This kind of implementation might help those people dealing with fiat gambling. As you know, there are people who got hooked up with gambling and can really take those losses. Since fiat is heavily regulated, expect that the government will take action at these people. Proving that people can take those losses is not actually hard to do.
Don't worry though at a crypto-gambling activity. This will never be implemented even we count for decades. Crypto-gambling site will all be regulated but will not face those regulations that fiat gambling casino does especially at the part of the subject of the thread.
Topic: You have to prove that you can take the loss - page 12. (Read 1632 times)
What is the government concern with my loss in online gambling as taking loss had been a rule ever since gambling started, I have never seen a case where looser fights over his/her lost tickets for money recovery, this action is out of the box and I don't think bettors can perform such but can only happen in an agent shop.
The important implementation of online gambling kills the trouble aspects of not proving lost bets as the Los happen right in your home with no one to blame for any sort of reasons.
The important implementation of online gambling kills the trouble aspects of not proving lost bets as the Los happen right in your home with no one to blame for any sort of reasons.
This regulation will be problematic to the casinos most especially, because their revenues will surely be diminished because of it. But on the other hand this is actually a good thing to gamblers. Many might be accepting this new initiative with grumbles but this is going to be beneficial to them.
Many will be saved from losing bigger amounts. Many will be saving time. Perhaps many will be kept busy doing something else rather than get too hooked on to gambling.
Many will be saved from losing bigger amounts. Many will be saving time. Perhaps many will be kept busy doing something else rather than get too hooked on to gambling.
Don't you understand that any costs incurred by the casino will ultimately waste by the players? As in any area where there is a producer/consumer. Players will pay for all changes, and how good they are is a very controversial issue.
Well, this regulation of the gambling casino that has a limit of loss then, --accept where your limit end and should also have a limit on your loss.
Losses £100 will be fine and should not beyond on that amount, this perhaps controls gamblers from addiction, and no more family will suffer if one of the gamblers has a limit upon spending their money. But I think, this is a case per case basis and it will depend on the player's salary per month versus the amount limit should spend in gambling.
Losses £100 will be fine and should not beyond on that amount, this perhaps controls gamblers from addiction, and no more family will suffer if one of the gamblers has a limit upon spending their money. But I think, this is a case per case basis and it will depend on the player's salary per month versus the amount limit should spend in gambling.
I would talk about the situation in US where people are getting stimulus checks worth $1200 and also gambling some bucks out of these. Even if they 'lose and' take those losses for granted, it will be stupid for them to gamble during the worst times of the century. It is not their own money but given as a help to survive the pandemic situation, and gambling is not a thing to do for them till everything settles.
Anyway even if it's approved this won't be a problem to most of us crypto gamblers since it's only from the UK while most crypto casinos are regulated by Curacao.
Yeah,,,you are right. This kinda regulations will not gonna change a lot for crypto oriented casinos. After implementing this type of regulations specific gambling platforms who don't allow crypto currency will gonna lose a big number of gamblers for sure and if i am not wrong then gamblers will change looking for crypto accepted gambking destination.As far as i know professional gamblers don't like to reveal their personal information and when its a matter of gambling they won't love to play with limitations.
So the source of the problem is because of the pandemic, because with this pandemic people will try and will continue to make efforts to earn income online and income from everything is not only about gambling, so the problem here is not about gambling addiction but about continuing to try to gamble to earn an income. But if it's just about being able to prove that you can accept losses, then the overhaul of the existing rules should indeed be adjusted to the current situation so that whatever the problem is can be controlled wisely and better in the current situation.
It's not a good idea to regulate online gambling, because if it comes to regulation, it definitely requires KYC procedures.
And limiting losses is not a profitable action for online casino, if it is realized it will reduce online casino income.Then it is
also possible that many gambling sites will go bankrupt.
And limiting losses is not a profitable action for online casino, if it is realized it will reduce online casino income.Then it is
also possible that many gambling sites will go bankrupt.
Wawa2013 these regulations have a goal to control people, it's not about online casinos profit, it's for people to spend
less money on gambling. This will hurt online gambling industry!
I don't know can use VPN and crypto gambling sites help UK citizens. I would like to hear someone from there to
comment this, it will help us to better understand situation there.
If the results are good in the UK you can bet they will implement it elsewhere. It's not that bad, especially when considering that if the gambler loses a lot the government will have to give them social benefits.
Perhaps on countries where social benefits are really good for those with low wages and no work, they might see/feel the need to implement a similar regulation so as to reduce the number of people falling into the debt oblivion. But for real, the general population that gambles contribute to the economy by just losing there alone, and even online gambling opens up jobs for other people especially in these times when one cannot simply visit a gambling house. Why the need for such strict regulations and not something that could help the scene grow?
It's not a good idea to regulate online gambling, because if it comes to regulation, it definitely requires KYC procedures.
And limiting losses is not a profitable action for online casino, if it is realized it will reduce online casino income.Then it is
also possible that many gambling sites will go bankrupt.
And limiting losses is not a profitable action for online casino, if it is realized it will reduce online casino income.Then it is
also possible that many gambling sites will go bankrupt.
If the results are good in the UK you can bet they will implement it elsewhere. It's not that bad, especially when considering that if the gambler loses a lot the government will have to give them social benefits.
Perhaps on countries where social benefits are really good for those with low wages and no work, they might see/feel the need to implement a similar regulation so as to reduce the number of people falling into the debt oblivion. But for real, the general population that gambles contribute to the economy by just losing there alone, and even online gambling opens up jobs for other people especially in these times when one cannot simply visit a gambling house. Why the need for such strict regulations and not something that could help the scene grow?
This must have a big impact to the profitability of the casinos, especially the regulated ones where gamblers needs to perform the KYC before they can gamble. However, in crypto space where gambling is anonymous, I think there will be no effect, and besides how can we prove to them if they don't know us since they are offering an anonymous gambling platform.
Me, I should not worry as I am a crypto casino gamblers for years already.
Not really you can't prove to them your winnings. We had lucky names provided by the gambler before playing in the gambling platform. There is no need to do KYC if gambling platform does not require it but it could be a good way to.inform them.that you had been comeback from losses by using a single username. This will become a trademark on you and this is a very good revenge for the gambling platform you had joined.Me, I should not worry as I am a crypto casino gamblers for years already.
This regulation will be problematic to the casinos most especially, because their revenues will surely be diminished because of it. But on the other hand this is actually a good thing to gamblers. Many might be accepting this new initiative with grumbles but this is going to be beneficial to them.
Many will be saved from losing bigger amounts. Many will be saving time. Perhaps many will be kept busy doing something else rather than get too hooked on to gambling.
Many will be saved from losing bigger amounts. Many will be saving time. Perhaps many will be kept busy doing something else rather than get too hooked on to gambling.
Based on the other thread it is said that those casinos which are regulated doesn't need to require KYCs for this. They will continue to do the same except for the new thing which is proving themselves within having a loss of $100 or maybe £100. I don't think it would be that big for them to gamble underground.
I think they have to require KYC during the registration if the £100 monthly losses gets implemented because casinos can't just guess or assume which of their gamblers aren't capable of handling the losses. Anyway even if it's approved this won't be a problem to most of us crypto gamblers since it's only from the UK while most crypto casinos are regulated by Curacao.I agree. Online gambling here in our country, as far as I know is illegal since I heard that POGOs here only offer their services to online casinos which costumers are feom other countries. This wouldn't be a problem to most of us here. But, if it is, I guess for me that cap is too much.
Based on the other thread it is said that those casinos which are regulated doesn't need to require KYCs for this. They will continue to do the same except for the new thing which is proving themselves within having a loss of $100 or maybe £100. I don't think it would be that big for them to gamble underground.
I think they have to require KYC during the registration if the £100 monthly losses gets implemented because casinos can't just guess or assume which of their gamblers aren't capable of handling the losses. Anyway even if it's approved this won't be a problem to most of us crypto gamblers since it's only from the UK while most crypto casinos are regulated by Curacao.If the regulations are implemented in the UK, I think the other countries will not get the effect, and the gamblers can still playing gambling, even they will get losses more than $100. I think the gamblers don't have to prove themselves of having a loss of $100 because I think for some gamblers, that will be an embarrassing thing for them because they told other people or government about their losses. I guess that crypto gambling will not be a problem because we can select the gambling website, which doesn't require KYC to play gambling.
I wonder what kind of prove they are looking just to verify that a certain gamblers can handle their losses. Most of the governments will surely try
to regulate any casinos that are operating in their country not only because they are worried about the gambling addiction but
because they need the money that came from the casinos.
Casinos are in disadvantage if limits will be implemented as they will surely take a loss rather than gain and once it will happen then casinos will be forced
to close.
to regulate any casinos that are operating in their country not only because they are worried about the gambling addiction but
because they need the money that came from the casinos.
Casinos are in disadvantage if limits will be implemented as they will surely take a loss rather than gain and once it will happen then casinos will be forced
to close.
Based on the other thread it is said that those casinos which are regulated doesn't need to require KYCs for this. They will continue to do the same except for the new thing which is proving themselves within having a loss of $100 or maybe £100. I don't think it would be that big for them to gamble underground.
I think they have to require KYC during the registration if the £100 monthly losses gets implemented because casinos can't just guess or assume which of their gamblers aren't capable of handling the losses. Anyway even if it's approved this won't be a problem to most of us crypto gamblers since it's only from the UK while most crypto casinos are regulated by Curacao.If the regulations are implemented in the UK, I think the other countries will not get the effect, and the gamblers can still playing gambling, even they will get losses more than $100. I think the gamblers don't have to prove themselves of having a loss of $100 because I think for some gamblers, that will be an embarrassing thing for them because they told other people or government about their losses. I guess that crypto gambling will not be a problem because we can select the gambling website, which doesn't require KYC to play gambling.
I do not know how substantiated these ideas are (perhaps there is something useful in them), but I know one thing for sure - the more government control and regulation, the more expensive the final product is for the consumer. Thank God that for the foreseeable future, blockchain will allow gamblers from all over the world to live the way they want without having to ask their governments for permission.
Based on the other thread it is said that those casinos which are regulated doesn't need to require KYCs for this. They will continue to do the same except for the new thing which is proving themselves within having a loss of $100 or maybe £100. I don't think it would be that big for them to gamble underground.
I think they have to require KYC during the registration if the £100 monthly losses gets implemented because casinos can't just guess or assume which of their gamblers aren't capable of handling the losses. Anyway even if it's approved this won't be a problem to most of us crypto gamblers since it's only from the UK while most crypto casinos are regulated by Curacao. 
I don't have to prove anything but I can take any losses that I'm aware of gambling with.
There are countries already that have regulated online gambling and some decided to ban and won't operate through it. I think the reason for others to prohibit it so the land-based casinos won't have any competition.
But if they allow so, they might be looking into crypto casinos too.
Casinos should be the one to regulate about gamblers losses but unfortunately, there is such a thing as privacy concern and protecting data of their customers, it's like a bank where they need to protect their clients because these casinos rely heavily on their high rollers and high rollers do not want to public what they spend in gambling.There are countries already that have regulated online gambling and some decided to ban and won't operate through it. I think the reason for others to prohibit it so the land-based casinos won't have any competition.
But if they allow so, they might be looking into crypto casinos too.
So whichever the local govt will instruct them to do so, they'll just have to obey if they want to keep operating. About the high rollers, they certainly want to take care of them, vip treatment and don't want to go to another casino, online or local.
on where they do limit such amount in monthly basis but we know that it can easily be hit up even on a part time gambler.
For Vip's or huge spender then casinos will really find a way to retain those players because they do know that it will really be a huge loss of them on losing those players
yet we know on how casinos do make profit.
This new rule or law sucks big time on their part.
They just can't let go of those people because they are the bread and butter of that casino. It is a matter of compliance on their end while understanding on the side of the government as they are a business that has to be retained if they have a huge number of customers.
Jump to: