club1man
|
posted on June 4, 2002 09:44:30 PM new
don't jump around from one thread to another coonr answer the question. Was it your choice to stop posting or ebay's
|
Coonr
|
posted on June 5, 2002 05:53:25 AM new
Not jumping.
Said it several times.
MINE. I lasted posted there regular over two months ago. Several incorrectly think I am someone else, with a posting ID. I have always objected to a posting ID.
Why does everyone make this about me? Cant defend your comments about Paypal?
]
[ edited by Coonr on Jun 5, 2002 05:56 AM ]
|
pez1960
|
posted on June 5, 2002 09:40:00 PM new
Coonr,
People dont really NEED to ask, now do they? We all know youre on a 'vacation' from the boards. And as for not posting for 2 months- you better get a calender out- just a couple weeks ago, someone 'congratulated' you on your 3000 sale & you responded? Gosh- was that 2 months ago?
Quit fibbing Coonr.
|
dealerjim
|
posted on June 5, 2002 10:20:17 PM new
Don't you mean sultan55, LOL!!!! BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!
|
Coonr
|
posted on June 6, 2002 04:55:44 AM new
pez1960,
In another response to the same question, I did note that I posted a couple of time to feedback related threads. Other than that, it has been some time.
dealerjim, No.
[ edited by Coonr on Jun 6, 2002 08:42 AM ]
|
dealerjim
|
posted on June 6, 2002 08:25:12 AM new
Why do you continue to deny the obvious? Are you suffering from schizophrenia? We all know you are the same person. Do you both receive checks from PrayPal? You're so crazy and so are you.
|
Coonr
|
posted on June 6, 2002 08:39:57 AM new
We all know you are the same person.
I am not hard to find. The problem is I am not all who I have been accused of being numerous times.
Do you both receive checks from PayPal?
No. When customers pay me I use the Mastercard or do an EFT. why pay $1.50 for a check?
|
fnewbrough
|
posted on June 6, 2002 08:12:15 PM new
Coonr,
Its not that many of Paypal's disgruntled users do not acknowledge that they made some mistakes. The problem is that Paypal markets itself as being safe and insinuates levels of protection that in reality don't exist. The $100,000 travelers insurance is not something that applies to individual accounts yet it is presented as if Paypal will file individual claims. Victims of fraud like myself who took Paypal at its "word" had no idea the level of risk involved with accepting credit card payments through the service. I received plently of emails advising me of the security and "100% control" my money but not one alerting me to any risks. Paypal seems more than willing to raise funding on the backs of its naive users but when it comes to helping a user out after someone stole someone's account or somehow registered a stolen credit card (I still haven't figured out how this manages to happen) then they try to stick it to the user. Paypal would be going a long way to producing a good faith relationship between them and their customers if they would work to make the system more secure against letting fraud happen in the first place. They could provide a note at the bottom of every transaction involving a credit card regardless of confirmed address. Here is a sample of what happens when someone doesn't have a confirmed address.
> Important Note: XXXXXXXXX has provided an
> Unconfirmed Address. If you
> are shipping items to XXXXXXX please keep in
> mind that you will not
> be covered by the PayPal Seller Protection Policy.
This seems clear but in cases where there is a confirmed address there is not even a link to how to make certain you are covered by the seller protection policy. I believe they should list at the end of the email the exact steps that one has to go through to be covered by the policy since they are always adding new disqualifications to the TOS.
Being a little more customer conscious and informing customers may drive some of them away in fear but then again shouldn't a customer be able to make a informed decision concerning the level of risk they are willing to take when making financial transactions? Plus those new to selling would be steered away from common pitfalls.
Paypal is a good service, I just think it should be responsible for making a good faith effort to educated and inform users of the risks involved with using the service and also should set clear timelines on restrictions that are standard and clearly laid out. If customers are expected to read the TOS everytime they make a transaction maybe Paypal should stop advertising itself as being easy to use.
|
Coonr
|
posted on June 6, 2002 08:23:43 PM new
The $100,000 travelers insurance is not something that applies to individual accounts yet it is presented as if Paypal will file individual claims.
Paypal never advertised they would file individual claims. They did promote the insurance was to protect your funds. It was.
Victims of fraud like myself who took Paypal at its "word" had no idea the level of risk involved with accepting credit card payments through the service.
The level of risk is no different for any other service.
This seems clear but in cases where there is a confirmed address there is not even a link to how to make certain you are covered by the seller protection policy. I believe they should list at the end of the email the exact steps that one has to go through to be covered by the policy since they are always adding new disqualifications to the TOS.
If they wont read and comply with the TOS they wont read and comply with an email.
shouldn't a customer be able to make a informed decision
Absoloutly. The info is in the TOS. They should read, understand, and elliminate any question before using any service.
If customers are expected to read the TOS everytime they make a transaction maybe Paypal should stop advertising itself as being easy to use.
That is why they have a link to significant policy changes right on the page after you log in.
|
club1man
|
posted on June 6, 2002 09:09:35 PM new
Fnewbrough My sincere thanks to you for putting into words what I couldn't. Payponzi could be an asset to the internet but they have act in a way to alienate their customers. Coonr is only partly right about the so-called insurance. I talked with the lady that handled the policy and she told me there was a 250k deductable on the policy. Customers thought from PAYPONZI's description on their web site that they would be dealing with travlers. Wrong it was to protect PAYPONZI's butt if they were hit hard. You would have loved to hear the testamony at my case. They have NO training NO training manuals and basicily you can get hired as one employee did that 90 days after joining PAYPONZI he was promoted to manager of the fraud department and his previous employment was working for a cement company. Their testamony was good as far as the rehearsed part with PAYPONZI's lawyers went, but when my lawyers asked questions all they could say was "i don't know"
[ edited by club1man on Jun 6, 2002 09:12 PM ]
[ edited by club1man on Jun 6, 2002 09:19 PM ]
|
GU1HToM
|
posted on June 7, 2002 07:43:19 AM new
Quote from Coonr
"The level of risk is no different for any other service."
I have to disagree.
If I have problems with my CC processing service be it a bad transaction or someone using a fraudulent card that company does not lock everything down for 30 days to get a resolution. They also will not continue to take money from my customers if they believe that there is a major problem & I am committing Fraud.
Most people in this country live paycheck to paycheck with no more than 2 weeks worth of funds to sustain themselves. Some of these decide to make their living online using PAYPAL. What happens to them when their funds are locked up for 30 days?
If one company presents itself to be "Better" than the rest these people will believe it, be it true or not. I think ENRON is a perfect example of that.
The biggest issue I see about PAYPAL is the size of the deception.
Telling others that people do not read the TOS is a moot point if the people are falsly led to believe that their funds will be protected & safe from whatever happens.
No matter how many good transactions you or anyone else may have had with PAYPAL. It only takes 1 bad one to change one's mind.
[ edited by GU1HToM on Jun 7, 2002 07:46 AM ]
[ edited by GU1HToM on Jun 7, 2002 07:48 AM ]
|
Coonr
|
posted on June 7, 2002 01:05:50 PM new
If I have problems with my CC processing service
GU1HToM what service do you use?
|
thchaser200
|
posted on June 9, 2002 06:19:51 AM new
The level of risk with paypal is higher than other services. They imply that you have protection, so if you use your bank account or your balance, in reality, paypal offers no protection and they should tell people that. They should say, unless you use your credit card, we offer no more protection then sending a money order or sending cash in an enevolpe and hoping it gets shipped.
The problem is that paypal gives you the feeling that it is safe until something happens and you find out that it is not.
|
Coonr
|
posted on June 9, 2002 06:32:19 AM new
thchaser200,
The level of risk with paypal is almost identical to any other services.
PayPal is not a escrow service.
if you use your bank account or your balance, in reality, paypal offers no protection and they should tell people that.
They do offer some protection. However it is dependant on them being able to recover from the seller, and that is fully disclosed in the Terms of Use.
|
thchaser200
|
posted on June 9, 2002 06:40:22 AM new
Lets be honest, if most people actually read the terms of service, there is no way a lot of people would sign up for this service. They make you feel that you are protected and when a problem comes up, you find out you are not.
If you use a check, you can stop payment. On some money orders, you can stop payment. However, on an e-check you can not and on you paypal balance, there is no protection. If you use a credit card, and chargeback your card, your account gets restricted. To say this offers the same level of protection is basically a lie. You have the same protection from paypal as if you placed cash in the mail.
|
Coonr
|
posted on June 9, 2002 06:50:59 AM new
Lets be honest, if most people actually read the terms of service, there is no way a lot of people would sign up for this service.
Or any ohter service, or even a bank account at your local brick and mortar....
They make you feel that you are protected and when a problem comes up, you find out you are not.
Again, PayPal never promised to act as an escrow service. I have never seen reported, a problem with the transfer of funds. The problems surround other aspects of the transaction.
However, on an e-check you can not and on you paypal balance, there is no protection.
Perhaps you should check with your bank, you can dispute an ACH transfer.
If you use a credit card, and chargeback your card, your account gets restricted.
Not if you comply with terms, and the chargeback is processed properly.
To say this offers the same level of protection is basically a lie. You have the same protection from paypal as if you placed cash in the mail.
Not true. You should review,
http://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=p/gen/terms-outside#consumer_protection
|
club1man
|
posted on June 9, 2002 11:53:36 AM new
When it comes to Payponzi's terms, they have changed them at least 50 times since i did business. No one knows from day to day what they will be. If they find some thing that benefits THEM they change it. By the time a customer finds it out their screwed.
|
Coonr
|
posted on June 9, 2002 12:15:45 PM new
If they find some thing that benefits THEM they change it.
The biggest thing that benefits them is being able to attract new and retain existing customers. It is that desire and ability that makes them one of the few profitable dot coms.
|
club1man
|
posted on June 9, 2002 12:32:36 PM new
Rest assured that if Peter and Max have a tail gate party they will not invite their customers, they will however invite posible investers, politicians and anyone that will put out good word and money in their pockets. In corporate America this is the way it's done. They will run and hide from anyone or thing that might enlighten others of their shady tactics.
|
Coonr
|
posted on June 9, 2002 12:38:06 PM new
Gee. How may investors and politicians do you think they will find at eBay Live?
|
GU1HToM
|
posted on June 9, 2002 10:20:51 PM new
If I have problems with my CC processing service
GU1HToM what service do you use?
NOVUS
|
Coonr
|
posted on June 10, 2002 05:14:02 AM new
NOVUS is a merchant account and not a payment service like Paypal or Billpoint.
Apples VS Oranges.
|
GU1HToM
|
posted on June 10, 2002 06:01:16 AM new
Correction it is NOVA not Novus
(I really need to get some sleep at night)
|
GU1HToM
|
posted on June 10, 2002 06:33:30 AM new
Apples to Oranges?
What you been smokin?
It is pretty simple really.
I WAS a PAYPAL user.
I HAD 1 bad transaction.
I STOPPED using PAYPAL.
I replaced accepting payments thru PAYPAL with a MERCHANT account.
Why?
Because in the long run it cost me less money to pay to have the merchant account set up & processing than it would cost in PAYPAL FEES alone.
I sat down & worked out the numbers.
If a person is doing about $1000 in sales a month thru PAYPAL it is actually cheaper to get & use a merchant account in the long run.
When one thing replaces another they tend to be similar like Apples to Apples.
Is my merchant account different than PAYPAL?
Yes it is much better overall & cheaper too.
In that way it is Apples to Oranges.
PAYPAL presents itself as the best, safest, & most secure way to send money over the net.
They have proven to me that they are not.
By getting a Merchant account for my business I have eliminated the need for the MIDDLEMAN which is all that PAYPAL is.
|
Coonr
|
posted on June 10, 2002 07:21:12 AM new
I think your numbers may be a bit off.
NOVA has a pertransaction fee of .25¢ and a AVS fee of .05¢ for a total of .30¢, which is exactly the same as Paypal
There discount rate of 2.17% vs. Paypal's 2.2 percent is cheaper. On you $1,000.00 per month, that equals $22.00 for Paypal and $21.70 for NOVA, a savings of .30¢
NOVA's monthly service fee of $10.00 which makes your total cost $9.70 more than Paypal.
If your Paypal prefered, the rebate makes the effective discount rate .7% for a cost of $7.00 on $1,000.00. When you compare to NOVA your paying $14.70 more on the discount rate. Factor in the monthly fee, and NOVA costs you $24.70 per month more.
You may like your merchant account and that is fine. However it is NOT cheaper.
|
stopwhining
|
posted on June 10, 2002 07:48:08 AM new
the reason for having a merchant account is more than just fees,it allows the seller to have more control over credit card transactions.in cases where the buyer wants the item shipped to a non confirmed address,the seller can do some background checking and decide if he wants to comply.
same with foreign cc transactions,currently only UK addresses can be verified.
but many of us continue to accept paypal payments ,because the customers have signed up for paypal,they may not feel comfortable giving away their cc data to every seller in cyberspace etc or they may have fund in their paypal account they want to spend.
but i agree with thchaser200,it is not a comfortable feeling to know that some day paypal could lock up your account for 30 days or more.given their level of customer service,it could be a lot more than 30 days.
that paypal debit card with 1 1/2% rebate is an attractive feature,but how many of us would dare to upload our savings into our paypal account just to take advantage of this feature for big ticket purchases??
|
GU1HToM
|
posted on June 11, 2002 07:44:40 AM new
Well then.
Since I did not jump thru their hoopes to maintain a premier/preffered/business account I didn't get that rate. That puts the percentage per transaction charge at (when I opened my merchant account) 3.50% + .30
Strike 1
Prepaid the monthly service fee is under $5 per month.
Strike 2
Since I never left money in my PAYPAL account I was not getting the rebate
Strike 3
Other points....
It is a business account. The money belongs to the business in the business account.
Not in PAYPALs hands till I find a a way to spend it to get their rebate.
The rebate only applies to purchases made with the PAYPAL credit card. My distributor gives me a better deal if I do not pay by credit card. So there is nothing lost there for me.
I can go & renegotiate my costs with NOVA.
Try doing that with PAYPAL.
It is real simple to me.
$25000 in online payment transactions last year. 2.17% or 3.5%
$542.50 or $875
Let me add in the $60 a year for the monthly fees
$602.50 or $875
So it would cost me $272.50 more a year to have remained with PAYPAL.
btw 2.17% is not the best that NOVA will do.
|
andrew123s
|
posted on June 11, 2002 09:57:41 AM new
I didn't know PayPal ever charged more than 2.9% + 30 cents, except for (what PayPal deems) high risk accounts, where I have heard they charge around 3.9% + 30 cents. Are you sure PayPal was charging you 3.5% + 30 cents?
|
stopwhining
|
posted on June 11, 2002 10:32:59 AM new
some of the problems with paypal comes from the fact paypal is not a bank.
it has bank accounts with different banks,it has a merchant account with a bank .all paypal member accounts are on the books of paypal and no where is it known to its banks or merchant account provider.
same when it comes to taking out insurance policy,it is paypal as the policyholder.
deductible applies to paypal ,not paypal members.
i would not be surprised someday paypal will merge with a bank.
paypal has done well,there is no serious threat to its market share in cyber transactions.
i dont understand why cant paypal requires a reserve -by going through the last 6 months of member transactions and come up with an amount whether 50-5000,instead of locking up the entire account when there is complaint or chargeback.
|
GU1HToM
|
posted on June 11, 2002 10:45:00 AM new
During one of their many changes in TOS PAYPAL had stated that any Premier accounts not actively listing on EBAY would not receive the Premier rate.
(I run my own auction/retail site)
This was in a notice I received via email last year.
The 3.5% rate is what they stated it would be going to in that email.
|
