5 ms·
>it was cheaper than other options What if the only reason it was cheaper for legal uses is that they were being subsidized by the illegal uses? What if the pr
by eurleif 13y ago
>it was cheaper than other options
What if the only reason it was cheaper for legal uses is that they were being subsidized by the illegal uses? What if the pricing LD offered would not have been a workable business model if they hadn't allowed money laundering?
(I don't know the facts here. I'm just offering a possibility.)
- jonknee 13y agoI don't think it's wild to assume thinking a 1% transaction fee is enough to fund an exchange. It seemed about as inconvenient to get funds in and out of as Bitcoin is and with similar fees. Dwolla has a $.25 fee for example and while I'm sure a bunch of criminals use Dwolla, it would not stand out as suspicious.
- socillion 13y agoFees for LR were generally much higher, because the way they structured it was to have 3rd party companies[1] handle transactions in and out of LR - who usually charged somewhere around 3-5%. Liberty Reserve wasn't in the business of actually converting money in their system to or from real-world currencies, and handed off tasks such as indentity verification and anti-fraud to the companies who actually exchanged those bits for real money. In some regards, LR was very similar to a protocol. 1. http://web.archive.org/web/20130424151449/http://www.libertyreserve.com/en/exchangers http://web.archive.org/web/20130424151449/http://www.liberty...