e-wallet no bonuses

[FictionNet]

I really hope I'm not the only person who doesn't know the answer to this - seems like a very newbie question that I should already know the answer to.

Q. Why do many online casinos not offer the welcome deposit bonuses if the transaction is made via e-wallet? Usually, it's Neteller and Skrill highlighted as excluded. Is there a massive fee using the e-wallets that makes it not worthwhile to give the player a bonus? If so, that seems too short-sighted to be realistic (in my eyes) as any fee now would potentially be more than offset by future revenue from the player.

Or is it nothing to do with fees?

And whilst I'm moaning about e-wallet, what the hell is it with so many casino sites' banking pages still showing 'Moneybookers' instead of 'Skrill', seven years after the company rebranded. I totally understand showing 'Skrill/Moneybookers' to avoid confusion but to only display 'Moneybookers' now smacks of a very out of date banking page.

Happy bloody Christmas, everyone!

[Mattbar]

I think it is largely due to past abuses where people have used duplicate Skrill/Neteller accounts to claim multiple bonuses. The initial verification is not as thorough as with a bank account and you can use many eWallet accounts on a limited level without verification, enough to abuse bonuses at least.

I'm sure there are other reasons too, but that's the one that I'm aware of.

[FictionNet]

I think it is largely due to past abuses where people have used duplicate Skrill/Neteller accounts to claim multiple bonuses. The initial verification is not as thorough as with a bank account and you can use many eWallet accounts on a limited level without verification, enough to abuse bonuses at least.

I'm sure there are other reasons too, but that's the one that I'm aware of.

Could make sense, but e-wallets have actually insisted on more ID from me than when opening bank accounts :/

[baldidiot]

Using gnomes for matched betting / casino whoring used to be a massive problem back in the day - I think it's more likely this than fake ewallets.

[FictionNet]

Using gnomes for matched betting / casino whoring used to be a massive problem back in the day - I think it's more likely this than fake ewallets.

No idea what the 'gnomes' are but shouldn't wagering req. and other t&c handle any amount of accounts opened, and bonuses claimed? What am I missing?

[baldidiot]

It's opening multiple accounts using the ID and ewallet of a friend/neighbour/family member etc.. I guess the theory is that it's more likely to happen with ewallets than debit cards, but some people probably do it with bank accounts (especially these days with all the digital banks).

xxx.matchedbettingmentor.com/multi-accounting/

Was rampant when bonus whoring was more profitable. Sure it still goes on today though.

Unless I'm wrong and an AM wants to chime in and correct me?

[FictionNet]

It's opening multiple accounts using the ID and ewallet of a friend/neighbour/family member etc.. I guess the theory is that it's more likely to happen with ewallets than debit cards, but some people probably do it with bank accounts (especially these days with all the digital banks).

xxx.matchedbettingmentor.com/multi-accounting/

Was rampant when bonus whoring was more profitable. Sure it still goes on today though.

Unless I'm wrong and an AM wants to chime in and correct me?

Appreciate that. Even so, I wouldn't fancy taking on most casinos' welcome bonuses' wagering requirements these days, no matter how I deposited. Deffo agree that some AM input would be interesting.

[Triple7]

Lots of bonus "abuse" as far as I've understood.

[TheGooner]

It's the fees. Merchant charges range from 2% to 4% of total value.

[Progger]

Lots of bonus "abuse" as far as I've understood.

Default AM answer. ?
This does not make sense...

Here is not one reason for a player to open 2 accounts....just for the Bonus ? What ? High risk!
Move on to a another casino and open a account...take the Bonus and burn it down...

Gooner is is probably right...

[Renee]

I can confirm that there are abuse rings that use those 2 ewallets. I cannot mention the exact method though.
I would assume that's why they are not available for use with bonuses at some places.

Cheers

[FictionNet]

I can confirm that there are abuse rings that use those 2 ewallets. I cannot mention the exact method though.
I would assume that's why they are not available for use with bonuses at some places.

Cheers

Thanks for the insight, and I understand you not wanting to go into details. At least I've got some rough idea - it really made no sense to me before

[EdgarJoseph14]

1. As, others pointed out already:
E-wallets donÆt have a security verification from the website point of view, and George can very well use JohnÆs ewallet to deposit. So from a website point of view, they canÆt judge if the players joining are Bonus Hunters, who create multiple accounts on the site, to take advantage of the free bonuses. In counter, the banking options, required the payment gateway to verify the identity of the player and the banking records, before deposits were successful. This was completely true during the transition period when many new e-wallet options were popping up.

But, we can now see that sites have started to embrace the e-wallet options more, due to its convenience, for the players, as well as the secure way in which money is delivered to the website. Players are now actively looking for exclusive bonus offers for ewallets, since most of them already have ewallet account.
The websites counter the influx of bonus hunters, through setting up specific criteria for the bonus to be available to play and also multiple wagering requirements that make it safe for them.
This is very similar to the scenario of ôuse & throwö Email ids that have come up. Email verification is not trusted much as a validation in many sites. They much prefer players who verify their mobile numbers. But email ids are still mandatory for registration on websites. E-wallets faced the same earlier, but are making a comeback now.

2. Moneybookers-
Most probably for nostalgia, old guys still call it that way even though its re-branded to Skrill in 2013 and it was bought in 2015 by Optimal Payments (Brand Paysafe, who already own Neteller). Some sites have already started giving both Skrill & Neteller together, since its æbuy 1 get 1 freeÆ for these e-wallets now and calling it ôSkrill/Netellerö, instead of Moneybookers, esp. the new gaming sites. ItÆs the prehistoric sites that still list it as Moneybookers.

[Sherlock]

It is 100% the abuse issue. Very easy to make profit from bonus, most likely you do not need to fulfill the rollover, you just arb the money away. After all this is a professional betting - taking any +EV bet and not some crazy tipping on games. Multiaccounting is normal.

It is true that Skrill and Neteller have now hard KYC policy. But it is psychological issue, it is ewallet, not a bank. Desperate losers sell their identity for this easier, plus the money are not at the risk of seizure like at the bank. Another thing is that once you start rolling money from and to casinos, and you do just that in a bank, the bank will ask questions. Skrill/NT will not ask, they will ask you for more action. Also Skrill participate on this scheme, as you know they have no 1.5% p2p fees, no cap. It is because they make a lot from those pro-bettors/bonus hunters.

It has nothing to do with fees. CCs have roughly the same fees.