I was just gonna say, Wings loses money to chargebacks DAILY.
Also, I brought this up on Tevin’s stream...
Phil claims that he didn’t see and would have no way of seeing Tut’s emails. That there’s no way he could have responded right away.
I seem to recall Phil stopping a stream after getting an email from Sony when he thought Assassin’s Creed Odyssey charged him $50 for no reason. I specifically remember him stopping the stream saying he was going to figure it out before he continued on... so why bother lying and saying he didn't see Tut’s emails until after the stream was over? He is ALWAYS checking his phone during the stream and like I said, it wouldn’t be the first time he checked him email midstream either.
I trust Tut’s word over Phil’s any day of the week. Just the fact that Phil is taking this as personally as he is tells me he lost the money. He just can’t admit it because that sets a dangerous precedent for other trolls.
Tut is the jaded ex who got dumped, but is trying to spin the story to his friends that he was the one who dumped Phil instead of admitting this was a "thanks for the money, dummy" situation.
On the flip side, Phil is, well, Phil, so it goes without saying everything he says is suspect. Phil is taking it personally because that's who he is. He takes everything personally, even things that don't relate to him in any way shape or form, like other streamers getting early copies or his chat not being interactive enough. Having a fun conversation about pizza or some other inane subject? You're spitting directly into Phil's face by ignoring him and his stream. Or even going further back, look at the Wolverine story.
For me, there were two big red flags with what Tut was saying in chat. One is he claims he disputed the Twitch subs, and the other was he did it by going through his credit card. Others have already said, Twitch subs are nonrefundable. Tut is right that you could get around that by going directly to your credit card and reporting it as fraudulent activity, but he's way outside the window of when he'd be able to do that. I don't know the exact dates Tut swooped in with all the gift subs, but it was at the very least over a month ago by now because they've expired and Phil's numbers have significantly dropped. That means he's already gone through one billing cycle, and it's safe to assume he's used that card for other purchases. Hell, we've seen him buying subs on other channels, which makes it even harder to dispute because no credit card company is going to believe that he made so many other purchases on the exact same product, except for X purchases that went to DSP's channel, especially if he continued to make those purchases after the period he's claiming the card was stolen or whatever. Normally, chargebacks work because you report it within a reasonable time frame with a smaller amount of money.
The fact that neither of them is a reliable narrator further complicates things, because DSP is making it sound like PayPal disputes for tips, while Tut is implying it is credit card disputes for subs. And now that I've typed that I just realized another flaw in Tut's story. To the best of my knowledge, when you purchase gift subs, you're just being charged a generic Twitch fee. That money doesn't directly go to the streamer, it goes to Twitch, and Twitch in turn pays streamers based on their subscription count. Tut has purchased gift subs for other channels, on top of his own subs and bits and whatever other generic Twitch purchases he's made. In any event, none of that is tied to DSP directly. He'd be disputing the generic Twitch purchase. It wouldn't even work if you purchased the subs in the same month then somehow managed to get them pulled, because Twitch hasn't sent out the payments and they'd just give you whatever your current sub count was when the billing cycle rolls around, so there'd be no possible money to dispute. As far as I know, there also isn't a process for Twitch to remove subs like that, which I'm guessing is one of the reasons there's a no refund in place for subs in the first place.
*Edit* I went to doublecheck the convo someone posted earlier to make sure I wasn't way off base with Tut saying he disputed the subs specifically. For anyone who didn't see it earlier, the convo is
http://archive.is/U4tsb
The one other thing I wanted to point out which got glossed over in the general thread is Tut's response of "I have no time for this monotonous discussion" and needing to get back to work after someone asked for specifics, followed by Tut clearly having time to continue the conversation once he shifts it back to how much he is winning. He was clearly trying to brush that particular subject aside which looks super shady. So does his reasoning for wanting a ban. How would getting banned now suddenly grant him eligibility for subs that have already expired from a month or two ago?
His bit about Visa not having to share the charges with PayPal also doesn't make any sense. I don't want to ramble on more about credit card transactions, but the dispute has to go through PayPal, whether it is from Tut directly going through them or Visa doing it. Visa has to convey it to PayPal because Visa needs to get the money back. Otherwise, Visa is paying the original $1200 to PayPal, and then instead of taking that money and giving it to Tut, they would instead be taking $1200 out of pocket to give to Tut, so they're effectively charging themselves twice.
