Yunjia Yuan For Fobes / Dbenitostock Getty Images
Consumers rarely even think about who processes their payments at checkout. Whether it’s being handled in the back offices of a traditional bank like JPMorgan or by a fintech like PayPal or Stripe, it merely needs to be fast, and hassle free. However, behind the scenes there is a battle underway to control ‘buy now’ technology.
Last year, the San Jose company began cutting the cost of payment services it offers under its Braintree brand, a white-label service that lets companies small and large accept debit cards, credit cards and other payment methods from consumers. Research firm MoffetNathanson estimates that Braintree revenue jumped to $8.4 billion in 2022 from $6.2 billion in 2021, making up roughly 30% of PayPal’s total net revenue.
Braintree is now growing faster than other parts of PayPal and unbranded transactions, which are mostly driven by Braintree, jumped 40% in 2022. PayPal’s branded business, when consumers click on the yellow PayPal button, grew only 5% in 2022….Continue reading….“
By: Emily Mason
Source: Inside Paypal’s Billion Dollar Battle For Payment Processing Dominance
.
Critics:
PayPal’s success in users and volumes was the product of a three-phase strategy described by former eBay CEO Meg Whitman: “First, PayPal focused on expanding its service among eBay users in the US. Second, we began expanding PayPal to eBay’s international sites. And third, we started to build PayPal’s business off eBay.”
In the first phase, payment volumes were coming mostly from the eBay auction website. The system was very attractive to auction sellers, most of which were individuals or small businesses that were unable to accept credit cards, and for consumers as well. In fact, many sellers could not qualify for a credit card Merchant account because they lacked a commercial credit history.
The service also appealed to auction buyers because they could fund PayPal accounts using credit cards or bank account balances, without divulging credit card numbers to unknown sellers. PayPal employed an aggressive marketing campaign to accelerate its growth, depositing $10 in new users’ PayPal accounts.
Until 2000, PayPal’s strategy was to earn interest on funds in PayPal accounts. However, most recipients of PayPal credits withdrew funds immediately. Also, many senders funded their payments using credit cards, which cost PayPal roughly 2% of payment value per transaction.
To solve this problem, PayPal tailored its product to cater more to business accounts. Instead of relying on interests earned from deposited funds, PayPal started relying on earnings from service charges. They offered seller protection to PayPal account holders, provided that they comply with reimbursement policies. For example, PayPal merchants are either required to retain a traceable proof of shipping to a confirmed address or to provide a signed receipt for items valued over $750.
After fine-tuning PayPal’s business model and increasing its domestic and international penetration on eBay, PayPal started its off-eBay strategy. This was based on developing stronger growth in active users by adding users across multiple platforms, despite the slowdown in on-eBay growth and low-single-digit user growth on the eBay site.
A late 2003 reorganization created a new business unit within PayPal—Merchant Services—to provide payment solutions to small and large e-commerce merchants outside the eBay auction community. Starting in the second half of 2004, PayPal Merchant Services unveiled several initiatives to enroll online merchants outside the eBay auction community, including:
- Lowering its transaction fee for high-volume merchants from 2.2% to 1.9% (while increasing the monthly transaction volume required to qualify for the lowest fee to $100,000)
- Encouraging its users to recruit non-eBay merchants by increasing its referral bonus to a maximum of $1,000 (versus the previous $100 cap)
- Persuading credit card gateway providers, including CyberSource and Retail Decisions USA, to include PayPal among their offerings to online merchants.
- Hiring a new sales force to acquire large merchants such as Dell, Apple’s iTunes, and Yahoo! Stores, which hosted thousands of online merchants
- Reducing fees for online music purchases and other “micropayments”
- Launching PayPal Mobile, which allowed users to make payments using text messaging on their cell phones
PayPal can be used in more than 200 countries/regions. Different countries have different conditions: Send only (Package Service allows sending only, valid in 97 countries), PayPal Zero (package suggests the possibility of enrollment, entry, and withdrawal of funds in foreign currency, but the user can not hold the balance PayPal account, operates in 18 countries), SRW Send – Receive – Withdrawal (the possibility of enrollment, input-output and the ability to keep your PayPal account balance in the currency and to transfer to the card when the user sees fit, operates in 41 countries) and Local Currency (SRW plus opportunity to conduct transactions in the local currency, 21 countries).
PayPal launches different marketing activities in various channels and emphasizes that consumers can use it in different ways. PayPal’s marketing includes TV commercials, outdoor advertising, Facebook, and display advertisement. PayPal provides free analytics to traders about the ways that consumers utilize online payments. Through the free tracking service, PayPal assists traders in targeting consumers.
PayPal’s code gathers the consumer information, which can be installed on the trader’s website. Both PayPal and traders benefit from the free service. PayPal partners with Synchrony Financial to provide the PayPal Cashback Mastercard, which offers 2% cash back to customers who use the card to make purchases both online and in physical stores. PayPal’s cashback financial service promotes the number of potential customers.
Apple allows PayPal as a mode of payment for App Store, Apple Music, iTunes, and Apple Books. PayPal can increase usage of Apple platforms. In addition, PayPal receives revenue from Apple services, especially from the App Store. Customers can use PayPal to make purchases by linking their PayPal accounts to their Apple IDs.
In March 2002, two PayPal account holders separately sued the company for alleged violations of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act (EFTA) and California law. Most of the allegations concerned PayPal’s dispute resolution procedures. The two lawsuits were merged into one class-action lawsuit (In re: PayPal litigation). An informal settlement was reached in November 2003, and a formal settlement was signed on June 11, 2004.
The settlement requires that PayPal change its business practices (including changing its dispute resolution procedures to make them EFTA-compliant), as well as making a US$9.25 million payment to members of the class. PayPal denied any wrongdoing. In June 2003, Stamps.com filed a lawsuit against PayPal and eBay claiming breach of contract, breach of the implied covenants of good faith and fair dealing, and interference with contract, among other claims.
In a 2002 license agreement, Stamps.com and PayPal agreed that Stamps.com technology would be made available to allow PayPal users to buy and print postage online from their PayPal accounts. Stamps.com claimed that PayPal did not live up to its contractual obligations and accused eBay of interfering with PayPal and Stamps.com’s agreement, hence Stamps.com’s reasoning for including eBay in the suit. Craig Comb and two others filed a class action against PayPal in Craig Comb, et al. v. PayPal Inc..
They sued, alleging illegal misappropriation of customer accounts and detailed their customer service experiences, including freezing deposited funds for up to 180 days until disputes were resolved by PayPal. PayPal argued that the plaintiffs were required to arbitrate their disputes under the American Arbitration Association‘s Commercial Arbitration Rules. The court ruled against PayPal, stating that “the User Agreement and arbitration clause are substantively unconscionable under California law.”
Paypal agreed to pay $9.25 million as a result of the case. In September 2002, Bank One Corporation sued PayPal for allegedly infringing its cardless payment system patents. The following year, PayPal countersued, claiming that Bank One’s online bill-payment system was an infringement against PayPal’s online bill-payment patent, issued in 1998. The two companies agreed on a settlement in October 2003….
battle ,billion ,braintree ,checkout ,consumers ,control ,debitcard ,dollar ,dominance ,jpmorgan ,method ,payment ,paypal ,processing ,research ,revenue ,stripe
Leave a Reply