Topic: The most liquid companies in the gambling industry - page 5. (Read 2820 times)

I also see that their casinos that are physical are very unlikely to become scams and if they do, they do not do it with the impudence of an online casino, that the online casino the disadvantage that we have as players is that it cannot be done There are other things to accept, because if they block the funds it is something shocking what they do by not allowing it to be taken out, then it is a robbery at least, on the other hand if there is a problem in a physical casino, the imdaitetnte person then goes and licks and does all the There is a fuss so that they can give you your money or something, but it is something that can be resolved at once, in a physical casino it is like that, but not in an online casino.

Online casinos are always very different in rules and in their ways of handling things, I am aware that in an online casino money is much more wasted than in a physical casino, that is the problem of trusting in casinos like this.

Well, I think that the majority of us who are here have left their KYC in the main exchange platforms, casinos and everything that has to do with these houses that manage money, in a decentralized exchange lpatfoam, the truth is I don't trust, If a theft occurs, who will respond? I consider that no one will say that it was a hack and that's not how things are, so we prefer to have a centralized excage, a centralized casino just because we know that we can count on them as it is, because they provide security, and they provide what we can and We seek to have, security can mean everything, but as you say, regulations are the things that distract us from the good thing about crypto, I have always said something, if bitcoin was created we should not detract from its function, Satoshi invented it so that We can have the financial freedom that we do not have with the money of the fiat system, neither banks nor third parties that tell us what things we should do or what permissions we should have, then this case is not fulfilled.

Now the regulations have Entered the casinos and exchanges, they wash their hands of what they say and affirm that they must comply with these demands so that they do not take away their licenses and yes, for one thing they are right , without that they cannot do anything, but how is it done? here? who loses? the casinos ? Or us, obviously us , because before in 2017 there was no mandatory KYC and then how did they do it? It was obvious that the ID was enough for things to go well, then we are people who should see those things, because before yes and now no, then they are a series of things that sometimes we as players do not fit, and that is enough for us to say no, not so much for the old casinos because they are the most reliable in the world, but in this sense things can happen that we accept our data for KYC just for the Fact of being reliable, the new Companies , the new casinos are the ones that suffer the most.

We have to consider the disadvantage of physical bulkiness, these gambling platforms are not safe in their physical appearance considering the amount of money they earned in fiat local currencies, they can be rendered under physical assault for theft, there could also be a means of physical violence in some of these casino houses, gamblers can abuse the casinos in any manner of assault including their fellow gamblers which there's none of these in any form with online gambling platforms.

Issue is part of every business but the problem is if the company is scamming the players or the players cheating the site those are the scenarios in which I believe is valid to tackle.


why you need to care? do you  become one of the involved here? or a victim or at least has problem ?


with the support giving answers and the withdrawal never been an issue? then that is correct a better business deals.

In any case, the limit amount should be several thousand dollars and more than $2 K, of course.  But when you are required to KYC when withdrawing $100, this of course resembles insanity, simply because the amounts required to process this personal information and the cost of its confidential storage are already beginning to be commensurate with such small amounts.  

As for the taxation of cryptocurrencies, it is natural that if governments decide to make taxation large, for example 30%, then naturally no normal person will perceive this positively.  And massive tax evasion to some other jurisdiction will spread everywhere.  And at the same time, jurisdictions with little taxation or no taxation at all will certainly appear somewhere in the world.  
So the government has a lot to think about before introducing brutal and huge taxation on cryptocurrency payments.

Are the Companies that can be more Liquid in the game the ones that have the most investment? Well, it is one of the most disturbing questions because we cannot ask it, is it something that can happen, and do companies that are large because they have many investors work? Really, the largest companies must have good Investors , Casinos are companies that Handle money all the time, and in large quantities, what I believe is that things can be like that , but I don't know, I'm not sure if in reality They do move things that way, because it can be owned by a single owner with enough money to cover every problem.

But in today's companies , Getting ahead with a casino is very Difficult, because it implies having a lot of money, marketing strength and a talent for money to do things with Security, this is something that is seen and noticed, that is why a Company i liquid to take that concept, it will take about 5-6 Years to see its Performance.

i understand clearly that there are companies in the gambling space that has issues with users. It is important to note that I consider whoever in paying.

I don't ever concern myself with the companies finance, even though I know that it is necessary.

I consider consistency more, cause even though they have issues with liquidity, if they keep their payouts constant, they will be getting results which will translate to success where they can win investors trust and get anonymous investors

If a casino has a lot of players, it should mean that their service is good. Maybe liquidity is not the best indicator of quality but I guess that more money means that the casino can invest in its team and therefore in its site so that they can be even better. And liquidity is important when some unforeseen problems/issues occur, after all, money solves problems, especially if the casino gets hacked, how else do you cover the losses and stay in the business? Good service brings money, and maintaining good service will bring money in the long run and raise liquidity over time.
 

I share in your view, and truly liquidity should not be the yardstick to measure the effectiveness, integrity and reputation of any company. I must also say that I've witnessed this with companies before where the small ones in the industry served me better than the biggest ones. This has to do with the people behind the running of the company and their intention in running the company, and not the money they have. This is why it can't entirely be the gauge for anyone to choose the best casinos. Nonetheless, liquidity is still important all the time, especially for those who are wagering big amounts of money. Wagering such in small casinos could be an issue if you win too big, they could be greedy and that big winning could indeed put them in trouble if they did not manage their casinos well.

Not managing it well means that due to greed, they might accept a wagering risk more than what the casino could afford to bear when the time of payment is reached. This is not news, it is happening, and even if some could afford to pay a very big winning, that might severely affect the payments of the winnings games of other gamblers which makes it risky for them.

Well, with your points, which I so much agree with as well, I think that finding a reasonable conclusion is important. And my conclusion here is that it is not all highly liquid casinos that are bad, so let us find those ones that have been in the business for so long with good track records and reputations. I believe that gamblers can't go wrong doing this.

Liquidity is important for high rollers but it's not the best indicator about the quality of service. Some casinos can have a large liquidity because they've a huge number of customers and not because they have many high rollers playing there for example. And if such companies operate from offshore locations they won't care about being professional and customer friendly but mostly of making profits from their losses.

Regulations can't affect those who use non-custodial wallets and decentralized exchange platforms and also avoid KYC-focused casino platforms because your public wallet address that shows how many Bitcoins you have doesn't have a direct link to you which means that the government or the regulators cannot know that you are the owner of that wallet so that they can tax you for it or ask you for money just for using cryptocurrencies.

However, if you use KYC-based platforms and send and receive assets to your KYCed account from your main wallet, it will be revealed that you are the one who has custody of that wallet and then they can link it to you and then tax you for what you own or spend every time.

In my understanding and believe that,  those casino that hard long term of reputation but suddenly turn bad is as a result of either attack or other for issues,  sometime only one among the team member will betray the company and then pulled an exit on everyone involved.

But many times,  most of the reputable casinos have had a long-term of good reputation without many issues and unless some few ones that hard technical challenges but are back online now,  this is what differentiates legitimacy casinos and scam casinos,  the level of consistency and good reputation iswhatdifferentiatese them from each other.
Yeah, government need to put mechanisms in place to regulate everything that goes on in the ecosystem,  this is very important to the development and safety of all,  but aside from the government,  we as individuals still have the responsibility to guide ourselves and make sure to identify and expose fake casinos,  no matter what their tactics are and how long their choose to play the game.

But also we have to promote those that are meeting up to the standards of things and taking the time to build a good reputation for themselves,  and as much as possible operating in the most consistently accurate ways and manners whereby ttthesatisfactionn comes first before anything.

I don't know if there is any data regarding how many customers physical casinos have and how many customers online casinos have, but I believe that physical casinos probably don't have the same number of customers that online casinos have, this is due to many reasons. , such as the fact that many people live far from physical casinos and are people who work, so these people who work will not have time to go to physical casinos every day, also physical casinos are most of the time frequented by people with good financial conditions, so people with low financial conditions don't go to physical casinos because they feel embarrassed, so these people with low financial conditions prefer to play in online casinos

and when we look at the great ease that online casinos can provide, then people who do not have the opportunity to go and play in physical casinos will play in online casinos, but when we compare the profits that physical casinos can obtain against the profits that casinos online can get we can see that land-based casinos can move a lot of money and even though they have high operational costs such as salaries, drinks, taxes, water, electricity, infrastructure maintenance, land-based casinos can still make a lot of profit because the people who play in physical casinos they play with many millions of dollars

because in physical casinos people know that the chances of scams are very low, they know the owners of the casino and they know very well that the owner of the physical casino will not run away with the customers' money, because he will easily be arrested, and it would be without It makes sense for a rich physical casino owner to steal little money from customers, so in my opinion what makes physical casinos the ones that make the most money is the fact that physical casinos are more reliable

Although it seems to me that this is a good figure of $5k, because Calrouno says $2k for the mere fact that it is a figure that seems quite decent, but there are casinos that if you are going to make a withdrawal of $50-100usd then they already ask you the KYC , then these things can be a little more flexible, so when you talk About how to do Things better it may be that that amount can be given to a casino without problems, but I have seen that at any time the casinos prepare for your withdrawal They have to comply with the KYC , I don't know if in the future People will not play as much or become aware of the issue of identification because as I said , Adoption before was a problem  now the problem will be that People will Not want to comply with these requirements, because if the governments come to the Conclusion that those who manipulate crypto will have to pay high Sums of money in Taxes, because no one will want to pay it , at least in my country People will look for a way to evade it , the Government If you have too much money and don't have good Policies , then they obviously Won't Help.

If people in Europe Still think that they have to give the Government money for just using crypto , then things will be very different , it may be that they accept it and say yes to their conditions, but in the case of the majority, maybe they already They won't want this, so we all know what anonymity means, the privacy that no one is aware of how much money they manipulate, because in part if those things are known it is not good, it is also dangerous, I understand that part, so it is better to avoid this type of things so that other types of problems are not triggered later just by using crypto.

From the moment the KYC began to be issued for the excahges and casino, I knew that things were not going in the right direction, however in some Cases they have been able to enter with the regulations at full speed and the people Accept them, and incredible, for That talked about the $10k requirement, but $5k is acceptable.

 ~~~~~ snip. ~~~~~~


So, while discussing the topic of limits on payouts of winnings to a gambling player, I come to the conclusion that the $2K limit without mandatory KYC is clearly outdated and already requiires an upward revision.  You have listed excellent casinos that have proven themselves well and in general there are few complaints from   players about them, even here in the topics of our forum, which are dedicated specifically to these casinos.  And our forum is perhaps one of the few where the information is quite objective and reliable.  It would be good and correct if at least one of the casinos you listed would finally increase the limit on cryptocurrency transfers without KYC to the level of, well, maybe not $10K, but for starters at least to $5K.  
I understand that this may irritate local regulators, but it would allow anonymous players who actually have quite a lot of savings and cryptocurrencies to play.  
I think that the casino itself, which decided to take such a step, would seriously benefit not only from additional income from rich players, but also from the image of the casino, which is a supporter of cryptocurrency and supports the original purplose of cryptocurrency as a method of anonymous and reliable payments.

Well, personally , I think that things should be at $10k just like they do at the airports, after $10k, if the arguments are made about the origin of funds, for me that is all that should be done, but baado in that the casinos have their own rules, it is up to us to Accept if we want to have our data there and roseguri with the Records and everything, but personally for me things must be very different, I might think that things could be seen differently. In a different way, I have always said that when we are looking for a casino that does many good things, well it is difficult. I might think that if we are not in a casino things can be very difficult, if we want to have a good experience, well We have to go quickly to a casino that is highly reputable and something that focuses on Trust.

The core of all this is that they generate trust, because anyone who deposits, or likes having their money gnawed, does not like improper things being done to them and because of this I say that things will always be focused on doing the best possible for everyone, I can deduce that for me the most important thing in a casino is money, and for me as a player it will always be that, no matter how much one understands a game, or how much one can do, but The important thing about these things is that we manage to do things well, what I can recommend is that, in a casino what we must look for is trust, where to have safe money and here in the forum there are many casinos that are trustworthy, such as sportsbet.io, bitcasino.io, stake.com, duelbits, among others, because they are casinos that have a very good reputation, they are very well accepted in the crypto world, on the financial side and this is the only thing that really matters, because there will be no reason to doubt them, this is something that must be seen.

By the way, here are my views and reasoning regarding these same $2K.  
In my opinion, this requirement is gradually becoming obsolete, but for some reason no casinos and no regulatory authorities are trying to bring this value into line with global dollar inflation.  This am ount, in my opinion, already seems too small to necessarily be used as a boundary value so that players can freely transfer such amounts of money to their wallets.  In my opinion, this limit should already be set somewhere around $5K, which would really eliminate unnecessary difficulties for many players with this stupid fuss when passing the next verification under the KYC procedure.  It’s even better to set a limit for the amount you can withdraw without additional complications, even $10K.  
Although I certainly understand that the global banking lobby will still not allow a significant reduction in the requirements for control over money transfers.  They are actively demanding this damned KYC from citizens, now even in cryptocurrency paymonts.  And this is generally arrogance and interference in the private lives of citizens.  In this case, blatant interference in the lives of cryptocurrency owners.

I don't think anyone could be so conversant with the listed casinos by then OP, and if you read it well, some of them dated back to 2000, a year that many online casinos we have now are not in existence. In that year, the internet connection had just been introduced to my country and I do not think that an ordinary person had started using it back then not to talk of people developing their platforms for gambling online.

The OP has stated that he came about the list based on liquidity as guided by a certain Financial Index (Financial Index DATA40: iGaming (iG-D40)). But this is not how the website was spelt, still, it might be the truth as I see it. The OP did not even add a link to make it suspicious as though he has something to sell. I also believe that all these casinos are strong and recognized offline casinos, yet, they should all have their present online even if their strongest base is offline. I just searched for the first one (PhilWeb) and I was able to see their website.

I learned that things with the casinos with the KYC I will only trust the most reliable casinos to leave my KYC, if they are also reliable, they will not have any problem in responding to any adversity and to make any complaints, because I know that it will be fixed that Please answer me, because the casinos that are reliable take great care of their reputation, and they are not going to risk a KYC problem because they start complaining or creating a problem, except if it is about making a withdrawal of 300usd or less, they for that moment I don't believe Let them make a bigger problem, because that is a normal money that can be a withdrawal order, the big casinos do not form KYC problems for that, now it is a new casino, because those are their rules and their questions may be yes.

Therefore, in a new casino the most recommended thing is to be careful and not start inventing things, or things that are untrustworthy, because we are going to have the same deal with them, no, things change.

        -  Honestly, I don't know anything about the casinos mentioned by OP, and like other commenters have said, I'm too lazy to do research on the mentioned casinos, and it looks like the ones he mentioned are land-based casinos in my opinion.

Because I have not seen any crypto gambling with the most liquid in the field we live in today in this industry. Then there must be a source, at least for others to think that what OP is saying is credible.