To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.market.servicesOpen lugnet.market.services in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Marketplace / Services / 268
267  |  269
Subject: 
Can we all agree to do eCheck payments with Paypal and not CC?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.market.services
Date: 
Thu, 2 Nov 2000 06:49:46 GMT
Viewed: 
1300 times
  
I know several people (including myself) are dreading the day when we're
forced to switch to the Premier or Business account at Paypal.  Getting
slapped with what will work out to about 3% in fees on every transaction
will sting, and in many cases, that fee is going to be passed along, either
out in the open as a "surcharge" or quietly in price increases, to the buyers.

I've noticed over the last couple of weeks since Paypal instituted this
policy that the majority of people don't seem to use their CC's to make
payments - they either use the eCheck thing or they just have money laying
in their Paypal accounts.  In fact, only three of my orders have reduced my
"limit" from $500 to $457 - and two of those are from the same buyer.

What I'd like to know is if people think we as a community of AFOL buyers
and sellers can agree that if we're going to use Paypal to handle our
transactions, we only do so with non-CC methods?  I just did a payment to a
friend of mine and I was surprised at how easy it is to NOT use your CC - in
fact it looks like the eCheck method is the default.

I see this as a win-win situation for both buyers and sellers, with the only
downside being it takes up to 4 days for the thing to process - big deal.
Buyers still get to click their payments in and not mess with paying for a
money order or writing a check and mailing either one.  Sellers get to avoid
costly fees and trips to the bank to deposit paper payments.  And nobody,
buyers or sellers, has to deal with the costs of those fees being passed along.

I don't think there is any way to actually refuse to accept CC payments
through Paypal, so this would have to be a voluntary agreement (although
with the understanding that if you're the only CC payment out of 20 and my
limit suddenly drops by $17.84 - it'll be pretty obvious who decided not to
play nice) between buyers and sellers.  Too bad you can't just shut off that
ability - although Paypal will certainly shut it off for you once you hit
the $500 limit, although the way I read the policy they'll hold onto any CC
payment funds sent to you until you upgrade your account, while still
letting you receive Paypal balance and bank transfers.

What do other people think about this?



Message has 4 Replies:
  Re: Can we all agree to do eCheck payments with Paypal and not CC?
 
I'm willing to stick to your informal agreement... seems a good idea to me. (...) I think you can refuse a payment once you go over the limit though, right? BTW, PayPal just went international. I was excited. Then I read the fine print... 30 cents (...) (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.market.services)
  Re: Can we all agree to do eCheck payments with Paypal and not CC?
 
(...) I suppose I should have know this would happen. I'm less than $3 from the limit. (...) My plan is to 1) start accepting funds via YAHOO! PayDirect. It's (still) free. 2) (probably) Post on my web site that Payapl CC payments will incur the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.market.services)
  Re: Can we all agree to do eCheck payments with Paypal and not CC?
 
(...) Count me as one of these people. I like my account just the way it is right now. I tend not to keep funds at Paypal. I keep them at my x.com bank account. My Paypal account is linked to my X.com bank account and that is the account where I (...) (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.market.services)
  Re: Can we all agree to do eCheck payments with Paypal and not CC?
 
(...) Okay, here is my problem: I have previously never had a balance in my Paypal account because I never sell anything via the internet. It just so happens that a seller recently kicked me some money back again because the item was not in the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.market.services)

35 Messages in This Thread:














Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR