Small/medium scale Businesses confidence in accepting Bitcoin

[She shining]

Hello everyone. My question might come as been stupid or childish so constructive criticism would be appreciated.
I have come across a lot of users that plans on accepting Bitcoin in their business and I'm curious on how they tackle fraudulent problems.

• If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

• In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

• In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

• Lightning network has been praised for its speed in transactions thus used by many individuals. Does transactions only involve those you trust? Or there's a basis for the confidence of not been scammed?

• I'm well aware of the dangers that centralized exchange poses, but doesn't their access to customers data make it feel safer to run a business? (Not to be confused for safekeeping of coins, just a means to run the trade)

I have been contemplating this for sometime now so assistance would be appreciated. Thank you.

[1714634885]

1714634885

[1714634885]

1714634885

[1714634885]

1714634885

[1714634885]

1714634885

[mendace]

• If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

If a user uses a custody wallet to buy goods and the seller does not comply with the agreement, the situation can be complicated.  In general, Bitcoin transactions are irreversible, which means that if the seller does not comply with the agreement, it can be difficult to get a refund

• In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

Bitcoin is an anonymous payment system if you take precautions you can bypass the controls but the risk is always good to evaluate it

• In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

In most cryptocurrency transactions, the buyer sends their Bitcoins to the seller first.  Once the Bitcoins are received, the seller can then deliver the goods or provide the agreed services.

• Lightning network has been praised for its speed in transactions thus used by many individuals. Does transactions only involve those you trust? Or there's a basis for the confidence of not been scammed?

The Lightning Network is a scalability solution for Bitcoin that allows for faster and cheaper transactions.  Transactions on the Lightning Network involve only parties directly involved in the transaction and require open payment channels between them.  The Lightning Network is designed to be secure, but it's still important to be careful and only do business with people or businesses you trust.

• I'm well aware of the dangers that centralized exchange poses, but doesn't their access to customers data make it feel safer to run a business? (Not to be confused for safekeeping of coins, just a means to run the trade)

Centralized exchanges can be vulnerable to cyber attacks and can compromise customer data.  For this reason, it is crucial to choose reputable exchanges and take security measures to protect customer data.  Safekeeping of coins should be handled securely, for example, by keeping most funds in offline wallets (cold wallets).
I have been contemplating this for sometime now so assistance would be appreciated. Thank you.

[bittraffic]

In the case of online merchants, I think they will use platforms like BitPay which they may complain to this company if something happens. Customers will also have to DYOR to verify whether the merchant is not a scam.

In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

Yep, You could say it only involves those you trust which is why you may need to read comments and accusations about the online store. It's easier to make a transaction if it's a local store.

[AmoreJaz]

In the case of online merchants, I think they will use platforms like BitPay which they may complain to this company if something happens. Customers will also have to DYOR to verify whether the merchant is not a scam.

In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

Yep, You could say it only involves those you trust which is why you may need to read comments and accusations about the online store. It's easier to make a transaction if it's a local store.

in today's online market, you usually pay before you receive the item. unless, it is local and they are accepting cash on delivery. that is why there are reviews of the seller if it is really legit or not. you won't trust a new seller without any review to buy an expensive item from him. just to give an example. so if you do really want the item, it is best to buy a trusted seller even if the price is a bit higher. at least you are sure that he will deliver.

[Ayebabara]

Before you buy anything to small medium business, you havee to know the seller if you want to use bitcoin to  buy the goods. Because when you send the bitcoin to the person in the custodial wallet and the person refused to waybill or ship the goods to my brother yours is gone. That is why when you want to buy the things it is better you go the wholesale and buy them and pay the person with bitcoin and you take goods and go.
Online business or buying things online is not encourage because the scammers online are many so to avoid those stories, it is better you go the shop and use p2p to purchase your things.

[pawel7777]

• If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

If a user uses a custody wallet to buy goods and the seller does not comply with the agreement, the situation can be complicated.  In general, Bitcoin transactions are irreversible, which means that if the seller does not comply with the agreement, it can be difficult to get a refund

Depends on the type of transaction and whether the buyer and the seller are located in the same jurisdiction.
People have been paying cash (of different forms) since the dawn of civilisation. Just like bitcoin payments, cash transactions are also irreversible and it's down to the seller if they decide to give you a refund or not. This was never a major problem as we have customer protection laws that force sellers to refund the money in specific situations, and bitcoin payments are no exception here.

[Odusko]

That is why must businesses that accept Bitcoin as payment does that through the use of payment system like a third-party payment system where the goods owner and the buyer meet to stick the trade, like what we have with p2p trading on the exchange where the exchange serves as a third party escrow.
So it is in accepting Bitcoin for payment, there is no way the seller will deny not receiving the fund as payment for goods.

More also you must know that, if you are residing in a country where cryptocurrency is illegal and banned by the government, it is better to totally avoid using it for either payment or as an asset since you risk getting your wallet red-flagged by the government.

[Smartvirus]

My question might come as been stupid or childish so constructive criticism would be appreciated.
I have come across a lot of users that plans on accepting Bitcoin in their business and I'm curious on how they tackle fraudulent problems.

Asking questions and learning haven’t got any stupid thing about it. It’s simply you trying to improve yourself about what you ought to know on a course and that’s okay.

• If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

There wouldn’t be any need to worry about the buyer not sending his or her coin in the event of a physical transaction once the trade is initiated and the transaction has got at least one confirmation on it. At that point, transactions becomes irreversible.

• In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

Cryptos aren’t completely outlawed in most countries, it’s mostly a question of it not being recognized for a means of exchange. Still, it would be great to stick to your nation’s laws about the assets you keep.

• In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

It’s dependent on the deal at the time. You both gets to decide based on the level of trust and if, your ready to take the risk in the event that, you both aren’t physically present.

In all, I would say you shouldn’t start what you ain’t ready for. Not until your well informed on it.

[serjent05]

• If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

This is a complicated matter because if the sender chooses to transact with unregistered unknown users then he cannot do anything about it but be careful next time.  If the merchant is known and is registered entity then he can file a complaint to authorities assuming that Bitcoin is considered a mode of payment and both party are in the same country it would be difficult if each resides on a different country though. 

• In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

Why transact with Bitcoin when you know it is illegal in your country?  Whatever the reason of these person's are, they themselves knows it since I would avoid the Bitcoin transaction if it is illegal in my country, lucky it was not.

• In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

This depends on the agreement of the two involved.  If it is about buying in a merchant, it is the buyer who sends the Bitcoin first then the merchant sends the bought item.

[nelson4lov]

Hello everyone. My question might come as been stupid or childish so constructive criticism would be appreciated.
I have come across a lot of users that plans on accepting Bitcoin in their business and I'm curious on how they tackle fraudulent problems.
I have been contemplating this for sometime now so assistance would be appreciated. Thank you.

On the contrary, These are thoughtful questions that every business owner considering integrating Bitcoin should consider in order to make well-informed decisions. Also I have a tip for you. You can have just one list and many list items compared to using many lists with a single item in each one.

If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?[/li][/list]

Before placing the order and proceeding to payment there should be an understanding of the terms of the business between both parties that would be transacting. Once the state has been updated on the blockchain (payment confirmed), there is no way to recall payments. My suggestion is to clarify all the terms and enquire about a refund process if there is any.

In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

If they have a way to convert it to their local currencies and can evade government or regulating bodies, then it should be fine. Accepting Bitcoin opens up a business to a wider audience. These days, If I want to make payments to non-local businesses for goods or services, I always check for the pay with Bitcoin option.

In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

The buyer has to send the payment first. This is the same for even P2p trades as payment often validates an order.

Lightning network has been praised for its speed in transactions thus used by many individuals. Does transactions only involve those you trust? Or there's a basis for the confidence of not been scammed?

Ideally, payment should only come last when all due diligence has been conducted. The way bitcoin works is that we have to take full responsibility for any decisions that have to do with our Bitcoin. Knowing this, it would make zero sense to make payment without confirming the authenticity of business or the products and services being advertised.

I'm well aware of the dangers that centralized exchange poses, but doesn't their access to customers data make it feel safer to run a business? (Not to be confused for safekeeping of coins, just a means to run the trade)[/li][/list]

I agree it makes it safer especially in an event where one of the transacting party wants to dupe the other. Centralized exchanges can help mitigate those situations. But this has its downsides as well. But I believe problems like this will be solved in the coming years as the technology is still undergoing major developments.

[Wexnident]

• If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

And this is by for example, not giving the goods themselves? This kind of setup usually involves people talking about it themselves and making out terms that both parties would agree in. A middle party would be the best, but if it was a personal transaction between the two, then they only need to talk it out imo. In terms of complaining, I don't think there is between private transactions between small parties, but I reckon there's a law or something for products or services offered by companies (since you can report them to the local government who holds their license or something similar).

• In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

Naturally. But there are ways to transfer it over to their local currency, so why not? I highly doubt people who are risking the use of Bitcoin are that ignorant in the ways and methods to use it anyway.

• In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

The buyer would most probably send the Bitcoin first since there's a period they need to wait for the transaction to be confirmed. Ofc, this can probably be adjusted depending on the terms between the two parties.

• Lightning network has been praised for its speed in transactions thus used by many individuals. Does transactions only involve those you trust? Or there's a basis for the confidence of not been scammed?

It's why Bitcoin is decentralized in the first place, there was no need for trust since third parties (miners) would confirm the transaction themselves. The lightning network is only a network that's used to enhance the speed of the transactions themselves.

• I'm well aware of the dangers that centralized exchange poses, but doesn't their access to customers data make it feel safer to run a business? (Not to be confused for safekeeping of coins, just a means to run the trade)

No? Their not supposed to "access" it in the first place, they're role is simply to store it. Accessing it is a whole nother thing. Not to mention a lot of centralized businesses can be rather dumb in terms of data security, so most people just can't help it but be doubtful of them. And with the advent of the internet, a simple full name and a contact number can get you a LOT of information about that person.

[komisariatku]

If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

If you are in a country where bitcoin is legal currency, you can report the scam to the police. But I don't think the police will be much help, especially if the transaction you're doing isn't big money. I think using fiat currency would be the same, and have the same risks in online transactions

In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

I didn't think I would do that. If you are determined to keep using bitcoins in a country where bitcoins are not legal, then you should be prepared to face legal trouble.

In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

It depends on the buying and selling system that you use. Most buying and selling transactions, the buyer will send bitcoin first before the seller sends the goods. Because there is no COD system in bitcoin, maybe you can convince the seller to send the goods first before you pay, in my opinion this is more of an agreement between the seller and the buyer

I'm well aware of the dangers that centralized exchange poses, but doesn't their access to customers data make it feel safer to run a business? (Not to be confused for safekeeping of coins, just a means to run the trade)

I'm not too scared of centralized exchanges, especially one with a big name like binance. I've never had a problem with a centralized exchange, I've used the exchange to buy bitcoins, sell bitcoins to fiat, or buy altcoins. I don't store my bitcoins/altcoins on a centralized exchange. I think you have nothing to fear when you use an exchange but if you keep your funds in the exchange like your own wallet then it is wrong. Use the exchange only for trading activities, don't think of it as a wallet

[BlackBoss_]

If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

If both the buyer and seller use a centralized peer to peer marketplaces like Binance P2P, they can file dispute to resolve the trade.

In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

If Cryptocurrency exchanging is considered as illegal in your country, don't take risk to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange. They accepted it because they accept risk.

In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

Nobody should do such trade. Go first is always risky and you should never do that except you know the trade partner is highly trusted.

Lightning network has been praised for its speed in transactions thus used by many individuals. Does transactions only involve those you trust? Or there's a basis for the confidence of not been scammed?

You can be scammed. Bitcoin on-chain or off-chain with Lightning network, if you are worrying of scam, you must use Escrow services or Peer-to-Peer marketplaces/ decentralized exchanges which provide Escrow service for traders. Trading without Escrow is risky and you can be scammed.

I'm well aware of the dangers that centralized exchange poses, but doesn't their access to customers data make it feel safer to run a business? (Not to be confused for safekeeping of coins, just a means to run the trade)

KYC does not exclude all risks but it's good if you use a centralized exchange and trade with a KYCed trade partner. It's better than you are trading with unknown trade partner on a decentralized exchange.

Being KYCed does not mean that user is not a scammer.

[bayu7adi]

• In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

In my country, cryptocurrencies are not considered illegal, and the government's functioning is not flawless at 100%. Among several business entities, some operate without strict government oversight. This creates numerous opportunities for small businesses that have little impact on the government and receive little legal attention.

This situation provides a loophole for those interested in experimenting with Bitcoin as a means of payment (if they understand its transaction mechanism or simply wish to study it). Particularly, small business owners may be inclined to adopt Bitcoin, as the risks associated with operating in a country where cryptocurrencies are deemed illegal could directly affect their business ventures.

In short, it is generally acceptable to use cryptocurrencies for small-scale businesses that remain unnoticed by the government. However, it is crucial to exercise caution and stay informed about any potential changes in the regulatory landscape.

• In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

In commerce, small trades value money first,
But for significant exchanges, agreement's thirst.

[noorman0]

-snip-

• If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

Sending from a centralized wallet is actually difficult to prove. The short solution, report it to the authorities. However, this question requires more information in which room the buyer and seller make the deal. In certain cases trade disputes can even be resolved without the help of external parties.

-snip-

• In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

Reasons could be because:
- Enforcement of the rules is not too strict
- There are special laws that allow certain criteria to do that.
- Involved in illegal activities (drug trafficking, money laundering, etc.)

-snip-

• In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

Depends on the situation and the deal.

-snip-

• Lightning network has been praised for its speed in transactions thus used by many individuals. Does transactions only involve those you trust? Or there's a basis for the confidence of not been scammed?

Whether through the LN or regular network, that is only the last point of the agreement procedure. Not related to your decision to trust someone.

-snip-

• I'm well aware of the dangers that centralized exchange poses, but doesn't their access to customers data make it feel safer to run a business? (Not to be confused for safekeeping of coins, just a means to run the trade)

Can't get the gist of this question yet

[Bobrox]

I don't know about scale business confidence in accepting in bitcoin because my country not allowed use Bitcoin for payment currency transaction, have positive and negative side when using Bitcoin for business but depend with small or medium scale business kinds.  If Business capital around $10k transaction in daily day I think is worth for accepting bitcoin as legal payment currency but have get allowed from your country, too risk when accepting bitcoin as legal payment but in your country Bitcoin still as illegal payment currency or not.
Small scale business is not worth using bitcoin as payment currency actually when sending trough custodial wallet and getting higher fees transaction, for bigger scale business is not matter have to pay fees above 5$ each transaction but small business get impact with costumer not interested yet payment trough Bitcoin.

[Reatim]

• If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

this is why  there is a need for trust and also to choose a proper seller , because it is not that easy to deal using crypto ,or also If I am the buyer , I will not send the funds once the Items is not in my hands for security purpose, and with this the trust and worthiness is the most important part.

• In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

because they Know the consequences and yes why not ? if crypto is not that completely prevented by the government though there is a hard risk if act on it.

• In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

again , trust or else the seller need to release first.

[adzino]

Hello everyone. My question might come as been stupid or childish so constructive criticism would be appreciated.
I have come across a lot of users that plans on accepting Bitcoin in their business and I'm curious on how they tackle fraudulent problems.

• If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

• In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

• In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

• Lightning network has been praised for its speed in transactions thus used by many individuals. Does transactions only involve those you trust? Or there's a basis for the confidence of not been scammed?

• I'm well aware of the dangers that centralized exchange poses, but doesn't their access to customers data make it feel safer to run a business? (Not to be confused for safekeeping of coins, just a means to run the trade)

I have been contemplating this for sometime now so assistance would be appreciated. Thank you.

1. File a complaint for fraud/scam to the local authorities like they would when making a purchase with a regular currency (FIAT currency). If the seller isn't "anonymous" and is from your area, there is a chance you will get back your funds. If not, there is no way you will get back your coins.

2. If bitcoin is illegal, then yes, they shouldn't be using it. I don't know why business would want to accept bitcoin and risk everything. Are you sure you don't mean legal tender? Because even if it isn't a legal tender, but using bitcoin is allowed, business can accept crypto currencies, but they can refuse to accept payments in bitcoin if they want.

3. The buyer is going to send first just like when shopping online. What's stopping the buyer from paying after receiving the goods?

4. Lightning network or not, both requires each party to trust each other.

5. Yes, it does make it safer. Hence there are those "wallet payment" services that lets you pay directly from the exchanges to the merchants. But yes, decentralization is lost.

[Findingnemo]

• If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

• In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

• In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

• Lightning network has been praised for its speed in transactions thus used by many individuals. Does transactions only involve those you trust? Or there's a basis for the confidence of not been scammed?

• I'm well aware of the dangers that centralized exchange poses, but doesn't their access to customers data make it feel safer to run a business? (Not to be confused for safekeeping of coins, just a means to run the trade)

1. Don't send your money for any trade before finalizing the amount so money should be exchanged only after consent from both parties and it is same no matter whether its custodial or non custodial wallet cause the transactions are irreversible.

2. They are breaking the laws which may financially benefits them but not an encouraging act.

3. Both scenarios are possible, the buyer sends Bitcoin first, and the seller provides goods/services afterward, or the seller delivers the goods/services first, and the buyer sends Bitcoin afterward depending on the situation and agreement between buywer and seller.

4. There is no need to trust anyone for using the Lightning network, the seller just have to provide the invoice then buyer has to pay it.

5. For them but I don't believe there is no benefits for users by using centralizing exchange other than convenience.

[un_rank]

• If for example a user of a custodial wallet sends Bitcoin to buy some goods and the seller voluntary chooses not to meet their end of the bargain, who are they going to complain to?

If you paid cash in a physical store and the refused to meet your needs who do you complain to?
As a buyer whatever payment method you use you always try to look out for your interest and verify the authenticity of the product on sale and how reliable the buyer is.
If you blindly spend money, through bitcoin, bank transfer, gift cards or cash transfers you can always be cheated out of your money's worth.

• In countries where crypto are considered illegal isn't it risky to accept Bitcoin as a medium of exchange? Then why are some people still accepting it?

• In a trade does the buyer send their Bitcoin first or the seller send their goods/service?

1. If it is illegal then it should not be accepted for payment by legitimate businesses.

2. If online there should be an escrow;
The buyer sends to the escrow > the seller sends the product > the buyer confirms the authenticity of the product > the escrow releases the funds to the seller.
If you are in a physical store, the buyer should get the product and pay before leaving. Just as you do in any store which accepts fiat.

I'm well aware of the dangers that centralized exchange poses, but doesn't their access to customers data make it feel safer to run a business? (Not to be confused for safekeeping of coins, just a means to run the trade)

You do not determine what wallet the seller will use based on which you use.
Centralized exchanges does not make transactions between a buyer and a merchant easier.

- Jay -[/list][/list]