- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: PayPal joins Samsung in ad fail
Posted on 9/16/14 at 11:20 am to ILikeLSUToo
Posted on 9/16/14 at 11:20 am to ILikeLSUToo
quote:
I wholeheartedly support the obsolescence of PayPal.
Why do you say that? Any particular reason you feel that way?
Posted on 9/16/14 at 1:51 pm to saintforlife1
quote:
Why do you say that? Any particular reason you feel that way?
Greedy. And I'll lump eBay into that as well, since they are one and the same. Not just "typical-greedy-corporation" level, either. EBay and PayPal basically strong-armed sellers to accept PayPal by preaching constantly to buyers that everything but paypal is unsafe. So, maintaining what is essentially a monopoly on payment processing on eBay, you get the gang-raping effect as mentioned above. EBay charges you 10% of your selling price, and then PayPal comes right behind them to take another 2.9%, as if you realistically had a choice in which payment processor you use. It is its own ecosystem of commerce that succeeds only because eBay's success forces it to.
Paypal acts like a bank without needing to follow the same rules. Their TOS gives them a lot more freedom to decide what should happen to your money in the event of a dispute, or if they just decide they don't like what you're selling, or they get a funny feeling. Their seller protection barely exists, especially if the buyer used a credit card, as most often do so they can dispute a charge in the event of a scam. Unfortunately, that same safety net of disputing a charge is abused by some. If a buyer disputes a charge with cc company, paypal takes the money from the seller regardless of return policy/claims process. I suppose it's similar for most merchant account services, except paypal is one of the few that tries to play the role of a bank, escrow service, and merchant account all in one. If a buyer decides your item isn't as described, there is no due diligence on PayPal's side to investigate any further than ignoring a seller's return policy. The buyer need only send the item back; by that, I mean the buyer only needs to provide a tracking number. What's actually in the box isn't important. If I sent a box of rocks to the buyer instead of the item, instant refund and likely a hold on my account. If the buyer returns a box of rocks to me instead of the item, instant refund and likely a hold on my account. Don't have the money to refund the buyer? That's OK. If you have a bank account on file, PayPal will take it from there.
It's this sort of overzealous buyer protection that turned PayPal into nearly a monopoly on eBay -- because what buyer wouldn't want such a large safety net when navigating the scary world of e-commerce? If you're a buyer, you love PayPal. If you're a seller, you put up with the fees and have no further complaints... until something happens.
Even though this is mostly an Apple White Knight thread, I do hope something gains enough traction so that PayPal is at least desperate enough to reform to keep whatever business they have outside of eBay sales. Nothing will touch the eBay/PayPal symbiosis, though, because if a superior and more convenient payment method arises, eBay will just buy it or ban it. Y'all think this recent ad campaign is desperate and pathetic, but it's probably going to be effective, since as Spock said, they are indeed the 800lb fear-mongering gorilla.
This post was edited on 9/16/14 at 1:58 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News