Cryptocurrency exchanges are the thorn in the cryptocurrency market's flesh. Though, they are centralized platforms operating for a decentralized entity. But, they fail to keep themselves away from biased decisions. Recently, on July 5, Bitstamp posted that inactive accounts will pay a $10 bill on their next transaction. Such a decision became clear to them that users saw it as a biased rule to favor the platform; this morning they lifted the rule. However, users already left the exchange, and some users may lose interest in cryptocurrency due to such an order. An exchange with a reasonable board of admins should have thought things out before effecting such a rule knowing that they are many other competitors.

On the other hand, users complain that the exchange is demanding a $200 minimum deposit per month to keep an account active. So if a user fails to deposit up to $200 per month their account will get deactivated.

Such exchanges are making decisions outside the goal of cryptocurrency marketers or inventors. It shouldn't be this way. Some exchanges are centralized already. They should be a general central body that should govern every exchange in the cryptocurrency space. The decisions they come up with every day, and the threat of some exchanges going into bankruptcy in the cryptocurrency space is not helping this ecosystem. A rule should govern any existing exchange to keep things in place or the market will face more threats in the future. 






https://blog.bitstamp.net/post/bitstamp-cancels-plans-to-charge-inactivity-fee/

That's correct. It's an idiotic move, since the inactives will not know and would just lose that money. It's indeed very close to stealing.
I find it a desperate move, caused probably exactly by the fact people are no longer trade much there. But not problem, really, there are plenty of more welcoming exchanges - with or without KYC.


It doesn't matter. They've just lost a huge amount of credibility and I expect people continue to leave in big numbers. And this means lower liquidity, hence one more reason for the users leave.

flip the mindset..

a $10 fee a month is a way to say "stop using bitstamp as a bank account long term", the advice is and should be to take your funds out and own your own crypto in your own wallet.

if people want to stupidly leave funds in an exchange for over a month. then sure they should be charged..
.. ofcourse this $10 sum should go towards some custodian insurance reserve. but atleast it could/should teach people to stop holding value in exchanges when not actually actively using the exchange.

by now changing to a min holding to have free bank account is just playing into the lazy investors who want to treat bitstamp as a bank account

..
no one should think or advertise or treat an exchange as a bank account service to store funds for over a month without any activity

if your not using funds for a few weeks, TAKE THEM OUT of the exchange.

Well, it also means that if one wants to buy or sell only every couple of months, he better closes the account, creates a new one and does KYC.. every time? I find it counter productive, nobody will do that.
So you either day trade (basically) on Bitstamp, either go and find another exchange (and yes, keep most of the funds on your own wallet, obviously). And with this move I think that day traders will also leave.

Hence instead of "stop using bitstamp as a bank account long term" this will easily translate into "stop using bitstamp"

I can't comment for the rest of the world but here in the US many banks have an inactivity fee / minimum use requirements on certain types of accounts.
Many of the crypto debit cards out there also have inactivity fees as do some other services.
No exchanges that I can think of have fees for non use, but there are some that will close your account and take your funds if you don't log in / use it for a certain period of time.

-Dave

Although now cancelled, and obviously they dipped their toes in the wrong direction, the conditions did not require a 200 € equivalent balance on a monthly basis to avoid being charged, but rather applied if you hadn’t made a platform TX over the last 12 months AND your account’s balance was less than the equivalent of 200 €.

The key to avoiding the inactivity fee would have been to either make at least one platform TX over the last 12 months, or have an account balance of over or equal to 200 €.


Customers of Bitstamp US were to be exempt from the inactivity fee. Praise be …

I think Bitstamp is facing some financial issues. Otherwise, in a highly competitive market like crypto exchange, no company would take such a suicidal decision. It is pretty easy to trade in any other exchange instead of Bitstamp which wouldn't have any such inactivity fees.

My suggestion would be to leave this exchange for good and immediately withdraw all assets whatever you are keeping with them. Otherwise things could go out of your control pretty quickly.

Two years later and some are still surprised that some exchanges, even big ones have been charging this for years

And seems some have been improving their fees since I posted that, like Coindirect:


The others seem to have been keeping it around 5$ a month  


Most banks have such a thing, and the card providers have them too, even gambling sites will close your account and if the remaining sum is below the minimum deposit required the amount will be lost, I know that from a mail I've got from Betfair saying my precious 2.5$ will be lost if I don't log in and place a bet in the next 3 months. As for exchanges, there are far more with this practice than you imagine.

These new conditions may seem harsh, but in the end it is their exchange and they are free to set the conditions they want and the user is free to accept or not, but when you agree to the terms of service, you become obligated to implement all the laws of the exchange and you have no right to complain, from the point of view of the exchange if you do not want to trade so why keep your money there? If you keep it there you have to pay a fee for it.
Therefore, the best solution for those who do not wish to trade in this bear market is to withdraw those assets into a safe wallet instead of leaving them idle there without trading. I don't blame them frankly because the exchanges exist for trading and not for storing money. If the exchanges don't take trading fees how can they keep going?.

But the question is...who does leave their funds on an exchange that would lead to inactivity? They should take it out and put it to their own wallet and never use an exchange as a bank or wallet but anyway, if it's in their ToS then that's the fault most of the users didn't read. But if it's a new condition then that's a straight stealing though they put it as if it's the users fault but it's them and then they left the condition maybe after reading this topic or a lot of users already left after that tweet.