Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo Shuts Down Their PayPal Competitor
LostCluster writes "MSNBC and ZDnet are both reporting that Yahoo and HSBC have announced a shutdown plan for their PayDirect service which was their rival to PayPal. Since CitiBank abandoned their c2it service last year, PayPal now seems to be a monopoly by default." There are other players in this field, though, like bidpay and worldpay.
PayPal should do that if they'd like to pick up some more customers. Yahoo should so that since they're nigging out on people.
BLING BLING. Meet the architecture that's changing everything.
This was a decent service and was in some ways a superior "eshopping cart" service. Many small websites or discount hardware websites use Yahoo stores and used the PayDirect service...I wonder if Paypal will, indeed, take it's place.
In the UK we still have NoChex, which is a very similar kind of thing...
Keeping the systems separate is in my opinion a protection to the consumer. I would never want my paypal account connected directly to my ebay account. I have had my ebay account broken into but never had my paypal account messed with. I would rather have to input my two different passwords to make a payment for a purchase than to have that worry that my bank account is prone to an ebay phishing scam.
From the e-tailer point of view, we added PayPal for the convenience of our customers. And a substantial percentage of our total orders are settled that way - even though we *do* take credit cards.
;)
*WHY* people use PayPal? Well, there are those who don't have credit cards, to start. (I had a bank account _long_ before I got my first credit card, many years ago though that was.) Beyond that, there have always been people who, for whatever reason, prefer to e.g. write checks, or use their debit card. PayPal is/can be the on-line equivalent. Not to mention literally thousands of reasons of which I haven't thought.
http://www.theboyz.biz/Your source for computers, parts, electronics, small applicances and more!
If you're not living on the edge, you're just taking up space!
However, this is also an area where a monopoly is least desireable. This is shown by the abuses PayPal has done with their shoddy customer service, and the ripoffs they've done against many people. What it comes down to now is that you either use PayPal or you don't ... and a lot of people don't. If a seller is able to take my credit card directly, fine. If not, maybe I'll send them a money order or cashier's check. But I'm not risking my money in PayPal.
I do have an alternative system idea in mind, and I am preparing a document on how it would work. It involves a new exchange system between banks that parallels their existing money exchange systems. An auction seller or shopping site would generate an "open transaction" through their bank (or equivalent service provider). The transaction code is given to the buyer, who then can submit it to their bank for payment. The security is a function of buyer's arrangement with their own bank. Once the bank has determined they are truly dealing with their own account holder who has approved payment on the transaction, payment is sent through a central clearinghouse. It should take under a minute to go through to the seller. Responsibility for fraud would be at the sending bank. The system would also send no private information on the transaction; it would be a blind, and non-reversible, payment. Seller would not know where the payment came from, but would know it cannot be reversed within the system. If the sending bank made a mistake, such as letting an unauthorized person access the buyer's account, that's the responsibility of the sending bank, and buyer's would choose their bank on the basis of how well they deal with security. Both parties would never have to deal with entities other than the one they chose to be their bank.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I'd much rather get services like that from a legitimate commercial bank than some flakey service like PayPal.
Realistically, you don't want to send money to a "merchant" that can't qualify for a Visa/MC merchant account. I've run mail-order software sales out of my house, and I had a real merchant account from a major bank (not a reseller), a business license, a fictitious name filing, and a Dun and Bradstreet rating. All those things are easy to get. Someone who doesn't have them is probably doing something wrong.
I bought a laptop from someone who ended up sending me a piece of shit. I tried to get them to take it back, and they gave me further crap about no returns, condition as advertised, etc. I then e-mailed paypal and they sent me a response in UNDER two hours with their insurance information, how they were investigating, and what my recourse options were. About two days later they wrote back saying they had gotten the vendor to cooperate and that all I needed to do was send the laptop back and have receipt confirmed by the shipper (not necessary to have it confirmed by the asshole vendor) and they'd refund my money. I did and they did. Couldn't be more pleased. I used to work at MBNA, which is about the highest-service CC company out there, and their claims were nowhere near that quick.
Moreover, the other advantage to you as a buyer is that you can easily and conveniently do business with a HUGE range of people you could not previously do business with. That increases merchant competition and keeps prices lower.
Read jack phelps dot net
There is another very significant problem with Pay Pal. Pay Pal censors what you can buy and sell and has stated a policy that they will "fine" buyers or purchasers of "adult" items $500. The definition of whether an item meets PayPal's standards is decided solely by PayPal and its official censors, who will even go so far as to read through romance novels/erotic fiction to see whether they pass muster.
While PayPal may not yet be a monopoly, it could be. Right now PayPal is the 800 pound Gorilla of online payments. They have millions of dollars of float from customer accounts, issue a PayPal bank card and yet aren't regulated as a bank. They also will freeze a customer's account, including the funds, at the drop of a hat.
If PayPal is left unchecked as on line commerce continues to grow, it will threaten our ability to buy products without censorship and it will put our finances at risk in an un-regulated bank.
http://paypalsucks.com/ They once withheld funds from me for over a month, and when I finally spoke to a real person at my expense, they would not help.
I bought $82 worth of magazines from a seller in Colorado. Seller never shipped the item. I issued a chargeback request with PayPal, who then said it would take 60 days to 'investigate.'
After about 60 days (right after my chargeback privilege with my issuer expired), they sent me an email stating, "We have found in your favor. However, the seller has a zero balance in their bank account, so we cannot give you your money."
The seller continues to do business through PayPal through the same account, with no further attempts by PayPal to hold the money or withdraw it. I've issued further complaints to PayPal, which have been ignored. Needless to say, I will be claiming my money back through the class action lawsuit already in progress.
The advantage to me as a consumer is that I don't have to give my CC# to a complete stranger. The burden of proof is on the vendor but it is still a hassle to get everything fixed if your card number is stolen.
It's a hassle to get it back, but if you're defrauded with paypal you can't get it back. Personally I'd rather have trouble getting it back than to not be able to get it back at all.
Also, if your card number gets stolen out of a database from someone you gave it to, visa usually quickly finds out and issues you a new card. I've had this happen to me once, when one of the sites I had purchased something from had their server hacked into. VISA had replaced my card before the bad guys got around to trying to charge me for something.
Which ones?
Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, etc. All are democratic EU countries and their residents cannot create PayPal accounts.
"Two things inspire me to awe -- the starry heavens above and the moral universe within." - Albert Einstein
In Estonia, my native country, banks created a cross-payment system in 1993 (over ten years ago!). Since then it has been possible for anyone with bank account in any Estonian bank to pay anyone else with a bank account. Shortly after that most banks made the system available over the Internet.
It became quite common for me to go out to lunch with my colleagues so that someone would pay the bill, and later everyone else would transfer some money instantaneously to his bank account. When I moved to the US in 1999, I was most puzzled by people having to mess with personal checks for such things, and the inconvenience they had to go through whenever they needed to make payments to anyone (e.g. utility bills).
Things like PayPal, various (paid!) bill payment systems and other things like that are simply hacks built on top of an antiquated banking system and would not be necessary if we had a decent cross-payment system between the banks. So can anyone please enlighten me and tell why we still don't have one??
When men used to be men
Yowcow is VERY shadey. They fund the paypalsucks.com website. That is a very low thing to do.
I did a story about the problems that paypalsucks and yowcow pose.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
I bet if paypal had to pay credit-card interest (through legislation) on locked accounts, you would see many if all of the problems go away.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
Interesting. But unfortunately, the proponents of this missed too many economic classes to understand why its a bad idea. It's not inflation proof just because it's backed by some arbitrary precious good. In fact that creates more harm than good, which is why the US gave up on the Silver/Gold Standards. I.e. if someone finds new lodes of gold then your monetary value goes to hell.
You will have liquidity issues as well, which is what money is supposed to prevent in the first place. That means that people will experience barriers to trade when they have to find a common currency to use. It's like trying to get a bunch of Linux geeks to agree on a common distribution. The Fed keeps this to a minimum by forcing us to use one common currency.
Also, if I'm not mistaken, it's unconstitutional in the US to have arbitrary monetary systems besides the dollar.