BITSTAMP exchange biased rule that chased users away

[franky1]

bitstamp small print
"the fee will not result in a negative balance on your account. So, if your balance is zero. your account will not be affected by this change"

this means TAKE YOUR FUNDS OUT, but dont close the account.
then when you want to use it. do a deposit. but when you finished using it that day/week withdraw it again. and avoid the fee's

a zero balance = no fee

[GreatArkansas]

It seems they are working like the banks. I remember here in our country, there are some banks that will charge you some amount once your balance falls below the agreed maintaining balance. It really sucks.

I am also curious, what is the difference when they will just ignore the inactive users than charging them? It's not making any sense for me.

[Saint-loup]

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?.

It's sad to still read in 2022 this kind of words. No, crypto users are not ships or cows ready to be milked by platforms. And exchanges are not free to do what they want with their customers, because scamming people is forbidden anywhere on earth.
As you said when an user registers into a platform he agrees the ToS, then if the platform doesn't want to respect them anymore and wants to change them they must offer a compensation for not respecting the initial contract anymore. Did Bitstamp at least offer to users to withdraw their funds without any withdrawal fees and KYC? I didn't hear that.
They've just tried to apply this new condition because they have the strictest KYC rules of all the exchanges afaik and many accounts are not accessible by their owners anymore because of that. But fortunately they've failed.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

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.

Or just don't create an account and use Bitstamp at all, there are lots of exchanges out there with no such rule.

From the way I look at the rule, they are instead forcing clients to use the exchange to store their crypto. More like "transact this number of times during this period and keep a minimum balance in our exchange or else we shall charge you an inactivity fee"

[examplens]

I didn't really follow what happened with Bitstamp and their new rules, but I received email notifications where they abandon this stupid policy of charging fees for inactive accounts.

We will NOT be introducing the inactivity fee
A few days ago, you received an email from us regarding changes to our fee structure, specifically the introduction of an inactivity fee for accounts that met certain criteria. Please disregard this email, your account has not been charged and we will not be introducing the inactivity fee.
At Bitstamp, our customers and the security of your funds are our first priority. We strive to offer you the best crypto service and that also means listening to your feedback. After hearing from our community we understand your concerns and changed course.

[sunsilk]

It shouldn't really be this way. Although there's this vital role of these exchanges in the whole crypto market but to abuse that privilege that they have, they're just pushing away their customers. This isn't the first crash that bitstamp has and why is it that they're doing the same rule as the other exchanges just to make themselves alive?

Those rules are naive.

They've been in the business for quite a while and then making this set of rules would really push the customers away.

and some users may lose interest in cryptocurrency due to such an order.

Possible but I don't think that they'll come into that point because they'll just ship to another better exchange.

[noorman0]

-snip-
I am also curious, what is the difference when they will just ignore the inactive users than charging them? It's not making any sense for me.

I think this rule is more demanding for inactive users with a certain amount of balance. When a user becomes inactive it is clear that their income will decrease, while they still have some company fees even if the user becomes inactive and only leaves their funds with the same insurance rights.

[bitbollo]

who knows which highly decorated executive came up with such a stupid idea

for many, many reasons ....
holding crypto requires no effort.
outside is full of exchanges competing to attract new users.
forcing users to stake coins or transact is just a non-sense move.

I am not surprised they changed immediately idea

[Anonylz]

They should change their board of advisors imo, such decision won't come to light without running it through the decision making bodies in that company and i wonder how the hell they ever thought this is the right way to make inactive accounts active! like seriously?
Has it not occur to them there is a reason so many accounts are inactive! the reasonable thing to do would have been finding out why and proffer an attractive incentives or something to make users want to be active again. No wonder i have never heard of them.