My new hobby is going to garage sales and buying old computers and hard drives. It's like a treasure hunt

It's not a threshold, it would be dependent on the levels of financial activity and balance on any given account. Point is anybody working in finance in Europe (and probably most of the Western world) has to by law undertake AML training, pass a basic AML test and adhere to AML reporting procedures (it's a criminal offence to partake in ML (14 years max) it's also a criminal offence not to report it - correctly - if you SUSPECT it (5 years max).

It is for that reason the UK retail banking industry is pretty much steering clear of CC, because of the ML connotations, and their fear that they cannot fufil their legal AML duties if they get caught up in it. (I'm talking operationally here...I'm well aware that various banks have expressed a "keen interest" in the possibilities).

The latest statement by the UK FCA on CC is basically... it's not money, it's not regulated, do wtf you want with it, but don't knock on our door if it goes belly up.

I have no idea if CC has a "regulated" future. I do know it does not have an "unregulated" one.

One industry guy I know several years ago lost his phone, it held 4 coins.

(I think you might be on to something.)

A good, informative post, but you miss three points ...

1. The banking reticence you describe is very real, but were it easy everyone would do it. There is a large portion of the financial services industry that is not a "bank."
2. CC and blockchain technology both have regulated futures; it is in the nature of regulation to seek areas for expansion. To a certain extent of course, regulation might prohibit or strangle some applications of the technology, which segues to the third point below.
3. If some use case exists, where CC or blockchain tech supports a useful application, it will continue to exist in an unregulated manner. For example, as long as cash is king, CC will exist.

The guy talking about cryptos not having inherent risk because of the 5000% increase in 5 years has zero understanding of financial instruments and risk.

Also why would a poker company use a trading exchange to transfer bitcoin to fiat. It is so unecessary for them. Transactions are also very expensive and slow. Bitcoin is also not scarce and people using this as an argument are morons.

There is and will only ever be a finite amount of gold, platinum, palladium etc.

Bitcoin is computer code, the scarcity was decided a japanese guy and there are now 1000s of cryptos. Something isnt scare because people say it is.

Maybe a company that holds BTC assets might need to match them to some fiat currencies in order to pay fiat-denominated liabilities ?

Alternatively, they might have "an understanding of financial instruments and risk" and adjust their exposure to currency risk among their financial or commodities holdings ?

I don't know, you asking your question rhetorically perhaps ?

I was yes.

Why would Amaya want to take on the role of a commodity speculator? Bitcoin is a commodity not a currency by most metrics.

Also when you run a heavily regulated business on the fringe of acceptability doi you want to expose yourself to using a currency that has been used for nefarious purpose and isnt regulated? seems unwise

You are posing questions that probably every igaming site and many regulators that considers bitcoin as a payments method has looked at, going back to 2012. The thread title notwithstanding, a number of online gambling companies, including poker sites, accept cryptocurrency.

Acceptance of bitcoin generally is regulated, both through AML/Terrorist Financing restrictions, and specifically by a number of gaming regulators.

The cost savings from processing crypto deposits and cashouts are significant. Additional savings lie in certainty and speed of transactions.

No gaming operator or other merchant need become a commodities speculator as markets exist to lay off the risks associated with accepting/holding crypto.

The Chicago Merc will offer futures trading on BTC, a prospect that Goldman Sachs reportedly is planning for.

Your point is? These futures are cash settled and will make companies able to create long (holding coins) and short (selling futures) portfolios. However the shorts have 0 effect on the underlying asset price as they are CASH SETTLED. I suspect many people holding bitcoin wont be aware of the difference between traditional futures and cash settled futures market so this probably will likely have an impact on markets.

I have no real view on bitcoin and have made money day trading it for a little while. It is FAR too volatile to use as a payment method. It is slow, it is expensive, it is not legal tender, markets are unregulated and susceptible to manipulation look at BCH/BTC 2 weeks ago.........


mod edit: I have highlighted the new material in blue to distinguish it from the prior poster's posted material
mod warning: please take care when quoting prior posts, either by breaking up the post into multiple quoted sections or by using color coding

To be clear all the bolded portion of your post is your writing, not mine. . If you want to engage in some dialogue with yourself, go ahead but leave me out of it.

Currency risk from acquiring BTC can be laid off with little effort and adjustments to match assets and liabilities are a typical treasury function for a multi-national business, but hey.... why bother to argue the point ?

Must be some reason why Microsoft, Expedia, the Louisiana State Republican Party, Save The Children et al. accept Bitcon as payments.

https://99bitcoins.com/who-accepts-b...take-bitcoins/

Yeah, but the question is, why doesn't Stars (or any of the other market-leading poker sites).

nice one. 4 humor points.


Do the regulations where these regulated sites are regulated by the regulated bodies allow for the use of cryto?

UK Daily Telegraph today...UK Regulator beginning to wake up and flex its considerable muscle in a very predictable fashion. Go after the ICO money makers and make them accountable for tax on their gains. They won't give a **** about the technololgy (and even less about the so-called "cultural decentralised evolution of money".)

They will just pitch up at the ICO bosses front door and invite them to fill in a tax return or have a one-sided dialogue with the SFO about Tax Evasion (crime) and ML (crime).

I have no idea what this will have on the overall "project", but it sure as **** gonna hurt some of the dudes in the UK who have trousering significant wonga.

fyp

Three out of four is not bad, but you forgot to say "regulated use".

Malta is certainly moving forward in that regard:

http://www.mga.org.mt/malta-gaming-a...ency-projects/

Feb. 2020 100% of Planet Earth's electricity will be required to mine Bitcoin. It'll be tough to shop for a new planet without electricity. The good news is counting trouser wonga can still be done by candlelight.

Planet earth has enough "electricity" for billions of years from heavy water alone.

Whew good to know. The interwebs had me worried for a minute. Electricity is a cool invention.

I think you are referring to the instant exchange back to fiat which is obviously a technological reality. If there is another risk you are thinking of describe it and I'll explain how its technologically solved with citations from the software solutions and projects that solve it. We could go through the code together. And if we want we can go talk to the experts together.