Subject:
|
Re: More changes at Paypal
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 20 Dec 2000 16:06:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
369 times
|
| |
|
|
Scott A wrote:
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.market.services, William Brumbach writes:
> > > I'd prefer they pay for it with advertising and an IPO.
> >
> > Advertising, sure... good idea, but what do you mean when you say "an IPO"?
> >
> > That they should find some sucker investors to buy stock in a company that
> > doesn't have a revenue model and fund operating expenses out of capital,
> > forever?
> >
> > Or did you mean something else?
> >
> > It's one thing to fund current deficits while building mind and market
> > share, if you have a path to profitability. But it is entirely another to
> > ask stockholders to fund something that never will make money. As many
> > dot.com companies learned the hard way.
>
> You are correct, too many of the e-business get treated by consumers as
> "make hey while the sun shines" type deals. Despite that, I think there is a
> need for what paypal is providing. However, I see no reason why individuals
> should not be able to make straight transfers between banks or CC without
> involving a middle man/men.
The ONLY way for two people to exchange wealth without a middle man is
to do a direct goods or services for goods or services trade. If you use
cash, there is a middleman (the guy who minted the money, and whose
guarantee you are depending on). To transfer money between my bank
account and your bank account, we need at least one middleman, our bank.
If we use different banks, there are at least two middlemen (the two
banks), and probably more.
Like I said before, there is NO way to transfer money for free. All you
can do is look for banks who do things to bundle transactions to reduce
the costs. This is one of the reasons Larry's factoring service could be
cheaper, instead of each transaction incurring the costs of shifting
money, Larry found folks who were willing to run at a negative balance
for some time, such that the transactions could be bundled. With enough
traffic, the factors might even be able to never actually exchange any
money.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: More changes at Paypal
|
| (...) Money is the accepted measure of value. Sure, you could go back in time to and trade commodities - but that would be crazy. We use money as it a stable measure of value - even better than gold these days. If I look and my bank account over a (...) (24 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: More changes at Paypal
|
| (...) You are correct, too many of the e-business get treated by consumers as "make hey while the sun shines" type deals. Despite that, I think there is a need for what paypal is providing. However, I see no reason why individuals should not be able (...) (24 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
15 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
