Topic: The most liquid companies in the gambling industry - page 2. (Read 2261 times)

Really? I think you guys are now deviating from the main goal here. Such a discussion like bankruptcy is not the subject here and no company in any field can be exonerated from this, so it is not necessary but the liquidity's importance and relevance in casinos. All companies are trying to manage their situation and continue to get relevant in the industry, so I do not think it should be the main concern in this context. This is also the reason why we should be so vigilant and attentive to the news and development around the companies we are dealing with and also go for those companies that are strong and well-planned and not those who put it quickly together because of the money they want to earn fast.

We cannot overemphasize the importance of liquidity in every company as it measures their strength and greatness in the industry. A good company should be able to overcome the test of time, and you can see what happened to Stake.com last year when over $41m was stolen. It's obvious that most casinos will not be able to survive that, and this shows how liquid they are and also how prepared they are for the casino business. Also, one must try to know the capacity of the company they deal with, and what they have for them in case of issues, especially when the company is stressed. This is why it is good to always go for the best that are fully prepared. I mean those who will still reimburse their customers even if issues happen because they have insurance and also distribute/plan their risk properly.

We know quite alright that gambling companies have this money but they have decided not to go loud about it because they don't want the eye on them to set target from the government regulations and the likes, there are some as well in which this category of gambling platforms are just coming up in building an environment of trust that will lead to their stay and with time they enlarge in coast with what they offers, this are the kinds that started small and mean business and later got developed whereby money is never a problem for them anymore.

All this is very true, I personally always make any type of payment that involves taxes or something like that, and it is better to do it through normal payment with the same local currency, it is much better, sometimes paying with foreign currency It can be synonymous with They Subject us to a possible investigation, however I know that in many Countries in the world what matters is that they have dollars to be able to pay and carry out all these processes in the best way, I have always said something, yes I am in a sensitive country about it , it is best to pay with local currency to avoid future inconveniences.

For those who want to maintain anonymity, it is recommended to use normal fiat payment, for payments with crypto it is not highly recommended to do so because in general they always indicate or usually ask for the person's data, then this is recorded with all the data, and when it is payments that the person makes with bitcoin because it is an indication of monitoring them.

It is likely that the massive offensive of financial clans and, after them, governments, which are not elected by the people at all, but who are put in charge of the countries by these very clans, will continue.  Democracy in its classical sense can now apparently be forgotten and not remembered.  And such an attack on human rights obviously leads to complete total control over the financial transactions of ordinary people.  It is also obvious that as Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies become more and more common in legal payments, for example due to the legalization of spot Bitcoin ETFs, the implementation of KYC by these financial clans and authorities will intensify.  And this primarily concerns the gambling industry, this goes without saying. 
Even I don’t really imagine how to defend my right to anonymity in crypto payments in transactions such as cryptocurrency being exchanged for local fiat money.

Both new and old casinos have the right and ability to build on their liquidity and at first glance we shouldn't take liquidity availability to mean what detrermind what make a casino a reputable one because it goes beyond that and it cought across to how much is the casino paying as in their highest withdrawal in history and how their keep up with the issues of paying for huge winning and what pressure their put the gamblers through before they get their funds out.

Also how their approach is to none verified users who are acting right and accordingly to the lay down rules of the casinos which most time states that benchmarks for kyc is 5k and above both in deposits and withdrawal attempts.

I think the above make up for more when building a reputation as both a new casino or an old one who want to make attempts to build on what is already on ground. Liquidity can be manipulated but then it means alit also but not the primary factors.

What I think it refers to is the situation that not everything lasts a lifetime, and that is something very true, you have to take advantage of the moments where the situation for some betting houses can be very profitable and when the companies win and They get their money paid, it is a casino, and casinos can go down due to any type of error, it is a company that when it does not receive good administration or attention everything can go down, that is what it means.

The circumstances that exist today are not the same as those of a few years ago, and that has to be seen, I am a person who has learned to see things that way too, because it is easier to take advantage of good things, and it is not They do so many things so that they can generate conflicts Regarding money, what drives everything in these industries is money and that is only the case of the rise or Bankruptcy of a casino.

I've got your point from here, however, should we make the standard of liquidity as our major basis for determining the reputation of a gambling company and such should be used in selecting for one or we should not only rely on that, we have to see them pass the test of time and see how reliable they could be in terms of quality gambling services and trust we have in them.

Well, really that is the ideal, generally I see USA as one of the countries with the most power in the world, in fact after the Second World War they have great respect from everyone in the world, and this is reflected in their currency that, as you say, is the one that manages finances worldwide, everyone works to obtain dollars, and that is a hegemony that has always existed, therefore it is something that will be seen as one of the most powerful countries in the world, and that is why it is that KYC is one of the things that they want to control, well not only them, I consider that the great powers are also on top of this, none of them are interested in private economies developing and achieving financial freedom, that is something that they do not allow themselves, and given this, they begin to take the main step which is anonymity, privacy, something that they will not allow.

Regarding  crypto payments, well that's what you say, I hope that these processes due to their KYC slow down and don't focus so much on it, previously, back in 2017 the importance of bitcoin and crypto was not considered so much , but since it is now very much worth money, they want to take slices from there.

I think that the example with the elections in the USA, when two old people are going to be elected president and there are no younger candidates from any of the leading parties in the country, this all reduces the image of the USA on the world stage and many countries will no longer consider the legislators of the USA as the base  legislators for the whole world. 
Gradually, the role of the USA in the world is decreasing. 
But their possibility remains of issuing the world currency $. 
But the role of this currency as a whole in the world is also declining. 
But what path other countries will take when regulating their financial systems and in particular the balance and ratio of anonymous/personalized payments in cryptocurrencies is a big and interesting question. 

I do not completely rule out that anonymous payments will continue to exist for a long time.  There will also be pseudo-anonymous payments in cash for a long time.
 All these processes directly affect KYC and the spread of this procedure throughout the world.  Let’s hope that the onslaught of KYC on crypto payments will slow down or perhaps begin to gradually disappear altogether.  And now there is already too much de-anonymization in crypto payments.

I don't know if this has much to do with KYC, but it seems that everyone looks for centralized casinos because the attention is immediate and problems can be resolved faster than casinos that are decentralized, but seeing the cases that exist it is very different when things are done when investors need to have their money safe, because you are right about that, casinos that are centralized tend to give trust, in a decentralized casino and in centralized exchanges I also trust more because any problem is easy solution, in a decentralized casino or in a decentralized exchange things are harder, because service usually takes longer.

Hours and days that pass with our money on a platform without giving a solution to anyone despairs, then this is the advantage that these sites have.

That's right, there has been quite a bit of a long stretch of good markets, good crypto and in general a good pace of growth mostly everywhere except in some poorly managed countries. We should not be thinking that this is going to be like this for a long time, there are periods in which all contract and then is when you will need to make sure the site is "liquid".

I think just as it be to exchange so it is with casino's,  for legislatmacy sake, it best to gamble on a KYC compliance casino,  because in terms of liquidity provision,  centralised platforms tend to have more liquidity compared to their decentralised contourpart, because investors investors will have more confidence in those platform that have some form of licensing for the operations.

Anyways if I am in position to chose at anytime a new casino then I will surly go for a good kyc casino and pass through the processes that enable me to withdraw my winning anytime I hit the jackpot, instead of relying on a no kyc casino that take my money and never pay out when there is winning due to low liquidities.

You know that time goes by and things continue to change, what we may e privileged to enjoy several years back may not be the same conditions of the requirements needed because obviously the economy and financial obligations have changed as well, we have to go along with the way thing operates now base on the current updates with the gambling sectors in this present conditions, those that have been seen as the most liquid gambling company then does not exist like before again and new one are taking over to make their own new offers and regulations concerning these.

Whoa, that's kind of Stake.com and I must say that I love to read things like this as their campaigner. We can't ignore the importance of the high liquidity of any company we are dealing with and it's no news that Stake.com is a well-liquid casino and sportsbook with a huge track record so far. This coupled with the huge reputation it has built in the course of years.

Now imagine a person gambling with such a company, the fear would definitely be alleyed, and no matter how much the money to be wagered and the winning possibility, it would be rest assured that it will be taken care of by such a well-prepared company. Needless to say, Stake.com is managing the risk internally as well which also depends on the multiplier in the game in question. By this internal management, they will reasonably avoid the risks they can't be able to honour its winning. This is wise and helps both parties, but such an amount would have been so huge to say the least.

You are completely right, but unfortunately, this is something that most gamblers always fail to understand, they tend to blame the casino or curse the casino for imposing kyc verification on their account, forgetting that without the casino doing that, the casino may one day go offline without the possiblity of them coming back online, and when that happens, same customer complaining about the casino asking kyc document for verification, may also lose his or her money.

It's like you've said, gone are the days when the government cared less about the people and their online identities, alot have changed in this regard and we mustn't hate and boycott our favorite casinos because they are implementing kyc verification system and seem to be imposing it on their customers, no business wants to lose their customers, most especially, their loyal ones, but when it comes to kyc, most casino can't do much is it's completely out of their control.

Gone are the days when one could deposit, gamble, and withdraw any amount in a cryptocurrency gambling platform without having to comply with AML and KYC rules because there was nothing of such kind back in the day. When we talk about privacy, reputable platforms always care about the privacy of their customers no matter what, some people think that the platform asking for KYC is hindering their privacy, but the reality is, that they are compelled to do that.

If a centralized platform doesn't comply with rules and regulations imposed by the authorities, they have the fear of their licenses getting cancelled and having their platforms closed down because they need to comply with the regulations, it's more of a necessity for them.

I believe the CEO's knows the importance of the privacy and at will continue to operate with all levels of privacy and this is why we have come to a point where all the facts and factors point to the casino with the highest liquidity this is like it will be measured in terms of high withdrawal,  and also how best the casinos act within the stipulated laws that guide the conduct of all the parties involved.


Some time ago, I read somewhere how Stake paid winners $150,000 without any demand for KYC which shows how well the company pays attention to privacy, and the high available liquidity to pay customers.

I got your points and you're absolutely right, in addition to it all, there are many things to consider before having a gambling platform established, the source to where this idea being generated is very important, some have it as a direct gambling business and they run their platform by themselves while some go into a partnership kind of franchise when the finance needed could not be able to catch up with the needs in demand, which is part of the serious challenges many platforms are having before the whole administration is being centralized into categories and you cannot easily effect any change or implement anything that has to do with financial liquidity.

It is very true, there is also something that the USA is Managing in a Great Way, it is that with their regulations they make the Countries of the world adapt to their measures, there it is, they say that it is going to Prohibit certain Countries so that they do not have Access to certain Privileges and the things are done as they say, so at a global level they pay a lot of attention to the power that the USA has, then these policies are passed on to the casinos, to the exchanges, and the main sites have regulations, then this type of thing has Decreased freedoms in Every sense, so when talking about KYC it is total control that is being Implemented, this is what is coming and each time anonymity, privacy is much less what People enjoy , the Flow Our data is quite Easy to find on the web, even so for people who do not like leaving traces on the Internet it is possible to find data about them, then, if they do not have social networks where their Names appear,  DNI, full name and sector where you live.

These are things that are Inexplicable to many , Because that is the Reason why people's Iinjuries sometimes Appear on the web and in reality

Yeah!  Of course, maintaining anonymity when gambling is much preferable to publicly disclosing such personal information.  Sometimes there are cases when even the closest relatives do not know that their loved one is an avid gambler.  Apart from the employer, from whom it is of course better to hide such data, sometimes this hobby has to be hidden from the public simply because of the government policies of certain countries where there is a direct ban or public condemnation of gambling.  So there are many options for people who prefer to remain anonymous.  Even I think that the vast majority of players would prefer not to undergo KYC at a casino if they were confident in advance that the casino would accurately and without any problems pay them the money they won at any time the player wishes.  But this doesn’t happen in real life and players have to go through KYC. 

Nevertheless, I see a clear gap in legislation here, primarily in US legislation, which does not properly regulate such an issue.  And this should finally be done simply for reasons of humanizing society and preserving the human right to private life.