Crypto exchanges charging for inactive accounts . Do you support this ?

[dunfida]

There is a new practice among crypto exchanges to charge its users if they are inactive on the exchange. Some f the examples are

1) Zebpay: It is an Indian exchange that charges some fees from users if they have not done any trade in any month. It is still having this rule on the platform.

2)Bitstamp: Another exchange which added this rule was Bitstamp. It planned to charge 10 euros ($10.27) per month for inactive accounts.

Personally, I am against these charges and it affects the rate of crypto adoption. It discourages people from starting to use crypto. What is your opinion about this practice ?

When a certain platform or site or service do charge out something on being inactive or in idle then it does simply imply that these companies arent earning sufficient money or income. 

How the hell they would really be making up these kind of considerations or actions in charging up someone who had been inactive for so long.Whats the point?

If its blocked or been not used then this simply indicates that people had left and transfer on other place or just simply had forgotten their accounts.
How this one would be impose or implied? Its just no sense.People would really be seeing this thing negatively.

[EdenHazard]

There always pros and cons.

This time around a policy to charge those people with inactive account to avoid dormant one and get back with million dollars in value after years being dormant.
As in crypto it's something very possible for you to put $100 and turn into million dollars within 10 years , this is a 50:50 policy for me.

[GreatArkansas]

There always pros and cons.

This time around a policy to charge those people with inactive account to avoid dormant one and get back with million dollars in value after years being dormant.
As in crypto it's something very possible for you to put $100 and turn into million dollars within 10 years , this is a 50:50 policy for me.

Yeah, because there are a lot of users that use centralized exchanges to store their funds just like personal wallets. So it is really bad for the customers that will pay the fee for inactive accounts.
I believe that these centralized exchange got reasons just like "maintenance fees".
I am also curious what if the account got no balance at all in the exchang? Are they closing it?

[Woodie]

There is a new practice among crypto exchanges to charge its users if they are inactive on the exchange. Some f the examples are

1) Zebpay
2)Bitstamp

Maintenance fee charged on dormant accounts will grow their profits in the short run, but will also hit them hard on their custormer base as few will subscribe to this nonsense.
In the first place, why didn't these guys come up with a service which allows users to buy a cold wallet slot which can act as some kind of insurance and security feature that can be used to safe guard a user's coins from theft and the alike....

I also know such exchanges, such as Latoken, Exmo, etc. My personal opinion - just stay away from such exchanges. I find this policy of crypto exchange management inadmissible and simply cheeky

I wonder why unpopular exchanges are in the forefront of implementing such, is this the new way exchanges are  making their money...

[wiss19]

I beg to differ, for this only case. With banks being picky in many countries about where the money comes from, this can easily become a problem if one sells Bitcoin.

I've never used one, given my well known stance on KYC and privacy, but my point was I don't want to sell my bitcoin at all. I want to spend it directly with merchants and retailers, so what the banks think is irrelevant.

That is the point of bitcoin in the end. If you are buying bitcoin with the hopes that you will sell it for more fiat then you did not learn the main purpose of bitcoin. I believe that the main purpose of bitcoin is exactly how you use it, not needing to cash it out to fiat, but to use it directly.

If I can sell my cash and buy bitcoin and then just stay in the bitcoin world and never invest into anything else, just use bitcoin to buy even a grape, then that means bitcoin reached the level it was supposed to reach. That will take a bit more time, we still have to cash out for many things but in the end we are doing as fine as we possibly could at this moment.

[o_e_l_e_o]

In the first place, why didn't these guys come up with a service which allows users to buy a cold wallet slot which can act as some kind of insurance and security feature that can be used to safe guard a user's coins from theft and the alike....

There already is such a thing which gives you the security to protect your coins against theft, insolvency, bad loans, exit scams, ridiculous inactivity fees, and so on. It's called a wallet. Preferably a hardware wallet or a proper cold wallet.

It doesn't matter what product a centralized exchange is offering, or if they offer some sort of separate account for "cold" storage. The bottom line is the coins are not yours, they still belong 100% to the exchange, and the exchange can do anything they like with them, regardless of what type of account they are in or what the exchange claims in regards to their security or whatever.

Take Coinbase as an example. They used to host Coinbase "vaults", which required additional passwords and time delays to be able to move your coins out of them. Great for extra security, right? Until they discontinued these vaults and a bunch of users with coins in the vaults are unable to access them anymore.

[tranthidung]

There is a new practice among crypto exchanges to charge its users if they are inactive on the exchange.

They even can write in their ToS that they have full rights to close your account and seize money in it. If I recalled correctly, in the past Poloniex had that point in their ToS.

Disagree or not, if you did not read their ToS or search in FAQs, it means you agree with their terms which will be applied on your account.

29. UNCLAIMED PROPERTY

If Poloniex is unable to return your Tokens to a third party Account for you after a period of inactivity, Poloniex may report and remit the Tokens to an applicable government agency pursuant to applicable escheatment or unclaimed property laws.

[_BlackStar]

Well, the way things have gone, I think the Exchanges that establish these policies are doing very poorly, the Exchanges have a lot of competition among themselves, I wouldn't make a move like that just to collect a few dollars, because in my case they do something like that, I would leave that Exchange and I won't come back, in fact I would tell my friends not to go near that Exchange, because it seems to me the last thing they want to charge for it,

Of course you need to stay away when the exchange policy will only harm you in the long term especially when you are required to go through KYC and pay inactivity fees for certain period. I don't have accounts on many centralized exchanges especially those that require KYC from their service users as I believe I should be more aware of my KYC security than with just some of the assets I trade.

It's too bad to expect centralized exchanges to have the services we want because they are subject to the jurisdiction of a country. In fact they can freeze our assets whenever they want and that's why I had to avoid more centralized exchanges until now.

[Franctoshi]

There are a lot of compitions as regards to trading platform. Therefore,this will even discourage a lot of users from using this exchange when they got to know that they will be charged for inactivity on their accounts. We have more than enough Exchanges to do business with that currently do not charge for inactive accounts for those that loves keeping their cryptos on exchanges, in this case they have the choice to choose whether they're to do business with this platform or not.

[jaberwock]

Personally, I am against these charges and it affects the rate of crypto adoption. It discourages people from starting to use crypto. What is your opinion about this practice ?

But who keeps money inside an exchange anyway? If they found some then that accounts were may be abandoned or there are bad things that happened to the owner. Only those who store money inside the exchange are traders but they are actively using it and if they decided to take a rest for quite some time, they will withdraw their money out of the exchange because they know that storing money in there is very risky.

The exchange can be hack or the exchange themselves are the one that will do inappropriate things. At first thought, this is not right but if we think deeper maybe this is their way of saying that people shouldn't treat exchanges like a wallet.

[wxa7115]

There is a new practice among crypto exchanges to charge its users if they are inactive on the exchange. Some f the examples are

1) Zebpay: It is an Indian exchange that charges some fees from users if they have not done any trade in any month. It is still having this rule on the platform.

2)Bitstamp: Another exchange which added this rule was Bitstamp. It planned to charge 10 euros ($10.27) per month for inactive accounts.

Personally, I am against these charges and it affects the rate of crypto adoption. It discourages people from starting to use crypto. What is your opinion about this practice ?

Obviously no customer is going to like to pay a monthly fee for not using their account after some time has passed without making any trade, but this shows once again why centralization is a bad idea.

If you had that bitcoin in your wallet not only no one could charge you those ridiculous fees but you will also have complete control over your coins, something you do not have when your coins are at a centralized exchange, so it is important to read the terms of the exchange in which you trade and if you do not like them then you need to keep your coins out of the exchange or look for another exchange without such policy.

[krishnaverma]

Personally, I am against these charges and it affects the rate of crypto adoption. It discourages people from starting to use crypto. What is your opinion about this practice ?

But who keeps money inside an exchange anyway? If they found some then that accounts were may be abandoned or there are bad things that happened to the owner. Only those who store money inside the exchange are traders but they are actively using it and if they decided to take a rest for quite some time, they will withdraw their money out of the exchange because they know that storing money in there is very risky.

The exchange can be hack or the exchange themselves are the one that will do inappropriate things. At first thought, this is not right but if we think deeper maybe this is their way of saying that people shouldn't treat exchanges like a wallet.

It makes no difference whether you keep coins in exchange or not. If you do not do trade in a month, there is a fixed charge for this. It does not gets affected by the fact that you bought a lot of coins through the exchange in past and are storing it now in a hardware wallet.

[tvplus006]

It makes no difference whether you keep coins in exchange or not. If you do not do trade in a month, there is a fixed charge for this. It does not gets affected by the fact that you bought a lot of coins through the exchange in past and are storing it now in a hardware wallet.

What happens if my account runs out of money? Will my balance show a negative value? If this is the case, then such actions of the exchange are more like fraud, since they require payment for services not provided. And you should stay away from such exchanges.

[Mr. Magkaisa]

    -  If the top 60 exchanges in this industry such as Binance, Kucoin, and others do not have such practices or rules, why would I agree to such rules of an exchange? It would be okay if that exchange can ensure that the assets of their clients are 100% secure if there is ever hacking or others that are not expected to happen.

As it turns out, a trader had extra billings because of that kind of policy. Zebpay and bitstamp are not even included in the top 60 exchanges in coinmarketcap. Although I am an active individual trader, I do not agree with such a policy of exchange.

[justdimin]

It would be okay if that exchange can ensure that the assets of their clients are 100% secure if there is ever hacking or others that are not expected to happen.

Keeping our funds secured against hack or any other attempts is their basic responsibilities but charging us for unnecessary reasons cannot be an excuse for fulfilling one of their main responsibility. When they are not generating enough income from trading fees or listing fees, I guess they are not fit to run an exchange business.

Personally, I am against these charges and it affects the rate of crypto adoption. It discourages people from starting to use crypto. What is your opinion about this practice ?

Yeah, but these days crypto beginners have lots of options to get into adapting cryptocurrencies hence one or two exchanges having such practice in my opinion may not have any deep impact on the rate of adaption of cryptocurrencies.

[wasin Aray]

There is a new practice among crypto exchanges to charge its users if they are inactive on the exchange. Some f the examples are

1) Zebpay: It is an Indian exchange that charges some fees from users if they have not done any trade in any month. It is still having this rule on the platform.

2)Bitstamp: Another exchange which added this rule was Bitstamp. It planned to charge 10 euros ($10.27) per month for inactive accounts.

Personally, I am against these charges and it affects the rate of crypto adoption. It discourages people from starting to use crypto. What is your opinion about this practice ?

This is not an appreciating condition. I do not support such type of activities by exchanges. Here we have thousands of traders who are investing for the long term profit. I'm one among them. we do not trade almost 3 month to year cause we purchase in cheap price and wait till bull run. So how should we support this?

[coinerer]

As these exchangers are applicable to a local country, they act like a central bank, ie if you have a bank account, maintenance charges and SMS charges and some other charges are deducted every year for your account.  In this case, you may or may not have money in your account.  So maybe these exchangers work in such an algorithm that a certain amount will be charged to your account every month.  Whether you use the account for trading or not. I am not completely sure about this.  But I think it happens because of this

[DaveF]

So after the FTX implosion and a few others that went down with it I cannot believe that we are still taking about this and people are still leaving coins on exchanges for any period of time. Seriously put your coins in, do what you have to do and then pull them out.

If you are worried about some fees and not worried about the exchange going away and taking ALL your coins / funds down with it then you are worried about the wrong thing.

Not your keys....not your coins.

-Dave

[hyudien]

Personally, I am against these charges and it affects the rate of crypto adoption. It discourages people from starting to use crypto. What is your opinion about this practice ?

An inactive account means that most traders will quickly avoid such exchanges. Never mind paying fees for being inactive, precisely because they are not active because they don't have assets to trade. There are many other exchanges with zero fees and you are free to be active or not, there are many exchanges that will not cost you anything. Such a rule would only lead to a massive reduction in users. Because for users, this rule is clearly an unfair rule. But the plus side, as many people have said, so you should never leave assets on the exchange if they are not being used.

[|MINER|]

As these exchangers are applicable to a local country, they act like a central bank, ie if you have a bank account, maintenance charges and SMS charges and some other charges are deducted every year for your account.  In this case, you may or may not have money in your account.  So maybe these exchangers work in such an algorithm that a certain amount will be charged to your account every month.  Whether you use the account for trading or not. I am not completely sure about this.  But I think it happens because of this

I agreeing with your words  I think they are locally applicable and with that may they have some extra facility for those users. Even then I think it would be better to avoid those exchangers because  if you hold your crypto fund there and stop trading for a while then you have to pay extra free again to retrieve that fund.  I think it's kind of putting pressure on the users.  Moreover, there are many good exchangers available through which you can exchange crypto directly to your bank. I don't support those kinds of terms and I also think that those exchangers will lose their users because of these terms.