Visa owes YOU money if you used them to process from 1993-2003

[TheEnforcer]

Nobody should be surprised by this. Visa and MC are bussiness giants and giants often push their weight around because they don't have much of anything to keep them in check.

[Hell Puppy]

Yup, this might be a littl windfall for the processors, but unless you have your own merchant account, I doubt the site owners see any of it.

The typical PSP contract calls for a percentage fee that is based on volume plus holdbacks and any penalties. They are no more obligated to pass along savings to you they might incur from a better deal from their banks or MC/Visa than any other business would be if they cut a more favorable deal with their vendors.

If you expect otherwise, ask yourself this, were you planning on passing whatever you might have been refunded back along to your customers, the surfers?

[Dravyk]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

Yup, this might be a littl windfall for the processors, but unless you have your own merchant account, I doubt the site owners see any of it.

The typical PSP contract calls for a percentage fee that is based on volume plus holdbacks and any penalties. They are no more obligated to pass along savings to you they might incur from a better deal from their banks or MC/Visa than any other business would be if they cut a more favorable deal with their vendors.

If you expect otherwise, ask yourself this, were you planning on passing whatever you might have been refunded back along to your customers, the surfers?

Aha! Caught you in a flaw, HP.

Surfers aren't entitled to monies back because they didn't get short-shrifted in the first place; they paid the correct amount and had the correct amount taken out. It is the sponsors -- and revshare webmasters -- who did not get an accurate tally from VISA/MC.

As for the processors, we will have to see how this is going to be handled. It's quite possible sponsors who used IPSPs will send VISA/MC their gross sales amounts and the court will direct them to pay the merchants back directly. If it does go to the processors, I have a feeling they will pay. Afterall it's pretty much only two companies this industry has to deal with now adays.

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by Dravyk

Aha! Caught you in a flaw, HP.

Surfers aren't entitled to monies back because they didn't get short-shrifted in the first place; they paid the correct amount and had the correct amount taken out. It is the sponsors -- and revshare webmasters -- who did not get an accurate tally from VISA/MC.

As for the processors, we will have to see how this is going to be handled. It's quite possible sponsors who used IPSPs will send VISA/MC their gross sales amounts and the court will direct them to pay the merchants back directly. If it does go to the processors, I have a feeling they will pay. Afterall it's pretty much only two companies this industry has to deal with now adays.

I'd have to fish out my contracts to be absolutely certain, but I dont think the "transaction charge" applied by the iPSPs says anything about the MC/Visa charges and instead just says "13.5%", "14.5%", or whatever deal you managed to negotiate based on your volume. It isn't stated as some caclulation of the "MC/Visa charges plus an additional X%".

In which case, if that's what they took out, then your check was calculated properly.

[Dravyk]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

I'd have to fish out my contracts to be absolutely certain, but I dont think the "transaction charge" applied by the iPSPs says anything about the MC/Visa charges and instead just says "13.5%", "14.5%", or whatever deal you managed to negotiate based on your volume. It isn't stated as some caclulation of the "MC/Visa charges plus an additional X%".

In which case, if that's what they took out, then your check was calculated properly.

I see what you are saying. Yes, hmm, it would depend on how it was done. One way would be sponsors and affiliates; the other way it would only apply to processors and those with their own merchant accounts.

Good thinking there. Now I'm wondering which way it is.

[RyanLanane]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

I'd have to fish out my contracts to be absolutely certain, but I dont think the "transaction charge" applied by the iPSPs says anything about the MC/Visa charges and instead just says "13.5%", "14.5%", or whatever deal you managed to negotiate based on your volume. It isn't stated as some caclulation of the "MC/Visa charges plus an additional X%".

In which case, if that's what they took out, then your check was calculated properly.

Unfortunately I agree here;

Not that it wouldn't be nice to get even 1/2 of 1% of say what.. 4 or 5 million dollars processed through Paycom - I could definately handle a kickback like that, especially right now

[RyanLanane]

Damn I just realized after I made that post... and did some quick math... Paycome revenues from me alone, which I realized 5-6 million is actually on the low side - Wow, if they have a 30% profit margin those SOB's are making more than bank

Not to mention the reserve money they are sitting on top of 'collecting interest' which for some reason we don't get, never did get that. Fine keep our money in reserves BUT pay us the damn interest if you are really keeping them for the reasons you state...

[Dravyk]

Originally Posted by RyanLanane

Not to mention the reserve money they are sitting on top of 'collecting interest' which for some reason we don't get, never did get that. Fine keep our money in reserves BUT pay us the damn interest if you are really keeping them for the reasons you state...

That's the cost of doing business, Ryan.

I remember when younger webmasters getting $35 flat from sponsors would compain about the email boxes and exit consoles on paysites. Affiliate owners had to explain to them that was how they were able to pay them $35 flat, and if they wanted it other wise, no problem, they would then go down to $25 flat. Soon after the model for no exits for TGP traffic came into being.