Postmates added $70M in revenue and saved $3M in network fees with Stripe
stripe.com
stripe.com
However, I'm sorry to always be the sour grapes guy when it comes to talking about Stripe neglecting us SMEs.
I'm pretty sure a lot of these things mentioned in the article are being passed down to "regular" customers, but to be honest, it lately hasn't felt like that.
Last year there were a few price spikes, Radar fees that were initially negotiated where reinstated, same for refund fees.
Radar works great when it does, but has a lot of wonky stuff like not catching heavy carders which defeats the purpose of using rules.
Acceptance rates internationally are still lacking. If you have a European Stripe account, billing US customers will not provide the same acceptance rates as if you use a US account. In some Latam countries the difference can be important.
Stripe is vital to our growth, but it is a complicated marriage.
I really hope they don't forget about us, the regular merchants.
Is this due to Stripe or due to the credit card providers blocking transactions? I ask because I have a card that routinely declines charges if I am not near my home. (I can temporarily expand "home" by adding travel plans in their app, but it's inconvenient.)
Stripe offers Atlas so you can "easily" open a US Stripe account and serve your US customers from there, but wouldn't it be great if Stripe did that for you automatically?
That said, could you email me at edwin@stripe.com and we can take another look at the issues you mentioned? (For example, we honor rates for their negotiated term.)
The network also has access to the account holders phone number so can actually call to validate risky transactions.
Lower fraud rates would also make issuing banks more likely to choose visa over MasterCard, so be a competitive advantage.
We’re still a tiny B2C though, so we definitely feel the complicated marriage side of things. Not to mention PayPal. The missing elephant in the room.
It is from the same company that created MercadoLibre (Market Free) which originally was a clone of ebay. MercadoPago is a clone of Paypal.
Mercadolibre/Pago is worth about 51.000 billion dollars today.
Again no relation.
Honestly, it is a mess...
There are specific payment methods that are common in a single country where people prefer to use that instead of credit cards, as a result sometimes we have to integrate a bunch of different payment processors, a couple of them with non-existent or terrible documentation which result in a ton of emails and calls to clarify stuff.
Stripe is in Beta in Brazil for a while but I never developed something with it for the local market, there is a countrywide processor here that have great documentation and support everything that Brazilian customers are used to and the fees are in the same ballpark, so there's no need to use it.
> We heard it’s better than Brazil.
Which is funny for me, integrating payment processors in Brazil isn't a big deal and I had a lot of trouble with a few LatAm processors, but if I had to guess the reason I would say that a lot of old cards and cards for people with low income used to be national only, they couldn't pay anything in other currencies, nowadays the card situation is a bit better and most issued cards can purchase international goods but since stripe apparently is coming to Brazil, if you could process your payments through it it should work flawlessly.
> "By intelligently updating the credentials on saved cards that have expired or been replaced, CAU optimizes authorization rates to keep subscription payments recurring seamlessly."
This is the shady practice of charging people's new credit card when their old one expires or they replace it to get rid of their subscription accounts. People assume they'll rid themselves of their accounts on things like Postmates, but thanks to this shady shit they keep getting milked. In many cases they might not notice for a while and/or not be able to get a refund.
This should be completely illegal. It's extremely unethical. Customers should have to consent to sharing a new credit card with a service that they've only shared a previous one with. This "innovation" is rich people at rich companies figuring out how to screw people, many of them poor.
The other stuff is probably shady too, but $60 million of the $70 million came from this implementing this practice alone.
It's safe to assume that Stripe and Postmates set a large number of people back financially, some undoubtedly went hungry, some had trouble paying their bills. And Stripe does this for many other companies presumably.
As someone clearly smart and good enough to see the ethics of this practice, Patrick Collision should be ashamed of himself. Instead, they're bragging about it.
Is this really shady? I’d personally find this behavior super convenient.
But in reality, many companies make it nearly impossible to cancel a subscription, even when the customer has the right to do so. I have experienced cases where the only way to cancel is to call a designated phone number, but you're put on indefinite hold by the phone system and can never actually get through to the person who can cancel. Or you need to fax a cancellation request, and somehow the system never actually processes it, despite repeated attempts.
So, in these cases, cancelling an old card is an act of desperation, not an act of laziness.
Why wasn't customer consent part of the process? Because that would lead to a huge number of denials and account cancellations for unwanted services.
However, in the specific case of Postmates, have they actually used this feature to screw people over? I get what you are saying in the case of a subscription like Netflix. But with Postmates, the user is making a concrete in-the-moment decision to spend money. This actually feels like a minor convenience in that the customer is hungry and can get the order in without having to fish out their credit card details again.
> By intelligently updating the credentials on saved cards that have expired or been replaced, CAU optimizes authorization rates to keep subscription payments recurring seamlessly.
So either Stripe is referring to a feature that Postmates didn't directly use (unlikely), or they are referring to Postmates Unlimited subscriptions, which is $10/month (and not an in-the-moment decision)
I've rarely heard of people replacing a card b/c they want to cancel all their subscriptions.
When my cards are lost/stolen, they provide a whole new card number. To my knowledge, they are not eligible for these auto-update programs.
There's no reason this couldn't have been implemented by asking customers for consent. Consent isn't asked because it's not likely to be granted in many cases and they fucking know it.
Extremely little use friction, it's a single button press, but it actually informs the user or what is happening.
It would be really interesting to me to see the stats on how many users who have had their cards automatically updated actually make a purchase afterwards, and how many are zombies.
Why does Stripe not insist on requiring customer consent for this feature created supposedly for their convenience?
And we all know why: because a lot of customers would not consent to the thing Stripe does supposedly for their benefit.
And then you couldn't write articles and sell Stripe as a solution to extracting money from people who, in many cases, don't actually want to be customers.
You can blame people for not handling their finances better or claim that "everyone else is doing it" too, just like banks do with overdraft fees, but that doesn't make it less evil.
Rationalize it however you want. You're hurting poor people.
User consent should absolutely be required for such changes to financial obligations by way of charge subscriptions.
[1] https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/you-have-prote...
I understand the issues with some companies making it really hard to cancel a subscription, and I agree that there should be more regulation around being able to unsubscribe easily, but in the abstract, a subscription is a contract to pay X a month for Y service until you give the vendor notice of cancellation under some terms. If anything "canceling" by intentionally voiding your payment information in this way is a hack of the system, and a little unethical, even if it's expedient.
I would guess that, in the majority case, people's subscriptions lapsing due to their card expiring isn't intentional. I know I've certainly had to re-subscribe to a lot of things before, due to my card having to be replaced because of fraudulent activity, and if it could have just automatically incremented my expiration date by a couple months, that would have saved me hours of work.
$0 – 100,000 / month 2.9% + 30¢
$100,001 – 500,000 / month 2.7% + 30¢
$500,001 – 1,000,000 / month 2.4% + 30¢
$1,000,001 – 5,000,000 / month 2.2% + 30¢
$5,000,001+ / month 1.9% + 30¢
https://www.adyen.com/press-and-media/2019/postmates-selects...
https://www.adyen.com/press-and-media/2019/postmates-selects...