Topic: BITSTAMP exchange biased rule that chased users away (Read 248 times)

They should change their board of advisors imo, such decision won't come to light without running it through the decision making bodies in that company and i wonder how the hell they ever thought this is the right way to make inactive accounts active! like seriously?
Has it not occur to them there is a reason so many accounts are inactive! the reasonable thing to do would have been finding out why and proffer an attractive incentives or something to make users want to be active again. No wonder i have never heard of them. 

who knows which highly decorated executive came up with such a stupid idea

for many, many reasons ....
holding crypto requires no effort.
outside is full of exchanges competing to attract new users.
forcing users to stake coins or transact is just a non-sense move.

I am not surprised they changed immediately idea

I think this rule is more demanding for inactive users with a certain amount of balance. When a user becomes inactive it is clear that their income will decrease, while they still have some company fees even if the user becomes inactive and only leaves their funds with the same insurance rights.

It shouldn't really be this way. Although there's this vital role of these exchanges in the whole crypto market but to abuse that privilege that they have, they're just pushing away their customers. This isn't the first crash that bitstamp has and why is it that they're doing the same rule as the other exchanges just to make themselves alive?

Those rules are naive.

They've been in the business for quite a while and then making this set of rules would really push the customers away.

Possible but I don't think that they'll come into that point because they'll just ship to another better exchange.

I didn't really follow what happened with Bitstamp and their new rules, but I received email notifications where they abandon this stupid policy of charging fees for inactive accounts.

Or just don't create an account and use Bitstamp at all, there are lots of exchanges out there with no such rule.

From the way I look at the rule, they are instead forcing clients to use the exchange to store their crypto. More like "transact this number of times during this period and keep a minimum balance in our exchange or else we shall charge you an inactivity fee"

It's sad to still read in 2022 this kind of words. No, crypto users are not ships or cows ready to be milked by platforms. And exchanges are not free to do what they want with their customers, because scamming people is forbidden anywhere on earth.
As you said when an user registers into a platform he agrees the ToS, then if the platform doesn't want to respect them anymore and wants to change them they must offer a compensation for not respecting the initial contract anymore. Did Bitstamp at least offer to users to withdraw their funds without any withdrawal fees and KYC? I didn't hear that.
They've just tried to apply this new condition because they have the strictest KYC rules of all the exchanges afaik and many accounts are not accessible by their owners anymore because of that. But fortunately they've failed.

It seems they are working like the banks. I remember here in our country, there are some banks that will charge you some amount once your balance falls below the agreed maintaining balance. It really sucks.

I am also curious, what is the difference when they will just ignore the inactive users than charging them? It's not making any sense for me.

bitstamp small print
"the fee will not result in a negative balance on your account. So, if your balance is zero. your account will not be affected by this change"

this means TAKE YOUR FUNDS OUT, but dont close the account.
then when you want to use it. do a deposit. but when you finished using it that day/week withdraw it again. and avoid the fee's

a zero balance = no fee

Haha. That's insane. How come an inactive user should be charge, if this a damn thing then there should be an option to delete the account.
Since they are giving an option people to avoid them when they come back from being inactive then there should an option for that.

You dont know? People like to leave funds on exchange now a days, disregarding the fact it can vanish when hack happens. Yeah, people should, but most of us are lazy to that.

But the question is...who does leave their funds on an exchange that would lead to inactivity? They should take it out and put it to their own wallet and never use an exchange as a bank or wallet but anyway, if it's in their ToS then that's the fault most of the users didn't read. But if it's a new condition then that's a straight stealing though they put it as if it's the users fault but it's them and then they left the condition maybe after reading this topic or a lot of users already left after that tweet.

This is honestly not just bitstamp but other companies as well for example when you consider Zebpay, they usually offer free services only when they see customers making at least one trade, but the fee is honestly 5€ approximately, therefore I do think that there are other companies as well that would be charging the same sooner or later, for them they are providing a platform and if they are charging as well, the customers would be able to ask for better services, I do not think that it is entirely wrong but they should decrease the fee considering they already take money on every trade made and withdrawals and deposits are also something you pay for in some platforms.

These new conditions may seem harsh, but in the end it is their exchange and they are free to set the conditions they want and the user is free to accept or not, but when you agree to the terms of service, you become obligated to implement all the laws of the exchange and you have no right to complain, from the point of view of the exchange if you do not want to trade so why keep your money there? If you keep it there you have to pay a fee for it.
Therefore, the best solution for those who do not wish to trade in this bear market is to withdraw those assets into a safe wallet instead of leaving them idle there without trading. I don't blame them frankly because the exchanges exist for trading and not for storing money. If the exchanges don't take trading fees how can they keep going?.

That's even more than a bank that charges in my accounts that do charge $5 for 2 years of being dormant.

That dormancy fee is like a suicide on their own, yeah, just push away those customers that they have and they only want the active ones to stay.

They shouldn't be surprised if the number of users goes low by the next month of audit. There will be sure those that will be charged $10 and it will totally make them dismay.

Two years later and some are still surprised that some exchanges, even big ones have been charging this for years

And seems some have been improving their fees since I posted that, like Coindirect:


Most banks have such a thing, and the card providers have them too, even gambling sites will close your account and if the remaining sum is below the minimum deposit required the amount will be lost, I know that from a mail I've got from Betfair saying my precious 2.5$ will be lost if I don't log in and place a bet in the next 3 months. As for exchanges, there are far more with this practice than you imagine.

if you leave funds in there.. you then have to top up extra each month just to avoid paying a fee if you not using it to trade

however.
if you take funds out..(an activity)
guess what, by putting funds back in a month later.. you are then depositing(an activity) to avoid the fee..

..
if you are not using bitstamp for 11 months and 28 days. then yea close the account completely and just use a different exchange..

but the point is to simply stop using an account as a bank

I think Bitstamp is facing some financial issues. Otherwise, in a highly competitive market like crypto exchange, no company would take such a suicidal decision. It is pretty easy to trade in any other exchange instead of Bitstamp which wouldn't have any such inactivity fees.

My suggestion would be to leave this exchange for good and immediately withdraw all assets whatever you are keeping with them. Otherwise things could go out of your control pretty quickly.

From my point of view, this exchange seems to be going downhill, it charges extravagant trading fees, 0.5% compared to 0.10% Binance's. It's the main reason I quit the exchange and never plan to return ever again. I received multiple emails to upload more documentation or they'd close my account, despite it being inactive for over a year.

Although now cancelled, and obviously they dipped their toes in the wrong direction, the conditions did not require a 200 € equivalent balance on a monthly basis to avoid being charged, but rather applied if you hadn’t made a platform TX over the last 12 months AND your account’s balance was less than the equivalent of 200 €.

The key to avoiding the inactivity fee would have been to either make at least one platform TX over the last 12 months, or have an account balance of over or equal to 200 €.


Customers of Bitstamp US were to be exempt from the inactivity fee. Praise be …

I wonder what will those user's reaction when they found out that they have changed their T&C and they don't know about this. I think it's better if they close the account if for several months there's an inactivity on the account and post a note of the closing in the account.

I can't comment for the rest of the world but here in the US many banks have an inactivity fee / minimum use requirements on certain types of accounts.
Many of the crypto debit cards out there also have inactivity fees as do some other services.
No exchanges that I can think of have fees for non use, but there are some that will close your account and take your funds if you don't log in / use it for a certain period of time.

-Dave

If we treat all the people into cryptocurrency as pros the market may end up not hitting a global adoption. Most users stumble upon crypto for what may seem to be a different reason; for-profits, trading, investing, etc. Many don't read or are not readers or not interested in reading about the ecosystem. Like you said lazy investors that see the exchange as a bank account. It's like a bank account to them, they can withdraw their funds since nobody or they have not enlightened themselves about the main cryptocurrency wallets that can be used to save their funds. In this thread, I emphasized that such decisions may chase noob users away from using cryptocurrency. So if the goal is to reach mass adoption I think everyone into cryptocurrency should not be considered a pro in the market.

Well, it also means that if one wants to buy or sell only every couple of months, he better closes the account, creates a new one and does KYC.. every time? I find it counter productive, nobody will do that.
So you either day trade (basically) on Bitstamp, either go and find another exchange (and yes, keep most of the funds on your own wallet, obviously). And with this move I think that day traders will also leave.

Hence instead of "stop using bitstamp as a bank account long term" this will easily translate into "stop using bitstamp"

They treat exchange accounts as bank accounts now with that minimum requirement. Are they not earning enough from the fees they charge to cover the fees from maintaining inactive accounts? That's probably the case here. They must be feeling the effect of the bear market hehe. Poor way to milk more money from their users.

flip the mindset..

a $10 fee a month is a way to say "stop using bitstamp as a bank account long term", the advice is and should be to take your funds out and own your own crypto in your own wallet.

if people want to stupidly leave funds in an exchange for over a month. then sure they should be charged..
.. ofcourse this $10 sum should go towards some custodian insurance reserve. but atleast it could/should teach people to stop holding value in exchanges when not actually actively using the exchange.

by now changing to a min holding to have free bank account is just playing into the lazy investors who want to treat bitstamp as a bank account

..
no one should think or advertise or treat an exchange as a bank account service to store funds for over a month without any activity

if your not using funds for a few weeks, TAKE THEM OUT of the exchange.

It is their exchanges, their lands and they have their own rules. I believe that none of us spend time to read all points in ToS (Terms of Service) of any platform. That means you will be trapped by their ToS sooner or later. Don't say it as biased strategy or decision.

It is still good. If you know exchanges have rules to close account of user if it is inactively after a very long time, 2 year or longer ie. I remembered I read it on Poloniex's ToS in 2017 or 2018.

Exchange can update their ToS and you will have to accept it. A good exchange will give you a window time to withdraw if you don't accept with their new policy. Scam exchange will take advantage of new policy to steal your fund.

That's correct. It's an idiotic move, since the inactives will not know and would just lose that money. It's indeed very close to stealing.
I find it a desperate move, caused probably exactly by the fact people are no longer trade much there. But not problem, really, there are plenty of more welcoming exchanges - with or without KYC.


It doesn't matter. They've just lost a huge amount of credibility and I expect people continue to leave in big numbers. And this means lower liquidity, hence one more reason for the users leave.

They are not to be trusted as I considered all of these act as theft. How can you charge such ? Who does that ?
$200 at the end of every month is a big amount. They would have lost more user if they had not uplift the ban thus.
Are there any difference between the exchange's and the bank related to these acts. ?

Cryptocurrency exchanges are the thorn in the cryptocurrency market's flesh. Though, they are centralized platforms operating for a decentralized entity. But, they fail to keep themselves away from biased decisions. Recently, on July 5, Bitstamp posted that inactive accounts will pay a $10 bill on their next transaction. Such a decision became clear to them that users saw it as a biased rule to favor the platform; this morning they lifted the rule. However, users already left the exchange, and some users may lose interest in cryptocurrency due to such an order. An exchange with a reasonable board of admins should have thought things out before effecting such a rule knowing that they are many other competitors.

On the other hand, users complain that the exchange is demanding a $200 minimum deposit per month to keep an account active. So if a user fails to deposit up to $200 per month their account will get deactivated.

Such exchanges are making decisions outside the goal of cryptocurrency marketers or inventors. It shouldn't be this way. Some exchanges are centralized already. They should be a general central body that should govern every exchange in the cryptocurrency space. The decisions they come up with every day, and the threat of some exchanges going into bankruptcy in the cryptocurrency space is not helping this ecosystem. A rule should govern any existing exchange to keep things in place or the market will face more threats in the future. 






https://blog.bitstamp.net/post/bitstamp-cancels-plans-to-charge-inactivity-fee/