchants. Once in place, the bonus ban for Neteller users can be countered by allowing bonuses for the competing eWallet service that better meets the operator's anti fraud standards. Neteller will either have to change it's current "look the other way" attitude towards misuse of it's services or face a flight of customers to the new service, which will be attractive to regular players but not so attractive to fraudsters who will face a higher degree of vetting.

As for card fees, these date back to a time when most casinos listed Neteller as their "preferred deposit option", and not only was it free, there was often an additional incentive for using it. The card fees were designed to put players off from using cards, and casinos would often promote the eWallets to players who used cards by telling them they would not be charged any fees and would also be eligible for additional incentives exclusive for eWallet users.

Now, it's cards that have become the "preferred deposit option", yet perversely fees are not being switched over to match so as to act as an additional incentive for players to switch to cards from the eWallets.

If fraudsters are staying clear of cards despite the possibilities, incentivising players to switch to cards by dropping fees, and even having further incentives for using cards, could tip the balance such that instead of alienating players, these players see the benefits of switching to cards. A rapid fall in turnover for Neteller might be enough for them to make the kind of changes operators are looking for to tackle fraud.

The current situation seems to be having the effect of pushing away the average player, a deterrent to signing up and depositing rather than an incentive to switch to using a card. The fraudsters will keep on using Neteller, and even without bonuses, they will be looking out for alternative opportunities to beat the casinos, such as "zero day" exploits in the casino games or platform software, or "emptiers" to use the fruit machine players' terminology.

Ecopayz
- better currency exchange rates, lower currency exchange fees, multiple currency accounts under one user name, cheaper ATM withdrawals with the debit card

Can give you a recent example from today for an upload of 100AUD from my Thai bank card:

Neteller


- 1.9% card fee
- total 101.9AUD
- debited from my Thai card: 2,925THB
- exchange rate: 1AUD = 28.70THB

Ecopayz

- 2.95% card fee
- total 102.95AUD
- debited from my Thai card: 2,768THB
- exchange rate: 1AUD = 26.89THB

Bank rate today: 1AUD = 26.71THB

Neteller has become totally arrogant when it comes to fees, they know exactly that they are the most accepted deposit method at online casinos and the majority of their customers are gamblers, hence will accept the fees just to have their punt.



There is also Entropay where you create virtual visa cards and use those to deposit.

It is just that most casinos do not accept EcoPayz or Entropay, or just for some regions. They all take Neteller though. E.g at Guts Canadians can use Ecopayz, me from Thailand not.:confused:
 
Last edited:

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom

Ecopayz
- better currency exchange rates, lower currency exchange fees, multiple currency accounts under one user name, cheaper ATM withdrawals with the debit card

Can give you a recent example from today for an upload of 100AUD from my Thai bank card:

Neteller


- 1.9% card fee
- total 101.9AUD
- debited from my Thai card: 2,925THB
- exchange rate: 1AUD = 28.70THB

Ecopayz

- 2.95% card fee
- total 102.95AUD
- debited from my Thai card: 2,768THB
- exchange rate: 1AUD = 26.89THB

Bank rate today: 1AUD = 26.71THB

Neteller has become totally arrogant when it comes to fees, they know exactly that they are the most accepted deposit method at online casinos and the majority of their customers are gamblers, hence will accept the fees just to have their punt.



There is also Entropay where you create virtual visa cards and use those to deposit.

It is just that most casinos do not accept EcoPayz or Entropay, or just for some regions. They all take Neteller though. E.g at Guts Canadians can use Ecopayz, me from Thailand not.:confused:

That is the biggest barrier to Neteller facing some serious competition, it has international appeal, whereas many of the other options are regional. PayPal for example is pretty regional when it comes to gambling transactions, offered in the UK for UK licensed casinos, but not widely accepted BECAUSE it's regional to UK customers, so it's casinos with a focus on the UK that tend to accept it.
 

spintee

Ueber Meister
webby
mm2
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Location
Northants
I know there is one or two threads at the least about this, I could only find this one,

Just came across this at VeraJohn, No bonus for e wallets for U.K customers????
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
I know there is one or two threads at the least about this, I could only find this one,

Just came across this at VeraJohn, No bonus for e wallets for U.K customers????

It's a complete joke now. Why ONLY UK customers, Neteller is pretty much the same in all the countries it's operating in. The UK is also more tightly regulated than the others, and it's also the UK that regulates Neteller.

Neteller, on the other hand, don't seem to give a toss about what is going on, and after all, they are potentially the biggest losers if this policy becomes more widespread. If anything, Neteller deserves to go the way of the cheque book for their complete inaction over this. They should be engaging with their merchants to thrash out a solution to whatever problem is causing them to ditch Neteller as an option for their recreational players.

Casinos may also suffer because if the banks are using the fact of gambling transactions to keep declining loans and mortgages to the average player, the players may quit online gambling altogether rather than change deposit method from one that keeps their banks unaware of their gambling to one that the banks see and use to reduce credit scores.

These two forces may drive players into using methods like vouchers like the former UKash, or Bitcoin, mainly to not use Neteller and fall foul of such terms, and also to avoid the banks being able to see that they gamble.

If casinos have to do KYC to prevent money laundering, the WORST possible thing they could be doing is using this social engineering to shift the majority of players over to using vouchers, prepay gift cards, or Bitcoin.

It has always been the case that if a product becomes unavailable in one outlet, shoppers will first look to another outlet before settling for an inferior replacement. The same goes for bonuses, if they are the important factor for a player, they will shift deposit methods or casino rather than stick with the inferior product on offer with Neteller. With the banks deterring the use of cards and bank accounts through serious financial consequences of gambling transactions having appeared on the statement, the remaining option for the shift is to cash equivalents, which is the shop bought voucher payment product or a pre-pay card that can be loaded with cash. It's then a lowly shop assistant conducting the KYC at the point of purchase, rather than the security teams of the bank, Neteller, and even the casino (since they can't trace the cash back further than the gift card or voucher).
 

spintee

Ueber Meister
webby
mm2
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Location
Northants
Well V&J lost a deposit today of me due to the ewallet malarkey,

I am 99.9% sure this is a pretty new rule as I have made deposit with ewallets in the past and received bonus there, I just do not get it, Thrills has the rule you have to turn over your deposit x5 times or bust out to receive the next days free spins, But if using ewallets x10 turn over,

I can see alot of casino losing players, I know a bonus is not for every one but alot of small rollers like a bonus for extra play, And most of the time if they bust out than its not really a big deal & busting out is pretty much the norm now days
 
Top