Printable View
Are you folks using NATs or SegPay concerned about potential conflicts of interest?
It would seem to me that an affiliate program script, owning a billing processor, having accumulated so much data from their existing NATs clients could cause a massive headache and an even bigger conflict of interest not only to their existing clients, but also existing SegPay processing clients.
Is there such a thing as having 'to much' information available as an individual company?
Regards,
Lee
Wasn't aware of this and honestly not happy to hear it.
Not just because of the too much data issue (I do think this is a concern) but because TMM has never been known (at least by me) for accessibility of its management and my impression has always been that (rank-and-file techs and Boris aside) they have an "absolutely as little as possible to get by" philosophy about most everything, which is not exactly what one wants in a biller.
Lee, conflicts of iinterest was the very first thing i wondered about when i read the news.
url to this news anyone ?
I wonder how a company that specialises in one script can handle taking on adult billing. I hope they keep things separate as I like NATS and don't want it going down with a sinking ship in a years time when the billing becomes too much.
The other issue that many dont seem to be understanding right now is that SegPay really is just a re-incarnation of iBill.
The first couple of days after SegPay launched (i beleive it was 2 days after iBill closed its doors) there was a lot of details the same as with iBill, staff, mailing addresses, company directors, off-shore companies, etc.
Of course that information isnt as easy to come by now because they have had a year to 'hide' it away from those who want to find it.
It is however still out there, if you know where to look.
Regards,
Lee
Well, and, as I posted on GMS, there are other issues.
- Segpay's "arms length" nonprofit organization that is supposed to hold webmaster funds independent of Segpay to ensure that a repeat of the Ibill debacle never happens. Except that, according to research people did way back when, the nonprofit was controlled by the same people that control Segpay (which are the same people that controlled Ibill.)
- Segpay seems to process for absolutely anything. All of the sites that have been terminated or refused by CCbill, Epoch, and even Verotel seem to be welcomed with open arms to Segpay.
Reading John's press release, with his trademark jabs at the competition, it's obvious that the MPA/Epoch deal must have really hurt them.
Two companies that I trust whole heartedly in this biz...and I have been doing this since '98.....are National Net and Too Much Media (Nats).
So to answer your question Lee....no I am not concerned in the least. If it was any other company, yeah I would be a little watchful.
You see thats interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Special_K
I say interesting because it already appears as if that conflict i mentioned above is starting to happen, they have mentioned that they will be adding a bunch of features to NATs for clients who utilize SegPay, and it sounds like they mean almost exclusively.
So basically, stick with your current processors, use the 'basic' version of NATs or, use OUR processor as your primary biller and get much better features.
They have to drive clients to SegPay, because very few people use them now, owning the industries most popular affiliate program script puts them in an ideal situation to do pretty much whatever they want.... Because pretty much everyone uses NATs.
What happens if they decide they no longer want to support Epoch or CCBill in NATs but only want to use it through SegPay? it would appear on the face of it, this is what they are planning on doing by only offering certain features of NATs to SegPay clients.
Yep, no conflict of interest there.
Regards,
Lee
How is Nats combined with Segpay any different than CCBill's all in one system in terms of information and this conflict of interest some of you speak of?
Lee.
Time will tell. We currently use Nats and I have no interest in adding Segpay. So personally, if Nats wants to incorporate more features into their system for Segpay clients....by all means they should go right ahead.
I doubt they will drop the integration of ccbill and the other billers but as I said time will tell and I am not going to worry about something I can not control. CCbill has proven themselves since day 1 and did not get involved in risky billing schemes like other companies did....and as a result they are the largest. Why would Nats drop them? Sure they could but I doubt it.
You are right, they will steer people to use Segpay. Why shouldn't they? Its perspective I guess...yeah maybe it is a conflict of interest to some. But for me....like I said Nats are some straight up guys and I like they way do business. I don't see their good business practices stopping because of this.
John's already said in his GFY thread that SegPay customers will get free nats use (not a big deal, its like epoch/mpa imho) plus will get special features not available to other billers (this is the big worry). I really like NATS because it gives me the choice of billers and the ability to flip billers within seconds. I have been approved by SegPay and have been hesitant to add them to my billing cascade. After being scammed by so many billers in the past, including iBill, I am very hesitant to accept a new biller and it then becomes a conflict once I have no choice but to use SegPay as my primary to get all features of NATS.
Now, I could be wrong, perhaps those features are nothing more than free third party affiliate payouts or combining of affiliate payouts over multiple sponsors....I really don't care about that stuff, but what if its something else, something important?
Its one of those slippery slopes, once tmm builds nats to enable special features for segpay, then it will be very tempting and easy for them to offer critical and important nats features only to segpay clients in order to boost their segpay income.
Well... and if you do the math, it's pretty obvious that TMM will make a LOT more money off the segpay % than off of the NATS fee for all but the tiniest clients.
This is a "touchy" situation.
However, in all honesty, what is really needed most in this business is another billing company that is solid. If this is one way of making SegPay a good third choice, then imho it's good for the business.
Billers have caused me the most financial difficulties so far. $14k a months in rebill down the drain overnight with DMR. Another $10k in rebills w/ Ibill.
Anyone remember when Epoch or Paycomm (not sure what they were called then) was having trouble paying webmasters?
This industry NEEDS more than two good billers. Yes, Ccbill and Epoch are "rock solid" now. But, in all actuality, so was Ibill at one time. Go figure.
Hugs,
Lloyd