Printable View
Hey guys,
I would love to hear from you what are the pros and cons for each one, CCBill (which we are currently use) vs. the new Epoch that raise so much excitement here. And please no acronyms and do explain technical terms- i want to understand it all!
Also why is there a need to use secondery processor?
cheers,
OMG you could not believe how important this is, having a second or third processor could be the only thing that keeps you out of the poor house in case your primary processor has issues with you or suddenly takes the money and runs. Also a secondary processor used in cascade billing can bump sales up like 10%.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShowGuys
I would take a long look at paycom now, things have changed. I am sure they will have a few bugs to start with, but they will quickly be known as the best processor in the world, well unless you work for Ccbill ;)
i've always been a fan of both companies. they are both very good and have super nice and helpful people working for them plus they pay on time.
but the new cascading option of epoch's will put another 11% or so in the pockets of smaller webmasters who can't afford cascading software or have other issues. i can't WAIT till they get their new non adult banking going so i can join in the fun ;)
IMHO it is to early to say right now if the 'new' Epoch is going to be better than the 'standard' CCBill, the reason being that there hasnt been enough time passed since Epoch launched these new changes and people actually using them.
Features are great, the cascading should, in theory add more money to Epoch programs bottom line profits but, theory doesnt pay the bills $0.02
Regards,
Lee
I would say with the new cascade options, Epoch will run away with the best processor spot, well ahead of ccbill. Of course, controlling your own cascade through nats or a similar program is always going to be better, but Epoch is now offering smaller affiliate programs something that is extremely valuable, giving both program owners and their affiliates more money.
The ball is in ccbill's court now, its up to them to step up to the plate with some new stuff.
BTW, its so nice to hear billilng companies actually being innovative and creative like this again, we haven't seen real billing company innovation for years, well before the visa regs came into play.
cheers,
Luke
Ya I predict many sites taking down that “Ccbill processing” stuff from their affiliate programs at least really soon. It could take Ccbill years to do anything big companies are normally really slow, but some day I am sure they will top this if they really can that is.
It could take 8-15 months for everyone to change over, but I see both site owners and affiliates moving over to epoch now
Excuse my ignorance....but what's the deal with all this talk about Epoch?
How are they better than CCBill? and what's this cascading option that you guys ar all talking about?
we're looking for a processor and i thought the obvious choice was CCBill. Should we be going with Epoch instead?
Thanks!
Allan
epoch just changed their stuff. not only have they improved their stats - which certainly needed it - but they have an option so if you also process with ccbill or a couple other companies, your declines will be sent to your secondary processor (ccbill or those other companies) and your affilates will get credit for sales made through either processor - and epoch can even pay out your affiliates for the other processors!
programs i work with generally see 11% more sales by cascading so...
Thanks Basschick!! :thumbsup:
Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
You will need them both. The new standard for smaller programs will most likely be Epoch as primary biller and CCbill as secondary.Quote:
Originally Posted by GPallan
collegedudes247 is currently using CCBill. As a newbie, I am impressed very much with CCBill's customer service, they are about 100 times more efficient than our hosting company.
I like the idea of the cascading that Epoch is setting up though, I'm going to take a look.
http://www.poster.net/highlander/hig...rt-4000779.jpg
There can be only one. :-)
I merely jest.
Maybe you need a new host? :cheekymonkey:Quote:
Originally Posted by shackzinc
I think you and every other smaller program will be doing the same thing over the next few months. I don't envy CCbill at this moment in time. Don't get me wrong... I LOVE CCbill. But this new, improved Epoch is a real pleasant surprise.Quote:
Originally Posted by shackzinc
How long will it be before we hear CCbill is teaming up with TooMuchMedia and implementing NATS? ;)
I agree, I don't think Epoch could have made a more brilliant move. Given the arrogance of the people at TooMuchMedia, I would be somewhat surprised if they would enter a deal with CCBill, but the MPA deal might force the hands of both TMM and CCBill.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xstr8guy
THe one thing that is of concern to us about getting our cascading billing through one billing provider (who is always in first position) is (depending on how it is actually implemented) it erases much of the reason for having multiple billers. As it stands now, if Epoch's scrub is too high, or they are lagging in processing time for some reason, it's a snap to change the cascade so CCBill is in first position. (Or, if you didn't like CCBill for some reason, Verotel or SegPay or somebody else.) As I understand it, this will not be possible with the Epoch version of MPA.
Likewise, in the unlikely event that Epoch runs into problems, you will lose not only your processor, but your cascading billing and affiliate processing as well.
Of course, with CCBill, this was always the case... drop them and you lose your affiliates (or, at least, all your affiliates link codes break). But with a leased copy of NATS or MPA3, you're never going to be in a position where a sudden and unanticipated clampdown by the cardmember associations could cause you to lose processing overnight if you have multiple processors.
I hope and believe that both Epoch and CCBill have their fingers on the pulse of the industry enough to ensure this would never happen, but purely from a risk management perspective, having your cascading/affiliate software be a separate third party product not tied to a single processor is the safest, provided that your program has enough revenues to justify the cost.
I think the guys over at CCBill were not blind sided by this new product by epoch... I think they've been aware of it for some time..
and it would not surprise me if they were not already in the production stages of a competing product.... Maybe the rollout timing was not in their favor, but I would almost bet on a competing product in short order.
CCBill have been working on several changes for at least 6 months that i am aware of so far as the 'affiliate' side of things go, im sure once everything is working 100% we'll find out what the new things are.Quote:
Originally Posted by tombarr
I just dont see the reasoning behind switching from your existing processor to one that cascades if you dont have a lot of declines, and if you have a lot of declines, you have more important things to worry about than cascading your decline sales.
Regards,
Lee
Yeah, and they'll soon be known as EPOCH too! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by maxpower
A imagine quite a few people have both Epoch and CCbill already and haven't gone the NATS or MAS route yet... us for one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
And some that I've seen were once with CCBill and went with Nats, only to come back to CCBill....Quote:
Originally Posted by Xstr8guy
I'm interested to see CCBill's response to this product rollout....
I think it will be interesting.
Just like the eternal Phoenix Epoch has risen from the ashes of paycom to guide us all into the futureQuote:
Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude
This whole “small programs” stuff is misleading EPOCH new script will be the best option for any US based company that does not want to spend 20,000$ on Nats and a month of their life to learn it. I can see Ccbill trying to come out with something that is just enough to say they are equal to paycom now, but sure they will drag their feet. I can also see many people that paid NATS a huge amount of money will try to poke holes in all this, but as this all unfolds I just wonder how long this will last.
You can get NATS for $150-350 a month starting out (depending on number of joins per month). I don't know for sure, but I suspect that a significant majority of NATS users are leasing rather than purchasing. Everyone I know running it (including some pretty large programs) is leasing.Quote:
Originally Posted by maxpower
I can see many reasons why leasing something like that would be best, but still would cost like 2400.00$ a year I guess a few years of that is better than gabbling on the whole 20,000$ that this stuff will even matter much in a year or two. I have to look at all the stress leaning this huge NATS thing will cause me, and the 1,000$ learning fee and some other weird stuff from what I remember too.
I am sure someday I will expand the affiliate options with NATS, MPA3, or Clickman, its just nice to see that decision becoming less important. I really have to do so many things as it is, and help in any direction is really appreciated. If I can make a extra 10% with this cascade billing, and save 2400.00$ a year by doing almost nothing than I have to love that. Also I do have to love things that level the playing field, and change is my friend right now, all and all this is the best news I heard in years :heartu:
Max, I wouldn't be that afraid of NATS. I am a real curmudgeon about learning new software, so I was sorta kicking and screaming about NATS.
I still don't know all the ins and outs, but I can reasonably competently use it now, and AJ is getting pretty familiar with it. It seems overwhelming at first, but really isn't bad once you get into it, and their knowledgebase is really good, and they do give you a pretty thorough overview on how to use it.
I'd lease NATS or MPA3 in a heartbeat except for one HUGE major drawback. I don't want to write and send checks myself. What a major pain for a small program. If I had an accounting department like gaybucks, it wouldn't be a problem. Lol.
Our "accounting department" is actually a drawer in AJ's desk :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Xstr8guy
Seriously, though... that was one of our biggest concerns with going to NATS, and one of the coolest things that Epoch did to address that issue was announce that they will handle all the payouts, including sales made through other (non-Epoch) cascades. And there are some services out there that handle the payouts for you. But you're right... we do have to deal with checks that get lost in the mail or otherwise don't arrive, writing a bunch of checks like clockwork every two weeks, and all the things that CCBill handled before.
I think we will probably eventually switch to one of the services or otherwise automate the process further.
It is a bit donating, but I do plan to offer NATS after I open my 3rd members site in this group. It must be nice to divide up projects with someone Chip, I am admittedly better at something’s than others, and sure that is the same all over. Just hard to see time enough for me to play with this NATS stuff to much at least in the near future. :smoke:Quote:
Originally Posted by gaybucks_chip
max - i agree with you here. nats does have a learning curve and beside that is the actual work of inputting all the banners and affililiate content, creating samples of each fpa and zipping and uploading the full size ones and inputting the fhgs - and then adding better thumbs and descriptions for each fhg. oh, yeah - and then changing all the links everywhere so they have the proper nats code.
That gives me a headache just reading it :embarassed: But it does sound like it might be best to start off a affiliate program with NATS if I am going to have to make everyone change their inbound links.
I really don’t know things are change here really fast now days, I might not really even need this NATS stuff at all ever. If Ccbill really tops this, and then maybe someone tops that what role will NATS play then, hell even now is it REally worth it?
is it really worth it? if you run a pay per signup program, absolutely! if you want to run a program that allow you to either pay per signup or by revshare, absolutely. for the rest? too soon to say since epoch is still finishing things up in their new stuff.
also using nats allows you to customize so the pages match your program - although using a custom solution does this even better. it does show that you have and are willing to spend money - although again, a custom solution does this better.
is it worth it? it depends on your program and what it needs. for some, i'd say absolutely yes. for others, i don't think it will matter as much.
Ya I need to fly this affiliate program awhile before I go PPS, so maybe weight and see approach is best. What are these custom solution’s you talk about? I do want to set-up my FHG and Sites a bit differently is that going to be a problem?Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
The paycom/epoch software is great, but accepting BaDoink to their program makes them no good business partner IMO.
I am still a huge CCBill fan!
bump.
has enough time past for the dust to settle on this?
any new opinions/perspectives?