Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Amazon Payment Systems Take On PayPal

samzenpus posted more than 5 years ago | from the deliver-me-from-paypal dept.

The Internet 92

Bridger writes "Amazon has introduced two new payment systems for merchants and consumers, which brings it into a market dominated by PayPal. Google introduced a similar system for merchants and consumers in 2006, also called Checkout, but it has not found favor with online retailers. Auction giant eBay, which owns PayPal, has prevented consumers from using the Google system."

cancel ×

92 comments

ecash / opencoin (3, Interesting)

jbaach (241113) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413007)

Hopefully someone will implement ecash again, e.g. opencoin.org, and will provide some more interesting payment features for the users.

Same Song, Different Verse (5, Insightful)

Khakionion (544166) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413057)

Auction giant eBay, which owns PayPal, has prevented consumers from using the Google system.

So, thank goodness Amazon has released a system, so that eBay will not use it too.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (5, Interesting)

biocute (936687) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413159)

Google doesn't have anything to sell, but not so for Amazon, it doesn't need eBay users to survive, Amazon has enough users to get this thing started.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (2, Interesting)

lysse (516445) | more than 5 years ago | (#24415839)

Not only that, but Amazon also provides a marketplace for its users too, which brings it into rather more direct competition with eBay. The only bit missing is the auction element - and thank heavens for that!

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (1)

scudco (644276) | more than 5 years ago | (#24425963)

Except Amazon Payments does not work on Amazon... seriously. When I asked about this I was told there were no plans to create the feature.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (4, Interesting)

erikina (1112587) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413183)

In all fairness I don't think either (Google's or Amazon's) attempt was designed as a full blown competitor to paypal. Which is a shame.

I personally would want something like a cross between paypal and e-gold. Buyer beware (no freezing and locking accounts, which only effects legitimate sellers). But without the whole gold thing.

It's the age of e-commerce, why still can't I send money easily/cheaply?

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (2, Informative)

icebike (68054) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413549)

E-Gold? You mean Ponzi Pesos don't you?

PayPal is often (mostly??) used for things totally unrelated to Ebay. It was in business long before Ebay purchased them.

It has a lot of advantage when dealing with people you don't want to provide any permanent credentials, such as when buying something from an unknown individual or donating money to some organization, group, or charity.

E-Gold, on the other hand was, is, an always will be a scam.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (5, Informative)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413907)

It has a lot of advantage when dealing with people you don't want to provide any permanent credentials, such as when buying something from an unknown individual or donating money to some organization, group, or charity.

Visa, at least, and probably the other cards by now, have a system where you can generate a single use credit card number pre authorized for specific merchant and dollar amount. So you can use that numbe in an online transaction and the merchant gets a number that's only valid for that single use single dollar amount. If it gets stolen, no big deal. If the merchant tries to double bill it, no dice. etc etc. And I trust Visa a lot more than Paypal.

I don't hate paypal, but I do dislike using it given all the limitations, fees, and scams. I also despise the ebay/paypal pairing.

As for egold... yeah total scam... it had potential...maybe something like it still does.

But I think the real juggernauts -- the banks -- still have to weigh in on this.

My bank recently introduced "Interac Email Money Transfer" and its pretty freaking impressive. I can send money to nearly anyone in Canada with a Canadian bank account, and an email address. We don't need to share bank information or personal information at all. All I need to know as the sender is the recipients email address -- any email address, they can even use a throw-away one as long as they can pick up email on it, and I don't need to know what bank they belong to as long as its participating in the Interac Email system which is currently the 5 major Canadian banks (TD, RBC, Scotia, CIBC, and BMO).

The price is a flat $1.50 per transaction, which is pretty steep to pay for a $10.00 ebay win... but a drop in the bucket when paying for a $500 transaction. There is no fee to receive money.

If they don't use one of the 5 participating banks, but have an account at, for example, a credit union, they can -still- receive money, but I think it gets redirected through a more complicated and time consuming inter-bank transfer, and there is a fee charged to the recipient.

For me this is the paypal killer. Not only is it secure convenient and trustworthy but banks and credit unions, at least in Canada are pretty customer service oriented...toll free 24-hour hot-lines, and genuinely useful staff are the norm in my experience with TD, RBC, and Scotiabank. Contrast that with Paypal. :)

Already for me, anything significant is now done via this interac system when I can. Once it expands to the credit unions and/or goes international... I think paypal and its cohorts will be reduced to competing for petty cash transactions and micropayments, e.g. sending sums like... $1 or $5, where the $1.50 fee is just too much.

but I wouldn't be surprised to see the interac system evolve and start offering 'plans' in addition to the a la cart flat fee.

For details check it out...

http://www.interac.ca/consumers/productsandservices_ol_emt.php [interac.ca] ... not sure if something like this is in the states yet...

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (4, Informative)

Lord Haw Haw Haw (1280782) | more than 5 years ago | (#24414255)

In India we have something called NEFT (http://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/FAQView.aspx?Id=60). you can send money to any bank on the RBI grid (currently in 15 odd cities) account using the banks internet portal. Though u do need to know the receiver's bank account and branch. This transfer is free to both the sender and reciever. (tho there is a daily cap on the amount of money u can transfer)

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24417895)

Wow, didn't know about that...Thanks, will ask my local bank :D

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (2, Interesting)

dirk (87083) | more than 5 years ago | (#24414387)

While this sounds like a really great system, unless they slash the fee, there is no way it will ever be a Paypal killer, or even serious competitor. The secret behind Paypal has always been the low fee, which means huge volume. You can use it for almost any transaction, no matter the size. This system sounds great, but how many transactions large enough to make the $1.50 reasonable are actually going on over the net, especially when compared to the millions of small transactions just done by eBay?

As a buyer, I use Paypal a lot even for places that take credit cards just because it is convenient. I can just log into Paypal and send the money versus having to go and get my credit card to enter all of the information. The fee for me is nothing and the fee for the seller is small enough that they still use it. All of those type transaction dry up with this system unfortunately.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (2, Informative)

popeye44 (929152) | more than 5 years ago | (#24417277)

I recently sold some software on Ebay. This is something I rarely do but it was the place to get the most money.
  Between ebay and paypal I paid 16.00 for 165.00 transaction. It roughly went half and half. Around 8.00 just to paypal. The percentage kills me. I still occasionally buy from ebay but I'll probably never sell there again.

If they took google I might. I don't have an issue giving ebay their fees. But in the day of electronic instant transactions sending money should be almost free.

The only other options are MO or Check. No thanks.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#24420501)

While this sounds like a really great system, unless they slash the fee, there is no way it will ever be a Paypal killer, or even serious competitor. 1) Paypal's fees are quite a bit higher than you seem to think. They are currently: 2) And yeah, while paypal still has the advantage in the micropayments area, I'd be willing to pay a buck fifty to send a $1000, $500, even $200 through the bank network instead. 3) I think if it catches on, there -will- be monthly plan options to bring that fee down...I predict you will eventually you'll get a certain number of them bundled in with your 'chequing account plan', with the option to upgrade to a higher plan. The secret behind Paypal has always been the low fee, which means huge volume. Since the receiver in this system doesn't pay anything, they can do huge volume at no cost. That blows paypal out of the water for a 'high volume seller'. And 'high volume buyers'? Well, they are a rarer breed to start with. And see #3 above. You can use it for almost any transaction, no matter the size. This system sounds great, but how many transactions large enough to make the $1.50 reasonable are actually going on over the net, especially when compared to the millions of small transactions just done by eBay? My average ebay purchase is usually over $100, because anything less than that and shipping becomes the dominant cost. I might bid on multiple items from a single seller, or big on larger lots of items. But the average auction that closes at $3.00 probably bears another $5 to $10 in shipping. Is an extra buck for the secure cash transaction really a big deal? The buyer already takes those costs into account when they bid, and bid accordingly. As a buyer, I use Paypal a lot even for places that take credit cards just because it is convenient. I can just log into Paypal and send the money versus having to go and get my credit card to enter all of the information. The fee for me is nothing and the fee for the seller is small enough that they still use it. All of those type transaction dry up with this system unfortunately. Agreed. As I said in my original post, paypal and its ilk will still be around, but will be competing for the microtranaction market. The interac system will grab all the large transactions.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#24420887)

Sorry for the double post... slashdot munched my formatting.

While this sounds like a really great system, unless they slash the fee, there is no way it will ever be a Paypal killer, or even serious competitor.

1) Paypal's fees are quite a bit higher than you seem to think. They are currently:

2) And yeah, while paypal still has the advantage in the micropayments area, I'd be willing to pay a buck fifty to send a $1000, $500, even $200 through the bank network instead.

3) I think if it catches on, there -will- be monthly plan options to bring that fee down...I predict you will eventually you'll get a certain number of them bundled in with your 'chequing account plan', with the option to upgrade to a higher plan.

The secret behind Paypal has always been the low fee, which means huge volume.

Since the receiver in this system doesn't pay anything, they can do huge volume at no cost. That blows paypal out of the water for a 'high volume seller'.

And 'high volume buyers'? Well, they are a rarer breed to start with. And see #3 above.

You can use it for almost any transaction, no matter the size. This system sounds great, but how many transactions large enough to make the $1.50 reasonable are actually going on over the net, especially when compared to the millions of small transactions just done by eBay?

My average ebay purchase is usually over $100, because anything less than that and shipping becomes the dominant cost. I might bid on multiple items from a single seller, or big on larger lots of items. But the average auction that closes at $3.00 probably bears another $5 to $10 in shipping. Is an extra buck for the secure cash transaction really a big deal? The buyer already takes those costs into account when they bid, and bid accordingly.

As a buyer, I use Paypal a lot even for places that take credit cards just because it is convenient. I can just log into Paypal and send the money versus having to go and get my credit card to enter all of the information. The fee for me is nothing and the fee for the seller is small enough that they still use it. All of those type transaction dry up with this system unfortunately.

Agreed. As I said in my original post, paypal and its ilk will still be around, but will be competing for the microtranaction market. The interac system will grab all the large transactions.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (3, Informative)

msisden (761674) | more than 5 years ago | (#24414967)

I just used CIBC's Interac Email Money Transfer system, and it was a pain in the ass. Having to pick a security question that the recipient has to answer? Ok, I can kinda sorta understand that. However, their are draconian limitations on what can be entered. Length limitation when trying to come up with your own question? That certainly helps me come up with something unique that the person would know. Only allowing letters, numbers and hyphens in the answer? Even more annoying! Why can't I used spaces and punctuation? As a concept it is ok, and for all I know other participating banks don't have CIBC's limitations, but from my user experience it was more frustrating than it needed to be.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#24420669)

I just used CIBC's Interac Email Money Transfer system, and it was a pain in the ass. Having to pick a security question that the recipient has to answer? Ok, I can kinda sorta understand that.

Given that that is the only shared security information, its not bad. Remember anyone can claim the funds if they intercept the email. The ONLY security is the secret/question answer.

However, their are draconian limitations on what can be entered. Length limitation when trying to come up with your own question? That certainly helps me come up with something unique that the person would know. Only allowing letters, numbers and hyphens in the answer? Even more annoying! Why can't I used spaces and punctuation?

You are over thinking it. Just exchange a secret code. Have them pick a random word and 5 digit number, and that's the answer. The secret question can be... "whats the code?" When I'm sending hundreds of dollars we exchange the code over the phone. Sometimes, I'll just generate a random answer myself, and then phone them with it, or have them phone me when they've received the email.

As a concept it is ok, and for all I know other participating banks don't have CIBC's limitations, but from my user experience it was more frustrating than it needed to be.

Agreed but its not really aiming at the microtransactions market. Its aimed that hundreds of dollars and up market. And at that price point it works brilliantly.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (1)

msisden (761674) | more than 5 years ago | (#24421871)

Sure, I eventually did a random code, but I would think that for the average user, doing something like that would be overthinking it. I was mostly trying to follow instructions, except the instructions + the mentioned limitations doesn't really work out and would result in the average user wasting more time than should really be required, or choosing a pre-made question that isn't really secure, because everyone knows you love ice cream (oh wait, we can't use spaces so you can't have that as an answer!) If they said "Type a random secret and then exchange it with the user using another form of communication, like the phone" the average user would probably do so, resulting in a more secure transaction (which is the point) and with less user frustration.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (2, Informative)

nabsltd (1313397) | more than 5 years ago | (#24417139)

For me this is the paypal killer. Not only is it secure convenient and trustworthy but banks and credit unions, at least in Canada are pretty customer service oriented...toll free 24-hour hot-lines, and genuinely useful staff are the norm in my experience with TD, RBC, and Scotiabank. Contrast that with Paypal.

But, this means you have to actually have the money to send. With PayPal (or other payment services), you can back your payment with a credit card. For the vast amount of people who rack up a lot of debt, this is important.

I use a credit card for PayPal payments because I get the credit card rewards. Plus, I don't like some of the PayPal practices very much. In particular, at one time sending "cash" (i.e., transfer from a bank account) was free. Later, it had a small fee. Now, it is exactly the same as paying with a credit card. So, I figure if PayPal is going to charge money as if you used a credit card, then it might as well actually cost them that much.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#24420935)

But, this means you have to actually have the money to send. With PayPal (or other payment services), you can back your payment with a credit card. For the vast amount of people who rack up a lot of debt, this is important.

1) People -should- have the money before they buy stuff. Any financial advisor will tell you that. If you -need- credit for an ebay purchase, you've probably got issues. :)

2) There is nothing stopping anyone from making a cash advance from their credit card into their bank account. I can do it through my online banking in around 3 seconds. (And i recognize that a cahs advance doesn't pay rewards, also starts charging interest immediately, so its not quite as good a deal... but seriously, if you need to buy on credit you still can.)

I use a credit card for PayPal payments because I get the credit card rewards. Plus, I don't like some of the PayPal practices very much.

I use a cc for paypal because I don't trust paypal, and wouldn't EVER give them my bank account details.

But seriously, the paypal limits are so low, especially for credit cards, that if you do more than a couple transactions a month, you need a 'premium account', and the fees start racking up. And if you are doing few enough transactions that you can get away with a free paypal account, well, $1.50 per transation vs $0.30 isn't really a big deal if your only doing one or two a month.

Plus you are probably using paypal as an american. As a canadian using paypal, there is a 2.5% exchange rate fee for currency conversion, an additional $0.30+ 3-4% fee for just being cross-border on top of the usual $0.30+ 2-3% fees, and I have to pay to withdraw money from my paypal account... they really nickle and dime us, and by the end of the day, I'm probably paying $1+ a transaction anyway.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (1)

nabsltd (1313397) | more than 5 years ago | (#24439353)

I use a cc for paypal because I don't trust paypal, and wouldn't EVER give them my bank account details.

I had heard that you couldn't get a "Verified" account without a bank account. Since that limits some of what you can do, I verified with them.

I suppose the best thing would be to get a throwaway bank account that keeps no real money in it, and use that as the "verified" account.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#24440457)

I had heard that you couldn't get a "Verified" account without a bank account. Since that limits some of what you can do, I verified with them.

Could be. I signed up in 2001 ago and am Canadian. I'm not even sure if they supported linking to a Canadian bank at that time, and adding a credit card was enough to 'get verified' at the time. (An unverified account at the time was one that was simply opened, and then funded by having another paypal user send you cash, which you couldn't withdraw)

But you could send it to another paypal user. So if you sold something on ebay, and accepted paypal, you could get money into your account... which you could then use to buy stuff from people on ebay who acceptable paypal.) The rules of likely changed, by my account appears to be grandfathered... because it is reporting its status as verified and I have not linked an account to it... although they invite me to frequently, "for my convenience".)

I suppose the best thing would be to get a throwaway bank account that keeps no real money in it, and use that as the "verified" account.

Or close it after you are verified. I wonder if they have any way of detecting that, after you are verified, without you actively attempting to transfer money between them.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (1)

brady8 (956551) | more than 5 years ago | (#24420713)

Interac Email Money Transfers (IEMTs) have been available from the major banks in Canada for at least the last 6 years. They're very convenient when paying your rent, etc. - giving money to people you know in real life, for relatively large sums.

PayPal is designed for online retailers who need to process one-time or recurring monthly payments without getting a merchant account. In other words, it's geared towards businesses - it has features like recurring payments, storing your credit card number for future use, etc. IEMTs are totally different, and designed for personal use. PayPal fees are also much less than the interac fee for most small transactions that happen online anyway - anything less than $25.

In short, IEMTs have almost nothing in common with PayPal or other online payment systems.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#24421113)

Interac Email Money Transfers (IEMTs) have been available from the major banks in Canada for at least the last 6 years. They're very convenient when paying your rent, etc. - giving money to people you know in real life, for relatively large sums.

I find them extremely useful for giving larger one time transaction sums of $100+ to people I don't know, online.

PayPal is designed for online retailers who need to process one-time or recurring monthly payments without getting a merchant account. In other words, it's geared towards businesses - it has features like recurring payments, storing your credit card number for future use, etc.

I disagree. It is geared toward personal users, especially back when it was introduced. I concede that now its become somewhat more geared for businesses.

But that is stupid. A credible business should just a merchant account. If I see a 'business' that only transacts with paypal, my faith in them, their product, their credibility plummets like a stone. Its not exactly difficult or expensive to get at least a partnered merchant account to accept visa/mc/amex through. If your so rinky-dink that you've only got paypal... well... color me unimpressed.

IEMTs are totally different, and designed for personal use.

Which pretty much covers how I use ebay. Which is paypals stronghold. So while they are 'totally different' their is some obvious overlap.

PayPal fees are also much less than the interac fee for most small transactions that happen online anyway - anything less than $25.

Yeah, I agree microtransactions were still in paypals realm, I asserted IEMTs would dominate the larger transactions where you want security, and don't want to deal with a 2-bit outfit like paypal.

In short, IEMTs have almost nothing in common with PayPal or other online payment systems.

I disagree. As I said, for me, IEMT's have replaced most of my paypal usage. I used to paypal to buy larger items on ebay. I don't anymore. I don't tend to buy 'microtransation' class stuff on ebay unless I'm bidding on multiple options, because the various fees, shipping, etc that get applied balloon the price ridiculously.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (1)

vistic (556838) | more than 5 years ago | (#24441263)

Visa, at least, and probably the other cards by now, have a system where you can generate a single use credit card number pre authorized for specific merchant and dollar amount. So you can use that numbe in an online transaction and the merchant gets a number that's only valid for that single use single dollar amount. If it gets stolen, no big deal. If the merchant tries to double bill it, no dice. etc etc. And I trust Visa a lot more than Paypal.

PayPal also offers this feature via the PayPal Plug-in. You don't have to use the browser plug-in to generate the temporary (Mastercard) credit card number, either. You can go to the PayPal Plug-in page once you log in and click to generate a new temporary card number.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (4, Insightful)

Threni (635302) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413997)

> I personally would want something like a cross between paypal

I'd be interested in a cross between paypal and something good, which is supported by people who give a shit about their customers and don't just send stock replies to users who are complaining about getting only stock replies. I've stopped using eBay because of it too, although it looks like I got out just in time - by all accounts it's much more dodgy to buy/sell stuff on there these days.

Re:Same Song, Different Verse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24414205)

It's the age of e-commerce, why still can't I send money easily/cheaply?

You can. Just because you don't like your options doesn't mean they're not there.

Illegal? (2, Insightful)

Exanon (1277926) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413065)

"Auction giant eBay, which owns PayPal, has prevented consumers from using the Google system."

Am I naive or doesn't that violate some kind of consumer rights?

Re:Illegal? (4, Informative)

nacturation (646836) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413111)

Am I naive or doesn't that violate some kind of consumer rights?

The consumer's right is that they can shop elsewhere.
 

Re:Illegal? (4, Informative)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413193)

It's a load of crap, and Australia has already called bullshit on them for trying to make eBay Paypal-only: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080612-australia-calls-shenanigans-on-ebay-paypal-only-policy.html [arstechnica.com]

Re:Illegal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24415517)

And how fucking dare anyone out their make fun of eBay after all it's been through!!! It lost its PayPal fees, it went through a ACCC hearing. Its customers turned out to be a bunch of users, and all you people care about bargains and making money off of it!!

IT'S A PUBLIC COMPANY!!!!!!

*sob*

What you don't realise is that eBay is making you all this money and all you do is write a bunch crap about it. Its scheme is called called "give me more" for a reason, because all you people want is more more more more MORE!!

*sob*

LEAVE IT ALONE!!!!

You're lucky it even operates for you bastards!! LEAVE EBAY ALONE!!!!!.. please..

*sob*

The Trading Post talked about professionalism and said if eBay was a professional it would have pulled it off no matter what.

Speaking of professionalism, when is it professional to publicly bash a company who is going through a hard time?

LEAVE EBAY ALONE!!!!!... pleehease..

*sob sob sob*

Leave eBay alone. Right. NOW!!! I mean it. Anyone who has a problem with eBay, you deal with me, because it's not well right now.

*sob sob sob*

Re:Illegal? (1)

sporkme (983186) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413197)

nope! you're naive. Check back in four years, then you're prescient.

Re:Illegal? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24413251)

Mmmm.. you mean like when you walk into fred's department store & they accept mastercard but not visa?

Re:Illegal? (3, Insightful)

DRobson (835318) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413385)

However Fred does not own Mastercard and does not have an inherent financial interest in denying Visa.

Re:Illegal? (1)

fprintf (82740) | more than 5 years ago | (#24414495)

No, but if I am Sears and have just invested a boatload in the Discover card, I can very well prohibit anyone from purchasing items in my store with any other credit card. The catch in the retail domain, is that there is vigorous competition so 1) a customer can go elsewhere for the same goods at a similar price and 2) Sears would be very foolish to do so.

Contrast this to the eBay/Paypal situation where they also have a financial interest but have a pretty solid lock on the online auction domain.

Re:Illegal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24414645)

But eBay accepts both Mastercard and Visa (along with Discover, American Express, and direct from bank account) through PayPal. All that they don't want to allow sellers to do is to ask buyers to provide payment info through something other than PayPal.

Amazon went Amazon Payments only in 2005. This was to avoid the problems where one of the parties (buyer or seller) was fraudulent. I suspect that part of eBay's problem is that PayPal was offered as an alternative service before they made it required. I don't recall anywhere near this level of controversy when Amazon did it.

It's only online that people would actually consider competing payment providers to make sense. No one is surprised that you can't use PayPal or your own credit card processor in Best Buy.

Re:Illegal? (1)

aussie_a (778472) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413405)

Depends on whether or not Ebay has a monopoly on online auctions. Now before you point to a dozen online auction websites, that is meaningless. Just as the existence of Apple and Linux were meaningless in proving Microsoft had a monopoly.

Re:Illegal? (1)

will_die (586523) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413689)

Why?
Being a merchant I don't have to accept Discover Card, American Express or Diners Card if I choose to accept payment with Mastercard.

I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (4, Interesting)

AdamInParadise (257888) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413067)

As someone who had the dubious task of integrating the Paypal payment mechanism into a custom checkout process, I welcome this new "Checkout by Amazon" with open arms.

Re:I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (3, Insightful)

sporkme (983186) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413215)

It is just a competitor to paypal-ebay. If it works, they compete. If it works well, congratulations, they contend. If it flops, it has a lot of company. It is imperative that the government keeps it filthy mitts off.

Re:I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (5, Insightful)

VdG (633317) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413711)

I think a competitor to PayPal would be a good thing, but I disagree about the government(s) keeping out of it. PayPal and any other similar service need to be under similar regulation to other financial services, to provide reasonable consumer protection - something PayPal have tried to avoid. There have been numerous complaints in this area over the years and it's one of the main things which has kept me from getting a PayPal account.

Re:I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (1)

Maverynthia (1105281) | more than 5 years ago | (#24414167)

You mean the, even if they rule in your favor you STILL will never see your money from a bad transaction?

Re:I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (1)

That's Unpossible! (722232) | more than 5 years ago | (#24419815)

it's one of the main things which has kept me from getting a PayPal account

The government is not required, then. You simply want PayPal to provide better service. You have a choice, which you are currently exercising -- don't use PayPal.

No need for the government's heavy hand.

Re:I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (1)

moro_666 (414422) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413305)

i don't think the paypal integration has been that difficult over here, and we run probably one of the largest shops in the world ...

but then again, can't say that paypal is even near perfect just yet and sometimes their innovations are less than wonderful.

competition is a wonderful thing tho :) i hope amazon puts up a nice fight so we all get a better outcome, which ever it is.

Re:I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24413357)

So, you like PayPal. Or you don't. I'm not sure. What was your point? Who knows for sure...

Re:I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24413449)

I'm not sure. What was your point? Who knows for sure...

Mmmh, that paypal is ok but not perfect. And that with a bit of competition things should improve.

Even with a nasty hangover it seemed quite obvious to me.

Re:I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (1)

AdamInParadise (257888) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413659)

Are you in the US?

Re:I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (5, Interesting)

mpcooke3 (306161) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413565)

I totally agree, we just integrated with paypal uk. My complaints are many. Firstly it isn't 1 system it's actually 3 different systems and depending what you want to do you may need to use multiple systems. Also some systems have multiple APIs, none of this is clearly documented, nor is it clearly documented what Cards do not work with the different systems.

Despite claims that it works with most payment cards, the paypal system we were recommended to use won't accept American Express and will only accept newer Maestro cards if you give them an imaginary start date and pre-convert the currency to GBP (we process in dollars).

It's a total joke.

The support service involves ringing a special business helpline that will only work if you ring from a pre-authorised telphone and pretend to be the person who originally signed up for the service and even then if you press the wrong option the support involves getting read out the contents of an online help page.
When you finally do get through to support and you ask them a question, they basically don't even know themselves what will work.

Re:I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24424017)

Has nobody in here used moneybookers [moneybookers.com] ?
is pretty easy to send money, and you can withdraw in different countries
and customer support is wonderful, they're uk based
and even support escrow payments

Re:I, for one, welcome our new checkout overlord. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24454427)

if you found it difficult your doing it wrong.

Google Payments / Checkout could work if ... (2, Informative)

inflex (123318) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413201)

If they allowed sellers in countries other than just the US and UK to be involved, until they expand that a bit more (Australia, NewZealand, even Canada?) things could be different.

For now I guess the commissions will just have to go to PayPal and my local merchant provider.

Come on Google, pull your finger out and expand that service.

Re:Google Payments / Checkout could work if ... (4, Insightful)

enkidu (13673) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413355)

Expanding a payments service to other countries is not as simple as writing code: government permits need to be obtained; legal entities created, certified and approved; transaction partners identified, negotiations completed, contracts signed, accounting methods and reconciliation formats agreed upon, tested and verified. Auditors need to be chosen, hired, audits managed. Even a company like PayPal with dozens of experienced legal and financial team members, takes more than a year to release in a new country. For companies with little or no financial institutional experience (beyond typical corporate finance that is) it is an undertaking which is several orders of magnitude more complex for a company to manage and execute than writing, testing and deploying code.

Re:Google Payments / Checkout could work if ... (1)

inflex (123318) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413529)

For sure there's a lot of work involved, I don't think anyone with a sensible grip on business would expect them to do this overnight, however I've been watching Google Checkout now for quite some time and there just does not seem to be any movements beyond their existing setup. One gets the impression that they got it started and then when "*Meh*, this is boring, let's move along to something shiney!"

Don't forget they already take and give payments to many countries via the AdSense and AdWords programs, agreeably it's not exactly the same as a consumer-google-business sale but the inroads have already been started.

Re:Google Payments / Checkout could work if ... (2, Interesting)

Twinbee (767046) | more than 5 years ago | (#24415213)

That's where a universal currency would help quite a bit. Perfect for small, growing businesses, faster/cheaper transactions for larger companies, and the public can only benefit...

Re:Google Payments / Checkout could work if ... (1)

JesseMcDonald (536341) | more than 5 years ago | (#24418925)

You'd need a universal legal system, not universal currency, to accomplish that goal.

Re:Google Payments / Checkout could work if ... (1)

Twinbee (767046) | more than 5 years ago | (#24419161)

Maybe, but a UC would still take a lot of the complexity out of it all.

Re:Google Payments / Checkout could work if ... (1)

aussie_a (778472) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413421)

Considering we haven't even got an amazon.com.au I'm certainly not holding my breath.

gbay (1, Offtopic)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413255)

I want a gbay. screw ebay and their horrid website layout and policy's.

This is *very* good news (4, Insightful)

bangzilla (534214) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413271)

As someone who has had the misfortune to try to resolve an eBay non-delivery issue with Paypal (never got back to me and then closed the request for support) I'm happy that there will be alternatives to PayPal. Paypal's customer service is *horrible* -- in comparison Amazon's customer service is one of, if not the, best in the world. Good news too is that Amazon already has my information (and millions of other people's) so anyone using the new service doesn't have the huge task of trying to convince buyers to sign up -- they are already signed up with a service they already trust.

Is it global ? (2, Insightful)

jaiyen (821972) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413335)

TFA is pretty short on details, but I'd be interested in knowing the range of countries Amazon's system can be used in. Anyone know? Google Checkout looked promising but is limited to just US/UK (at least the last time I checked), and there's a wider world out there!

I realise international banking transfers is a complicated area, but it's one Paypal seems to be miles ahead of it's competitors in at present. Google don't seem to have problems with Adsense/Adwords in this regard though, so it's a bit puzzling to me why Checkout is so limited in who they accept.

Which is a shame really, as it leaves only Paypal and all of its problems that everyone's familiar with.

Re:Is it global ? (3, Informative)

jyristys (546156) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413635)

"Checkout by Amazon is currently available only for sellers in the United States." https://payments.amazon.com/sdui/sdui/business?sn=cba/faq#o_countries [amazon.com]

Re:Is it global ? (1)

jaiyen (821972) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413693)

Thanks for the information, looks like another one to strike off the list for now then! I imagine it won't be heading to my corner of the world (Thailand) for another 10 years or so :(

Checkout? (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413353)

Can someone explain to me how this isn't a trademark violation?

Re:Checkout? (2, Informative)

Corporate Troll (537873) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413573)

Good question... Perhaps because it's a generic word? Compare to "Word". Technically, "Word" isn't called "Word" but "Microsoft Word".

So the of from Google is called "Google Checkout" and the one from Amazon is called "Amazon Checkout". Of course, I don't know for sure...

What E-Bay did that most people missed.. (5, Insightful)

Channard (693317) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413443)

.. or at least the press missed, was forcing PayPal on people by force. Over the space of about six months, they've been requiring people to take PayPal if they had less than 100 feedback, and then if they listed in certain categories. Now they've expanded that to nearly all categories, so that if you want to list anything on E-Bay, you have to take PayPal. By that time I'd already started using Amazon, but that was the final nail in the coffin.

Re:What E-Bay did that most people missed.. (1)

STrinity (723872) | more than 5 years ago | (#24420107)

If anyone had doubts about how much PayPal cares about consumers, this should dispell all doubts -- people with low feedback should be forced to take credit cards only, that way any customer who gets ripped off can dispute the charge and recover the money.

Subscriptions? (3, Interesting)

pebcak (773787) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413453)

Hopefully Amazon takes a lesson from Google. One of the problems with Google Checkout is that they don't allow subscriptions to be created [google.com] . Google's transaction fees [google.com] are lower than PayPal's [paypal.com] , or my merchant account's, so I'd love to use them more heavily, but that's a major roadblock. I'm sure a lot of other small businesses are in the same situation.

Re:Subscriptions? (1)

thrillseeker (518224) | more than 5 years ago | (#24416367)

It's just not that hard for the end user to write some application code to handle recurring billing.

Re:Subscriptions? (1)

pebcak (773787) | more than 5 years ago | (#24416559)

I can see how automated billing would be easy, but the thing with PayPal is, the charges are automatic as well. If there's a way to script that with Google Checkout, I'd love to be pointed in the right direction.

Free money (1)

minhlish (1336351) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413501)

Wonder if Amazon would start giving away money like Google did to promote their checkout system...

Smells like home cookin! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24413773)

E-bay can't take the heat, so they locked Amazon out of the kitchen. No surprise! That's ok though, Amazon has a much better selection of cookware!

This isn't about eBay... this isn't like Paypal... (4, Interesting)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413797)

I don't use eBay, don't want to use eBay, and frankly wish I could get Paypal to quit telling me about eBay. I still have little interest in Google Checkout. I suppose I might sign up for it some time, but it's not even the same kind of business. Paypal works like a checking account, I can paypal small amounts of money around to anyone else who has a paypal account, they don't have to be set up as an online merchant, they can just take my money and spend it themselves. It's pretty much the online equivalent of cash. If Google Checkout has any comparable capabilities they're sure hiding it... for the end user all they are is another merchant service like the one Yahoo runs, but one that's tied specifically to Gmail and the other Google services. I can maybe see some convenience there but it's nothing like Paypal.

Re:This isn't about eBay... this isn't like Paypal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24413893)

Paypal works like a checking account, I can paypal small amounts of money around to anyone else who has a paypal account

Yeah you can do that with Paypal, but if you send a small amount of money then the person on the other end won't actually get anything.

Paypal's and eBay's fees these days are absolutely ridiculous - while maintaining their long-standing absolutely shitty customer service - that they're removing what Warren Buffett refers to as the "moat" around their business model and making it feasible for competitors to come in. Thank fucking God for Google and Amazon making headway into this space, hopefully they'll both expand their models to cover all the same services as Paypal. Those assholes at eBay/Paypal need to get a big fucking dose of humility and see their business start to falter, then maybe they'll treat their customers with something approaching respect.

Re:This isn't about eBay... this isn't like Paypal (1)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#24413993)

Yeah you can do that with Paypal, but if you send a small amount of money then the person on the other end won't actually get anything.

If you try to use it as a merchant service and pay with a credit card, probably not, but if you use it as a checking account and send them the money from your Paypal credit balance? They better.

Thank fucking God for Google and Amazon making headway into this space

They're not "in this space" yet. When they get here then we'll talk.

mp3sparks anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24413981)

Maybe they'll take money for mp3 sparks, my account is running low...

Amazonbay (3, Interesting)

s7uar7 (746699) | more than 5 years ago | (#24414027)

Lets hope it means there's an Amazon auction site on the way too: ebay needs some proper competition.

Re:Amazonbay (5, Interesting)

mdfst13 (664665) | more than 5 years ago | (#24414583)

Err...yes, because Amazon's last auction site worked so well. Have you noticed that eBay is becoming more like Amazon? Payments to go through eBay's payment processor (PayPal). Greater concentration on fixed price (Buy It Now). Seller based browsing. Amazon had all those things first.

Amazon already competes with eBay in online selling. Do they really need a variable price mechanism as well? It's one of those areas that scales naturally to a monopoly. Sellers want to run single auctions that maximize the buyers (more potential buyers means a higher top bid).

Auctions is actually a niche market. It works best for unique objects, where the seller does not know how much a buyer is willing to pay. One of the challenges for eBay in recent years is that many of the people who have used auctions would really prefer a fixed price setting but have had to use auctions because that was the only place they could find their product.

In far more countries than Amazon and selling through both auctions and fixed price, eBay's earnings are still lower than Amazon. Amazon would be better off launching in a new country (e.g. India or Australia) rather than trying to invade the auction market.

The reason for Checkout By Amazon is simple. Amazon is moving to a model where people can pick and choose what Amazon services to use in selling their product. There's the Amazon Advantage program, where the product is in Amazon's warehouse, discoverable on Amazon's site, paid for through Amazon's checkout system, and shipped by Amazon (possibly bundled with other items). However, if people prefer, they can purchase those services separately:

1. Store in Amazon's warehouse and ship with Amazon's discounts. [amazonservices.com]

2. Discovery through Amazon's sites (if they don't use Amazon's checkout, they can't have a detail page but can still purchase a link from Amazon to their site that appears in search results and on other detail pages [amazon.com] ).

3. Pay through Amazon's payment processor. [amazonservices.com] Amazon already had Simple Pay. It used to be called the Honor System. Checkout by Amazon is new only in that one couldn't use it separately previously but had to list the item on Amazon's site.

Amazon is also different from eBay in that it offers listing on defined pages where all listings of a certain product are on the same page. This is the reverse of the auctions model, where every listing is essentially its own product. Discovery is expensive and hard. Payment is straight forward by comparison. As such, if you want to see an eBay competitor, you should look for a company that is competitive in search rather than in payment. Amazon currently does not have that kind of search, and it would be expensive for them to develop it (with no guarantee of success, see A9, where years of development failed to produce results).

Re:Amazonbay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24424765)

If you can't use your trusted credit card like Visa or Amex, why would anyone want to do any business on the net? For example, visa and Amex have local offices whereas Paybal is in a foreign country with no local representation.

Re:Amazonbay (1)

lysse (516445) | more than 5 years ago | (#24415955)

What's so great about an auction? People who want to buy stuff don't know how much they'll end up paying (or even whether they'll be successful), and people who want to sell stuff don't know how much they can expect to recoup for it (they can either run the risk of having to sell $200 worth of kit for 99c, or run the risk of nobody even looking at the auction because it's not "a bargain"). Give me a place I can pay a fair price for an item and that's the end of it, and I'll be happy. Let's leave eBay to the cheapskates, timewasters and rip-off merchants...

Re:Amazonbay (3, Informative)

cliffski (65094) | more than 5 years ago | (#24417003)

In economic terms, auctions are more efficient. Auctions ensure that people pay the value to them of the product, and that the seller gets the correct price from the market.

If I price a good at $10, and nobody wants to buy it, I sell none, nobody enjoys the product, and I am none the wiser as to the value of the product, other than I know its under $10 (or it may be due to their being zero demand).
An auction makes the *real* value and price of the product immediately apparent to both parties, and allows it to vary over time to capture markets that otherwise would not be satisfied. Rather than suffering from understock or overstock, the price automatically adjusts so that all products get sold, and every slice of the market gets access to the product.

Auction Deoptimization (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#24418277)

That's the economic theory. The practice on eBay has often been buyers who are willing to bid up to prices totally out of touch with economic reality. Everybody who shopped on eBay in their early years has had the experience of being outbid by somebody who seemed to have no idea of the actual value of the item.

This overbidding was probably a big reason for eBay's early profitability. Seems to be much less common nowadays, which is probably why eBay is putting so much emphasis on fixed-price selling.

Re:Amazonbay (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 5 years ago | (#24418015)

What's so great about an auction? People who want to buy stuff don't know how much they'll end up paying (or even whether they'll be successful), and people who want to sell stuff don't know how much they can expect to recoup for it (they can either run the risk of having to sell $200 worth of kit for 99c, or run the risk of nobody even looking at the auction because it's not "a bargain"). Give me a place I can pay a fair price for an item and that's the end of it, and I'll be happy. Let's leave eBay to the cheapskates, timewasters and rip-off merchants...

That's true if you're like the people who use eBay to buy stuff one could get at a retailer (and a way of getting said retailer to ship to you).

However, if you want something that's out of print, if it's a book or CD, maybe Amazon has it through their used service. If it's something that wasn't sent publically distributed, fat chance seeing it on Amazon at all. This is stuff like CDs and books that were released during some event/convention/etc., and never released again. In these things, which I believe are called "collectibles", eBay really is the only option. No way Amazon would bother selling something that maybe has one random seller selling their only copy per year.

Alas, the problem with Google Checkout (and looks like this Amazon service as well) has is well, individuals can't easily get an account for individual random transactions. They all appear to be more retailer-oriented service rather than people sending people money (like Paypal).

Google checkout not found favor? Huh? (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 5 years ago | (#24414365)

I find Google Checkout is accepted at almost every eCommerce site I shop at nowadays - and I usually prefer it over Paypal.

Amazon Flexible Payment Services (1)

neonux (1000992) | more than 5 years ago | (#24414425)

Instead of linking to an uninteresting web page with very few details, TFA should link to the webpage describing the service on Amazon :
http://www.amazon.com/Flexible-Payments-Service-AWS/b/ref=sc_fe_l_3?ie=UTF8&node=342430011&no=3440661&me=A36L942TSJ2AJA [amazon.com]

It's much more interesting that what I expected from TFA, it seems to actually be even more flexible and configurable than PayPal :

Examples of possible Payment Instructions include:

        * Transaction Amount: Specify fixed minimum, maximum, range, or specific amount for a certain payment.
        * Transaction Date: Configure a payment transaction to be executed at a specific time (e.g. specific day, weekly, monthly, or date range).
        * Spending Limit: Set daily, weekly or monthly limits on number of transactions or total amount spent, to control spending on your application.
        * Recipient List: Specify recipients who are authorized to access and receive funds.
        * Payment Method: Specify the payment methods (credit card, bank account debit, balance transfer) you want to accept through your application.
        * Fees: Control which party pays the Amazon FPS charges.

Niiice!
Take that PayPal!

Re:Amazon Flexible Payment Services (1)

neonux (1000992) | more than 5 years ago | (#24414459)

Forgot to add that they allow developers to provide other merchants potentially competing services :

Every FPS transaction has a sender (party making payments), a recipient (party receiving payments), and a caller (party making the API calls to Amazon FPS). Callers are the same as recipients if the developer is the party receiving funds, but developers can also act as third-party callers enabling a transaction between a sender and a recipient (and taking a cut of transactions if desired).

Overpriced? (1)

hendridm (302246) | more than 5 years ago | (#24415671)

Hmmm, Amazon charges 2.9% + $0.30 per transation, and Google Checkout charges 2% + $0.20 per transaction. Why would you use Amazon's service?

Re:Overpriced? (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#24416545)

If Amazon's service is available to Canadians? Yes.

As a Canadian, Google checkout is useless to me, I'm stuck with PayPal only.

Microtransactions? (1)

Danimoth (852665) | more than 5 years ago | (#24415793)

I've been looking for a good service for micro transactions. On the scale of around 25-50 cents/transaction. This new Amazon service seems the most interesting of any service I've seen (5% and .05 on transactions $10) Anyone know of any good services?

Re:Microtransactions? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24420959)

Personally I like to use pocket change for these transactions. Universally accepted, no transaction fees.

Not holding my breath... (1)

hyperz69 (1226464) | more than 5 years ago | (#24416529)

Ebay currently has a Microsoft type grip on the payment market. It's going to take some serious force to create competition in the online payments market. I don't think this will be the solution.

Not meant as a joke, but I wish Ebay would have offered home loans. It would have been the one bank I would have been cheering for to be flushed ;P AND YES EBAY IS A BANK... no matter how they skate the law, they are an unregulated bank PERIOD!

Dear Amazon (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#24416537)

Make your system work between USA/Canadian buyers/sellers, unlike Google who is limited to the USA and the UK.

Amazon runs e-stores (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24419059)

Amazon runs the e-stores of many major retailers so it has a pretty good chance of succeeding.

A matter of trust (1)

JakeChance (983045) | more than 5 years ago | (#24431035)

I would simply trust Amazon a lot more than I'd trust PayPal. I've heard too many terrible stories about their shady practices.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...