Alternative to paypal

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
43 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Alternative to paypal

Ben Yates
The new amazon payment API looks really good.  Support for micropayments, etc.

http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/08/04/why-you-shouldnt-ignore-amazons-new-fps/

--
Ben Yates
Wikipedia blog - http://wikip.blogspot.com

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Mark
Ben Yates wrote:
> The new amazon payment API looks really good.  Support for micropayments, etc.
>
> http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/08/04/why-you-shouldnt-ignore-amazons-new-fps/
>
>  
If I recall correctly, when proposals like this come up, the canned
reply from foundation-type people (if a reply comes at all) is that at
the moment the benefits of adding another option outweight the negatives
of having to manage yet another account---between Paypal, moneybookers,
direct bank transfers in both Germany and the US, and mailed checks,
most people are able to donate with reasonable ease, a large number of
currencies are covered, and the fees aren't *too* unreasonable. At
least, that was the reply to previous suggestions that we add support
for e-gold and for Google's payment system.

Perhaps at some point in the future they'll do a reevaluation and choose
a new set of two online payment systems (maybe moneybookers is no longer
the best 2nd choice?), but I don't think it's likely that Wikimedia will
ever want the hassle of simultaneously supporting a large number of them,

Of course, I speak as someone with no particular knowledge of the
foundation's inner workings; these are just my observations of past
practice.

-Mark


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Uber Halogen
On 05/08/2007, Delirium <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Ben Yates wrote:
> > The new amazon payment API looks really good.  Support for micropayments, etc.
> >
> > http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/08/04/why-you-shouldnt-ignore-amazons-new-fps/
> >
> >
> If I recall correctly, when proposals like this come up, the canned
> reply from foundation-type people (if a reply comes at all) is that at

Curious, isn't it odd that we voted in a board that ignores our proposals?

> the moment the benefits of adding another option outweight the negatives
> of having to manage yet another account---between Paypal, moneybookers,

Do the board members really not have enough time to do this, if they
don't then they shouldn't be board members. It would take a few
minutes every week or month - not much time to ask.

> direct bank transfers in both Germany and the US, and mailed checks,
> most people are able to donate with reasonable ease, a large number of

It really isn't about ease, the Amazon thing AFAICS has lower fees and
therefore would be preferred by users who don't have much money to
donate (every little helps).

> currencies are covered, and the fees aren't *too* unreasonable. At
> least, that was the reply to previous suggestions that we add support
> for e-gold and for Google's payment system.

Perhaps our Foundation is in a secret deal with eBay and co. ;) -
really we should be providing as much incentive as possible for users
to donate and remember one of Google's corporate philosophies is:
"Don't be evil" (source: Wikipedia).

>
> Perhaps at some point in the future they'll do a reevaluation and choose
> a new set of two online payment systems (maybe moneybookers is no longer
> the best 2nd choice?), but I don't think it's likely that Wikimedia will
> ever want the hassle of simultaneously supporting a large number of them,
>
> Of course, I speak as someone with no particular knowledge of the
> foundation's inner workings; these are just my observations of past
> practice.
>
> -Mark
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

-UH.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

geni
On 8/5/07, Uber Halogen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Perhaps our Foundation is in a secret deal with eBay and co. ;) -
> really we should be providing as much incentive as possible for users
> to donate and remember one of Google's corporate philosophies is:
> "Don't be evil" (source: Wikipedia).

Google are a PLC. Attempting to enforce that would likely result in
complaints from shareholders.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Florence Devouard-3
In reply to this post by Uber Halogen
Uber Halogen wrote:

> On 05/08/2007, Delirium <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Ben Yates wrote:
>>> The new amazon payment API looks really good.  Support for micropayments, etc.
>>>
>>> http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/08/04/why-you-shouldnt-ignore-amazons-new-fps/
>>>
>>>
>> If I recall correctly, when proposals like this come up, the canned
>> reply from foundation-type people (if a reply comes at all) is that at
>
> Curious, isn't it odd that we voted in a board that ignores our proposals?

It is not odd at all. Paypal system is a purely operational issue. The
board is not in charge of operations. Sue is. Please contact her. That
is her job.

>> the moment the benefits of adding another option outweight the negatives
>> of having to manage yet another account---between Paypal, moneybookers,
>
> Do the board members really not have enough time to do this, if they
> don't then they shouldn't be board members. It would take a few
> minutes every week or month - not much time to ask.

----> Sue

>> direct bank transfers in both Germany and the US, and mailed checks,
>> most people are able to donate with reasonable ease, a large number of
>
> It really isn't about ease, the Amazon thing AFAICS has lower fees and
> therefore would be preferred by users who don't have much money to
> donate (every little helps).
>
>> currencies are covered, and the fees aren't *too* unreasonable. At
>> least, that was the reply to previous suggestions that we add support
>> for e-gold and for Google's payment system.
>
> Perhaps our Foundation is in a secret deal with eBay and co. ;) -
> really we should be providing as much incentive as possible for users
> to donate and remember one of Google's corporate philosophies is:
> "Don't be evil" (source: Wikipedia).
>
>> Perhaps at some point in the future they'll do a reevaluation and choose
>> a new set of two online payment systems (maybe moneybookers is no longer
>> the best 2nd choice?), but I don't think it's likely that Wikimedia will
>> ever want the hassle of simultaneously supporting a large number of them,
>>
>> Of course, I speak as someone with no particular knowledge of the
>> foundation's inner workings; these are just my observations of past
>> practice.
>>
>> -Mark

Bordering trolling in your observations nevertheless.
In any cases, this week, we held Wikimania in Taipei. Some board members
are back home (Frieda I think), some are still in Taipei, and others are
in transit. I am commenting from Hong Kong airport. Last I heard, Sue
was still stuck in Los Angeles airport. Contact her on all operations
matters.

More on the role of the
board:http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Elections_to_the_board_%28June_2007%29

Thanks

Ant



>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
> -UH.


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Mark
Florence Devouard wrote:

>>> Perhaps at some point in the future they'll do a reevaluation and choose
>>> a new set of two online payment systems (maybe moneybookers is no longer
>>> the best 2nd choice?), but I don't think it's likely that Wikimedia will
>>> ever want the hassle of simultaneously supporting a large number of them,
>>>
>>> Of course, I speak as someone with no particular knowledge of the
>>> foundation's inner workings; these are just my observations of past
>>> practice.
>>>
>>> -Mark
>>>      
>
> Bordering trolling in your observations nevertheless.
>  

Huh? I don't see what prompted this personal attack. I was replying to a
suggestion that we add Yet Another Payment System with a guess that the
Foundation won't do so because it's a huge hassle to simultaneously
support a lot of payment systems, and there's little benefit from doing
so, and that's why similar suggestions in the past haven't been
accepted. How is that "trolling"?

-Mark


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Florence Devouard-3
Delirium wrote:

> Florence Devouard wrote:
>>>> Perhaps at some point in the future they'll do a reevaluation and choose
>>>> a new set of two online payment systems (maybe moneybookers is no longer
>>>> the best 2nd choice?), but I don't think it's likely that Wikimedia will
>>>> ever want the hassle of simultaneously supporting a large number of them,
>>>>
>>>> Of course, I speak as someone with no particular knowledge of the
>>>> foundation's inner workings; these are just my observations of past
>>>> practice.
>>>>
>>>> -Mark
>>>>      
>> Bordering trolling in your observations nevertheless.
>>  
>
> Huh? I don't see what prompted this personal attack. I was replying to a
> suggestion that we add Yet Another Payment System with a guess that the
> Foundation won't do so because it's a huge hassle to simultaneously
> support a lot of payment systems, and there's little benefit from doing
> so, and that's why similar suggestions in the past haven't been
> accepted. How is that "trolling"?
>
> -Mark

"quoting" someone whilst removing the background of an issue, and the
comments to which the person was answering, is really not nice Mark. I
would prefer you avoid doing that.

In this case, my sentence was not an answer to one of your comments, so
you have no reason to feel attacked. I have no memory of you trolling in
the past. You often are very passionate about some issues, but I do not
remember you saying things just to offend people. What you wrote in that
discussion was fair and I have nothing to comment, and no reason to read
that as trolling behavior from your part.

My comment was attached to Uber comment, which was, for memory

"Do the board members really not have enough time to do this, if they
don't then they shouldn't be board members. It would take a few
minutes every week or month - not much time to ask."

This sentence is, from my perspective, an attack on board members. When
I read this sentence, I feel no "constructive" comment. I only read
nasty criticism. It is not the job of the board to change payment system
from Paypal to another. And implying that not spending just a few
minutes a week to fix paypal system is ground for removal of a board
member, just reveal a total misunderstanding of the role of a board
member, and an attempt to pain people. I think we are all together in
the same story. Our goal should not to hit on each other each time
something is not working as well as we would wish. I am more than happy
to help when I have time, when I have the ability, when I think it makes
sense. But I think it should always be with the assumption of good faith
from all parties. There is no good faith in Uber comment.

ant


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Mark Ryan
I've heard a lot of horror stories about Paypal. And considering that
by using PayPal, we're basically paying eBay a percentage of donations
we receive, I reckon it'd be a good idea to look at alternatives every
now and then. Now that Wikimedia has hit the big time, our support for
any particular payment method may actually become important.

~Mark Ryan

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Sebastian Moleski
On 8/12/07, Mark Ryan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I've heard a lot of horror stories about Paypal. And considering that
> by using PayPal, we're basically paying eBay a percentage of donations
> we receive, I reckon it'd be a good idea to look at alternatives every
> now and then. Now that Wikimedia has hit the big time, our support for
> any particular payment method may actually become important.
>

When you accept credit cards, a percentage goes to VISA, Mastercard, etc.,
another percentage to your merchant account provider. How's that different
from Paypal/eBay taking a cut?

Either way, the question that should drive our decision regarding available
payment methods is fairly simple: what methods do a significant number of
donors (or a few donors with donations of a significant amount) prefer? If
it's Paypal, that's what we ought to have. If it's checks, money orders,
wires, debit transfers, credit cards, debit cards, Moneybookers, gift cards,
etc. then we ought to offer those too.

Sebastian
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Anthony-73
On 8/12/07, Sebastian Moleski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 8/12/07, Mark Ryan <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I've heard a lot of horror stories about Paypal.

Most of the horror stories about Paypal are from the early days,
and/or from tiny businesses with grey-area business practices.

> > And considering that
> > by using PayPal, we're basically paying eBay a percentage of donations
> > we receive, I reckon it'd be a good idea to look at alternatives every
> > now and then. Now that Wikimedia has hit the big time, our support for
> > any particular payment method may actually become important.
> >
>
> When you accept credit cards, a percentage goes to VISA, Mastercard, etc.,
> another percentage to your merchant account provider. How's that different
> from Paypal/eBay taking a cut?
>
Merchant accounts are often cheaper, but they also are often harder to
manage than paypal, especially when dealing with people in so many
countries, using so many different currencies, etc.

> Either way, the question that should drive our decision regarding available
> payment methods is fairly simple: what methods do a significant number of
> donors (or a few donors with donations of a significant amount) prefer? If
> it's Paypal, that's what we ought to have. If it's checks, money orders,
> wires, debit transfers, credit cards, debit cards, Moneybookers, gift cards,
> etc. then we ought to offer those too.
>
Support for micropayments is a cool feature, and something which isn't
really offered by paypal.  Then again, the impact such a feature would
have on foundation revenue would probably be small percentagewise.

If I were King of Wikipedia I'd probably try out amazon's payment
system for the cool factor, to have a readily available backup, and
just to learn more about micropayments, but not for financial reasons.
 I'm a big fan of trying out new stuff.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Andrew Gray
On 12/08/07, Anthony <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > When you accept credit cards, a percentage goes to VISA, Mastercard, etc.,
> > another percentage to your merchant account provider. How's that different
> > from Paypal/eBay taking a cut?
> >
> Merchant accounts are often cheaper, but they also are often harder to
> manage than paypal, especially when dealing with people in so many
> countries, using so many different currencies, etc.

Yeah. And even more hassle when people start messing around, which
occasionally happens.

Right now, we're effectively outsourcing the overheads of collecting
the donations to a third party; we could *perhaps* do that cheaper
internally, but it strikes me as equally likely we'd end up spending
more in staff time and energy handling it than we'd save on
commissions.

> Support for micropayments is a cool feature, and something which isn't
> really offered by paypal.  Then again, the impact such a feature would
> have on foundation revenue would probably be small percentagewise.
>
> If I were King of Wikipedia I'd probably try out amazon's payment
> system for the cool factor, to have a readily available backup, and
> just to learn more about micropayments, but not for financial reasons.
>  I'm a big fan of trying out new stuff.

The only real question is "is it worth the effort". If we need to pay
a setup fee, will our income back through that cover it; will the
additional income from adding a n'th payment system offset the amount
of time and hassle to set it up and keep it going.

(If we make $5,000 through donations after we let people use X
service, it's probably worth us setting it up. If we make $50, it's
probably not. But it's hard to predict this)

Amazon is probably a fairly good bet as a non-trivial service - they
do have a large established userbase - and it might be worth trying to
estimate what proportion of potential donors that payment method
represents compared to Moneybookers. (I very much doubt it's going to
beat paypal...)

However, we do need to keep focused on a "main methods" approach.
There is (anecdotal? but I've heard it a few times) evidence that
offering more than two or three methods of payment confuses people and
makes them less likely to shell out - because they get confused and
annoyed. Right now, we have moneybookers, paypal, and a general "how
to pay us with real money" (the latter probably needing some pruning
and a bit of layout). There'd be nothing stopping us having a link
underneath to a page of "other ways to donate", though, with the
various 'backup' methods.

--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Gerard Meijssen-3
In reply to this post by Ben Yates
Hoi,
Ben alerted us to the Amazon payment API. There is another new kid on the
block; it is the Google checkout system. They provide there system for free
for the whole of 2007. When we would support Google, the money spend on
implementing their system would be earned in less fees.

Also when there is not just Paypal but other systems as well, we can at some
stage go for the organisation that offers the best conditions. This is only
possible when we are able to support the providers of all these systems.

Thanks,
    GerardM

https://*checkout*.*google*.com/

On 8/5/07, Ben Yates <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> The new amazon payment API looks really good.  Support for micropayments,
> etc.
>
>
> http://paulstamatiou.com/2007/08/04/why-you-shouldnt-ignore-amazons-new-fps/
>
> --
> Ben Yates
> Wikipedia blog - http://wikip.blogspot.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Sue Gardner-2
Hi folks,

I’ve been following this conversation with interest, since it
parallels a similar one we're starting to have at the office. And the
considerations mentioned here are the ones we’ve been talking about
too: usability/accessibility, financial implications (i.e.,
commissions and other overhead), wanting to support multiple avenues
for donation versus the risk of clutter, the cost of switching, etc.

What we actually need, I think, is a survey of the available options,
laying out the pros and cons of each. I’ve seen a couple of these
online –for example, here
http://www.idealware.org/donations/intro.php- but they are all pretty
dated.

If anyone’s seen anything that's more recent, I’d love to know about
it - otherwise, we will likely end up commissioning something specific
for us.  Although I doubt that will happen prior to the next fundraiser.

Thanks,
Sue

GerardM wrote:
On 12/08/07, Anthony <[hidden email]> wrote:

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Andrew Gray
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
On 12/08/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hoi,
> Ben alerted us to the Amazon payment API. There is another new kid on the
> block; it is the Google checkout system. They provide there system for free
> for the whole of 2007. When we would support Google, the money spend on
> implementing their system would be earned in less fees.
>
> Also when there is not just Paypal but other systems as well, we can at some
> stage go for the organisation that offers the best conditions. This is only
> possible when we are able to support the providers of all these systems.

Mmm. We should remember, though, that "best conditions" is not simply
a study of how good they are in isolation; a crappy service which has
a lock on two thirds of the market is still pretty much essential
because of that, despite irritatingly high fees.

The bottom line here is getting lots of money in, not just getting it
in in the most elegant way possible :-)

--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Anthony-73
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
On 8/12/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hoi,
> Ben alerted us to the Amazon payment API. There is another new kid on the
> block; it is the Google checkout system. They provide there system for free
> for the whole of 2007. When we would support Google, the money spend on
> implementing their system would be earned in less fees.
>
Just a single datapoint, but the one and only time I used Google
checkout the merchant wound up losing my order, Google refused to
refund my money (saying I had to go through the merchant first), and I
wound up having to dispute the charges through my credit card company.

Maybe I'll try them again in a year or two, but not any time soon.

Again, just a single datapoint, feel free to ignore it.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Ilario Valdelli
In reply to this post by Sebastian Moleski

> When you accept credit cards, a percentage goes to VISA, Mastercard, etc.,
> another percentage to your merchant account provider. How's that different
> from Paypal/eBay taking a cut?
>
>  
It's more complicated.

In any transaction in e-commerce we have three levels:

1.the PSP (who manage the e-commerce platform)
2.the acquirer (generally connected directly to one bank)
3.the credit card

American Express and some other credit card are also acquirer and for
this reason they seems to be more expensive.

In these levels we have some charges fee:

1.the PSP generally applies a fee for a transaction (if you make a
transaction of 1,00,000 euros of a transaction of 1 euro the fee is the
same) this fee is normally 0.3-0.4 cts (some PSPs are very expensive and
apply also a percentage fee normally 0,5% on amount)
2.the acquirer applies a a percentage that depends on credit card,
normally 2%

This numbers can change because the PSP can have a direct access to the
transaction databases or the acquirer make available you money quickly.

Paypal or moneybookers seems to be PSPs. Onestly I don't know the fee
that they apply, in any case if the total of fee is more than 2,5% is a
very bad solution.

> Either way, the question that should drive our decision regarding available
> payment methods is fairly simple: what methods do a significant number of
> donors (or a few donors with donations of a significant amount) prefer? If
> it's Paypal, that's what we ought to have. If it's checks, money orders,
> wires, debit transfers, credit cards, debit cards, Moneybookers, gift cards,
> etc. then we ought to offer those too.
>
>  
The credit card has a limit, in any case for X.000 euros the best way is
the credit card.

Ilario

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
For your information, it is possible to have a Paypal account that is NOT
linked to a credit card. This makes for less costs.
Thanks,
    GerardM

On 8/12/07, Ilario Valdelli <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> > When you accept credit cards, a percentage goes to VISA, Mastercard,
> etc.,
> > another percentage to your merchant account provider. How's that
> different
> > from Paypal/eBay taking a cut?
> >
> >
> It's more complicated.
>
> In any transaction in e-commerce we have three levels:
>
> 1.the PSP (who manage the e-commerce platform)
> 2.the acquirer (generally connected directly to one bank)
> 3.the credit card
>
> American Express and some other credit card are also acquirer and for
> this reason they seems to be more expensive.
>
> In these levels we have some charges fee:
>
> 1.the PSP generally applies a fee for a transaction (if you make a
> transaction of 1,00,000 euros of a transaction of 1 euro the fee is the
> same) this fee is normally 0.3-0.4 cts (some PSPs are very expensive and
> apply also a percentage fee normally 0,5% on amount)
> 2.the acquirer applies a a percentage that depends on credit card,
> normally 2%
>
> This numbers can change because the PSP can have a direct access to the
> transaction databases or the acquirer make available you money quickly.
>
> Paypal or moneybookers seems to be PSPs. Onestly I don't know the fee
> that they apply, in any case if the total of fee is more than 2,5% is a
> very bad solution.
>
> > Either way, the question that should drive our decision regarding
> available
> > payment methods is fairly simple: what methods do a significant number
> of
> > donors (or a few donors with donations of a significant amount) prefer?
> If
> > it's Paypal, that's what we ought to have. If it's checks, money orders,
> > wires, debit transfers, credit cards, debit cards, Moneybookers, gift
> cards,
> > etc. then we ought to offer those too.
> >
> >
> The credit card has a limit, in any case for X.000 euros the best way is
> the credit card.
>
> Ilario
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Mark Ryan
Mark Ryan wrote:
> I've heard a lot of horror stories about Paypal. And considering that
> by using PayPal, we're basically paying eBay a percentage of donations
> we receive, I reckon it'd be a good idea to look at alternatives every
> now and then. Now that Wikimedia has hit the big time, our support for
> any particular payment method may actually become important.
I perfectly understand where it gives the impression that we support pig
capitalism, but that still needs to be weighed against the
practicalities connected with its general availability.  Some systems do
require that the transaction commissions are the responsibility of the
purchaser instead of the merchant, but that opens up the question for
commercial transactions, not just charitable ones.  The cure could be
worse than the sickness.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Lars Aronsson
In reply to this post by Mark Ryan
Mark Ryan wrote:

> I've heard a lot of horror stories about Paypal. And considering
> that by using PayPal, we're basically paying eBay a percentage
> of donations we receive, I reckon it'd be a good idea to look at
> alternatives every now and then.

When Richard Stallman visited my town and gave a speech, I asked
him if he saw any freedom issue with Paypal's dominance, i.e. if
he felt a need to fight for the establishment of an alternative.
He didn't seem to think so.  Indeed, www.fsf.org receives
donations using Paypal and credit cards,
https://www.fsf.org/associate/support_freedom/donate

I'm not following every move and idea of RMS, but if there really
was a problem, I guess he would know and be concerned.

I agree we should keep our eyes open for alternatives, but the
need doesn't seem to be urgent.


--
  Lars Aronsson ([hidden email])
  Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative to paypal

Delphine Ménard
On 8/13/07, Lars Aronsson <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I agree we should keep our eyes open for alternatives, but the
> need doesn't seem to be urgent.

I believe that there are way too many things to be taken into account
to actually solve this issue (if issue it is) on a mailing list.

Let me try and state what the Foundation would need to answer before
finding the "perfect" fundraising tool.

First, keep in mind that, unless I am mistaken, the Wikimedia
Foundation is about the only organisation in the world achieving the
success it achieves with online fundraising (ie. not sending emails or
paper, but by just displaying a site notic on its websites), which in
itself, whether or not paypal is the best way of doing it, is quite an
achievement.

Now, the things to be taken into consideration to find the best
fundraising tool are:

1) who gives and how do they give?
ie. are donors in the biggest donor pool comfortable giving with this
or that way of giving? In that case, seeing that the Foundation is
primarily addressing US donors since it is a registered charity in the
US, is Paypal the best recognized system, or would another bring us
more donors?

2) Financial efficiency of the fundraising tool
Considering tool X is the right tool for our donors, do we get our
money's worth thanks to this tool (ie. the fact that more people give
is not offset by the fact taht we pay xxx fees on using that
fundraising tool).

3) International efficiency of that fundraising tool
Considering the Wikimedia Foundation is a US based organisation, but
has a vocation to fundraise across the world, is tool X the right tool
to make sure that donors across the world will give?
ie. Canadians/Japanese probably being the next potential source of
donations, do Canadians/Japanese trust/use tool X easily to donate?

These are three questions that would help us choose the "better"
fundraising tool.

This said, the most important question to answer, in my opinion, would be:

"Why do people give? (or not give, actually)"
- Because it's easy to give (as in practical)
- Because it's in their language
- Because it's in their currency
- Because it's tax-deductible (in their country)
- Because they love us
- Because they trust the organisation(s)
- Because they wanted to give to something somewhere and that's the
first thing that came to mind
- Because their donation does make a difference
- etc.
- Some of those reasons combined
- All of those reasons

Answering all of those questions, would probably prevent debating
whether Paypal or Amazon or Moneybookers is the "best" API, because it
would become evident what is the best solution. Keeping in mind that
"the best" does not mean "the best for each and everyone of us" but
the best in an average kind of way. Nobody's ever going to be 100%
happy about what tool we use anyway ;-)


Delphine
--
~notafish

La critique, art aisé, se doit d'être constructive. -- Boris Vian in
*Chroniques du menteur*

NB. This address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to
this address will probably get lost.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
123