Financially Speaking / Archive RSS Feed
Archive for the ‘e-commerce’ Category
Buried in Billing Activities
This is a guest post from Lance Walley, the Co-Founder of Chargify and EngineYard. Chargify is an SaaS software that manages billing activities. Engineyard provides infrastructure for running Ruby on Rails applications in the cloud (TransFS runs on Engineyard). I suspect that his story of how Engineyard got buring in billing activities will resonate with many entrepreneurs and developers.
Over the course of a few years, Engineyard grew from 0 customers to 1,000 and by month 12 we were buried in Managing our Billing Activities (BAM – Billing Activity Management). We had a combination of software and people involved every day just to keep up. It became very expensive in terms of operational costs, customer dissatisfaction and the inability to report on that activity.
Engine Yard started reining in these costs in 2009, but I wish a better solution had existed earlier.
How We Got Buried
Here’s what happened. I think it’s pretty typical:
- It’s easy to get started with tools like Quickbooks and Auth.net to set up simple recurring billing of ‘x’ dollars per month on a customer’s credit card. When you just want to get a customer set up, this is quick and simple, but the simplicity is short-term because…
- Customers add & remove products, you need to change the recurring amount they are billed
- You’ll change pricing over time. We did so 4 times over a couple of years. We gave existing customers 1 year of grandfathered pricing, which added another layer of complexity to pricing.
- Some customers get special pricing because they’re in a special group, such as a charity, school, or reseller. Another layer of pricing.
- Credit cards get declined or expire, so someone needs to resolve these issues. I later learned that this process is called “dunning”.
- As you figure out what your customers really want, you’ll change your products.
- This is where “metered billing” comes into play. Unlike pre-paid flat-rate plans mentioned so far in this story, this is where customers pay ‘x’ amount per ‘y’ widgets used in the previous billing cycle.
- As your business grows and you get a finance person, you’ll discover that some charges must be “recognized” over different periods of time. We found out that set-up fees are supposed to be recognized over the expected life of the customer. I had never heard of “revenue recognition”. Wouldn’t it be nice if your BAM system could help with things like this?

As you can see, Engine Yard quickly outgrew the systems we started with, and we had almost no ability to report on all of this activity because the data was either spread across different systems or just didn’t exist.
We were paying a lot for a bad BAM system. For my next business I wanted to solve the BAM problem, which I think we have done at Chargify.

Yesterday, Techcrunch reported that mobile payments startup Boku (now calling themselves Paymo) raised $25 million in series C funding led by venture firm DAG Ventures. Since its launch in June, Boku has raised $38 million in funding.
The way it works is that to make a micropayment, Boku users enter their cell phone number on the website, reply to a text message, and all virtual charges are tacked onto their monthly cell phone bill. This is great since users don’t need to have a credit card or bank account to make a micropayment.
Boku recently acquired its competitors Paymo and Mobillcash, and with this acquisition gained a strong base of users internationally. No joke: Boku boasts service in 58 countries and 190 carriers with more countries stepping into the queue.
One of the major problems mobile payments platforms face is high fees stemming from mobile carriers. This can represent anywhere between 10-50% of purchase price….also nothing to joke about. However, Boku is in the process of negotiating these fees down, first in Europe then hopefully followed by the US.
Boku’s major competitor is Zong, most well known for providing virtual currency via Facebook.
On Monday the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation released a report summarizing its investigation into deceptive e-commerce business practices. The report highlights the growth of sleazy direct-marketing practices on the internet, particularly companies such as Affinion, Verture or Webloyalty. These companies, which have operated for years through direct mail and telemarketing, exploit consumers’ confusion about the online “checkout” process to sign consumers up for monthly payments in exchange for services that consumers may not want or understand. The report highlights two deceptive practices in particular: (i) “misleading ‘Yes’ and ‘Continue’ buttons that cause consumers to reasonably think they are completing the original transaction, rather than entering a new ongoing financial relationship” and (ii) the “data-pass” process whereby “direct-marketing companies receive automatic transfers of credit or debit card information from a familiar web seller to the third-party membership club.” After “agreeing” to enter into a relationship with direct marketers, consumers are typically charged $10-$20 per month until the consumer cancels the membership. According to the Senate Committee, thousands of online consumers have complained to their attorneys general about these deceptive and misleading practices.
Why would a reputable web commerce company enter into a partnership with a sleazy third-party membership club? The answer is that such partnerships are extremely profitable. Whereas typical internet advertising banners have CPMs (cost per thousand people who view the ad) around $30-$40, third-party membership clubs pay out CPMs of between $850 and $2,650, depending on conversion rates.
However, when reading the frustrated testimonials of customers who feel duped by these deceptive practices, one wonders whether it is truly in the best interest of e-commerce companies to allow third-parties the opportunity to deceive their customers.

PaymentsNews reports that according to a survey, eCommerce fraud is down for 2009. The survey was conducted by Cybersource and reports that:
“merchants in 2009 were fighting back against fraud, and seeing considerable evidence of success. U.S. and Canadian merchants expect to lose about $3.3 billion to eCommerce fraud this year, down from $4 billion last year. This is the first drop in estimated revenues lost since 2003. The percentage of revenue merchants predict they will lose in 2009, on average, is 1.2%, the lowest estimate in the 11-year history of the survey.”
Why the good news? Well, it seems that more widely accepted usage of automated decision tools to sort orders increased by 16%… from 56% in 2008 to 67% in 2009. An example of this is called “device fingerprinting,” when the source of orders is identified by a computer’s operating characteristics, also called its “fingerprint.” The use of device fingerprinting tripled in use, especially among merchants with more than $25 million in sales online. Another reason for the decrease has to do with awareness. About 33% of survey participants said they had changed their procedures in response to fraud, and about 68% now track the status of orders they manually review to better understand fraud management. This is in comparison to 54% the year before.
Merchants with eCommerce revenues of $5-$25 million were hit hardest in 2009, with about 1.3% of accepted orders resulting in loss due to fraud. Half of survey respondents reported that this year fraudulent orders appeared more like valid orders than the past year, meaning fraudsters are adapting to the changing environment.
Another increasingly positive figure is the growth in international sales. Though many merchants are wary of increased fraud when selling outside the US and Canada, the numbers of merchants going international has also increased to 54% from 51% the year before. The good news is that fraud on international order decreased a whopping 50% this year and order rejection rates decreased by 30%.
In terms of improving in the year to come, 60% of merchants with eCommerces sales bigger than $5 million mentioned adding automated detection and sorting capabilities on their systems as a top priority. Other priorities incluce improving process analytics (20%) and streamlining tasks and workflow around manual review (16%).
For more information on the survey results and method, please click here.
Image courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/28551615@N00/83554503/

Many businesses sell goods that fit the micro-payment category (under $5) and wonder if they can make online selling a reality. However, the reality is that since payments online are made using credit cards, costs incurred for credit card processing really narrow the profit margin. A great Ecommerce Times article explains how and why online micro-payment can work.
Since most micro-payment models are sensitive to convenience and cost of processing, new merchants may feel confused about when is the right time to shop for a credit card processor. TransFS encourages new merchants and merchants with smaller credit card volume to begin shopping for a credit card processor at the point when volume hits $1,000. Until this point, using a processor may not be worth the money. TransFS encourages its small volume users to go through the auction process keeping that number in mind.
Image courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/pfala/
If you are an ecommerce business and you are paying more than 2.00% + 0.20 per transaction (so $2.20 for a $100 transaction or $0.40 for a $10 transaction) you likely could get a better deal – more info below.
There are lots of costs involved in credit card processing. But the largest is Interchange, which is the amount that the credit card processor (also called a merchant account provider) collects from the business accepting credit cards and passes along to Visa and Mastercard, who then in turn pass most of interchange along to the banks that issue credit cards.
If you accept credit cards, your interchange rate will vary depending on your transaction mix. But we recently did analysis of all our e-commerce customers to determine their average interchange rate. The result:
average per-item fee = $0.1226
average % fee = 1.844%
Credit card processors deserve a reasonable markup over the price of interchange. They provide all the customer service, maintain the computer networks that send the transactions around, handle all the billing, etc. In our opinion, a reasonable markup over interchange, depending on the size of your business, is 0.10% to 0.50% of volume, plus 0.05 to 0.20 per transaction. If you are paying more than that, you might want to consider finding a new credit card processor.
If you don’t want to spend a lot of time and effort shopping, and you want to ensure that you get the best deal possible, use TransFS.com to get a fast, accurate, unbiased and apples-to-apples credit card processing comparison.
If you are not an ecommerce merchant, some additional data on average interchange rates is available in these articles: Average Interchange Rate and Average Credit Card Processing Costs.
Earlier this year the guys at 37signals wrote an informative post about how they limited chargebacks. In it they shared their history of changes that reduced chargebacks little by little. This culminated in an innovative idea to create a website that explained 37signals’ charges to their customers. The URL of this site was then used as the business name on the credit card statements of customers. From their post:
If you don’t use a product descriptor (“Basecamp” or “Backpack”), you get 22 characters. So I decided to register 37signals-charge.com, redirect it to 37signals.com/charge, write up a page explaining why there’s a charge on your card, and put that URL on people’s charge slips instead of “37signals, LLC” or “Basecamp” or “Highrise” etc.
Now when someone buys something from us, this line item shows up on their credit card statement:
37signals-charge.com 800.xxx.xxxx ILVisiting that URL takes you to this page where we explain the charge, the products, some suggestions if you don’t recognize the products, and a link to our billing support form someone needs additional help.
This was quick to implement and lead to a 30% drop in chargebacks as a percentage of sales. Not bad for a small investment of time.
Do you have an innovative method to limit chargebacks that you have used in your business? If so, please share it with us in the comments.
Easy PCI Compliance
PCI Compliance rules, designed to ensure that credit card numbers are not kept on merchants’ computers in a form that are easy to steal, is a good thing, nobody like having their credit card stolen and fraud hurts everyone. However, it is expensive and complicated for everyone who accepts credit cards, in particular online merchants. Most business owners have no idea what they have to do to meet the PCI compliance requirements.
If you are confused about PCI compiance, Internet Retailer recently posted a good article on the topic. The best part of the article is this:
Don`t hold data
PCI experts say one of the best ways for a retailer to reduce PCI compliance costs is to not hold cardholder data, because only retailer systems—networks, servers, databases and software—that hold cardholder data fall under PCI. No card data in a customer history database, for instance, means that database is excluded from PCI audit.
Seriously folks, most smaller businesses do not even require an audit if their numbers are not stored. Just send the card into on to your gateway company and let them store it. Most small and midsized businesses, if they don’t store credit card numbers, can achieve PCI compliance by simply filling out a self-assessment questionnaire.
-
About TransFS
TransFS is a comparison shopping website for credit card processing.
Our unique auction process and comparison shopping engine leads to an average savings 40% on credit card processing.
Click here to learn how TransFS works or try TransFS now to quickly add cash to your bottom line. Search
-
You are currently browsing the archives for the e-commerce category.
Archives
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- July 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
Categories
- auctions (8)
- Business Tips (36)
- buy or sell a company (5)
- credit card processing (133)
- credit cards (29)
- customer stories (7)
- debit cards (7)
- deceptive practices (35)
- e-commerce (17)
- financial services (25)
- Informed Merchant (34)
- interchange (37)
- Intuit (1)
- negotiation (8)
- networking (3)
- payment gateways (16)
- payment processing (104)
- PayPal (8)
- payroll (1)
- small business (40)
- small business financial services (15)
- TransFS (36)
- Uncategorized (21)