- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
why would you thinks checks would set off alarms and faster than electronic transfers?
And what alarm are you concerned with? not paying taxes or somthing?
allfreechips wrote:why would you thinks checks would set off alarms and faster than electronic transfers?And what alarm are you concerned with? not paying taxes or somthing?
EFT ACH is electronic, there is not a physical being looking at each and every one of them. A check on the other hand will be viewed by a physical being, if they see a 50,000 check coming from isle of man or some other small island/country every couple of weeks for instance its going to make them phsyically go hmmmmmm what does this person do. Sure the electronic transactions can trigger checks as well, but they are in my opinion anyway safer; maybe its just paranoia talking.
Professor wrote:Roxy just indicated they wont do ACH to US affiliates either….:rockband:
Gooner make it stop!
Once click2pay and payspark leave; and they surely will; USA affiliates are going to be up a shit creek without a paddle. Our supposed lifelong earnings are going to vanish over night. :shots:
is it time yet to take frist to court for abuse of power?
Its geting real damn close.. let me tell you
I didnt receive notice from Roxy, but have click2pay and payspark, might be ok for a month… but….if US players can’t deposit, which 75 percent of mine are…I won’t have to worry about collecting
I think most of us are going to lose 50% of our incomes very soon.I dont know about the rest of you but im learning japanese lol
私は私達のほとんどがあなたの残りについて私達の収入非常に. の50% 知らない 勉強の日本の を失おうとしていることを考える
casinobonusguy wrote:I think most of us are going to lose 50% of our incomes very soon.I dont know about the rest of you but im learning japanese lol私は私達のほとんどがあなたの残りについて私達の収入非常に. の50% 知らない 勉強の日本の を失おうとしていることを考える
Sorry, you overseas folk will lose 50%, us USA folk will lose 100%. As bad as your situation sounds I would much rather be in your shoes.
axl wrote:I thought ACH was very hard to trace and very safe gooner?ACH does not contain a source – or sender – other than a generic source bank branch. There just are not the fields in the format to handle this.
However, as I said earlier you could potentially identify the sender if they put their name (or company) in the statmenting details. Change the statement details and you’d be fine.
Interersting for the FEDS to spot these they must have sample affiliate accounts, or be monitoring accounts of known affiliates.
So they might still by knocking on the door and asking the professor about these new $30K entries each month eh?
:whoa:Another option might be that the Online casinos have wandered into the US bank and when they joined up to this declared that they were a Gambling operation …. and their bank has cancelled their registration as the result of pressure and the legislation.
(Just like the credit card companies stopped allowing casinos)
But … there are plenty of options to successfully use ACH that are available :
(1) Re-register (probably as a new bank) as something like an “advertising consultancy firm”.
(2) Or submit payments via an international bank.But hell, this is stuff I do (or did) in a previous career – and if affiliate mangers seriously want advice on how to bank internationally – then I’m available at a reasonable daily rate.
:tounge2:The issue probably is that this is now a GREY AREA – and (perhaps) technically the funds could be confiscated by the US Govenment ?
If affiliates are on a “share of profits” commission payment – then I guess it could be argued that you are aiding and abetting and profitting from online gambling …
So are the funds forfeit if detected?
I have NO idea about the legal ramifications.
And this might be the real issue.To me it seems that casinos are no longer TRYING to use ACH rather than the method being stopped … it seems to be as a result of the same “big stick” waving and scare tactics that forced these guys out of the US space to start with.
I don’t actually see payments being detected …
I don’t know of payments being detected …
It’s really not possible to detect the payments (other than as stated above)
:sarcasm:TheGooner wrote:If affiliates are on a “share of profits” commission payment – then I guess it could be argued that you are aiding and abetting and profitting from online gambling …I would agree with you on that, but I think they could also argue that you were aiding and abetting and making a profit from it if you were merely accepting flat rate advertising. You would still be the individual or group responsible for sending the gambler to the site, you would still be getting paid for that activity.
Sadly, the government will turn things upside down inside out any way they want to benefit their current view point.
I had to speak to my lawyer on a different matter 2 weeks ago and he ‘strongly recommended’ that I would stop taking percentage /COMMISSIONS and move my business to a marketing /advertising platform. So from one lawyers point of view he didnt see the commission vs flat rate as being the same .
