CCBill and ACH

[nickbaer]

I wonder when CCBill is going to get into the 20th century and start using ACH for its US payees?

AEBN and Amazon.com have paid me by ACH since 2005.

CCBill uses Wires, which cost fees outgoing and incoming. Incoming wire fees are $8 at some Banks, or $10 or $15.

Incoming ACH direct deposit is free! Plus at BoA, if you have an account with monthly maintenance fees, and you have an incoming ACH, the fee is waived! (At last read of their services and fees).

i don't get it. An electronic payment processing company, that pays by checks and wires, both of which cost a lot of money.

ePassporte is $2. Payoeer is $0 or $5 (wait vs immediate), customer's choice.

[Lee]

Why would any business cut a significant percentage of its weekly earnings?

I can understand why clients of CCBill would like ACH payments but, on the other hand, i can also appreciate why CCBill doesnt want to offer ACH payments.

After all, if we are being charged for every check that gets cut, every stamp that is used and every wire transfer that happens, CCBill are making some good revenues from these payout types and to be fair, they do have staff costs when it comes to payouts which need to be covered.

Also, dont forget, the fees we get charged for these payment methods are business expenses and can be claimed from the IRS.

Regards,

Lee

[TropixxxStudios]

While I understand your point Lee, I think CCBill is doing themselves a major disservice by not offering ACH. Even if they charged $2.00 they would still make a lot.

Yes, they have overhead, but so do all of us.

How you treat your customers (and we are CCBills customers) says a lot about your business.

I for one (And apparently others agree) think that CCBills wire policy is lame.

[HunkyLuke]

it would be nice if they started offering epassporte payouts!

[Squirt]

I'm going back to checks with CCBill.

Bank of America just raised my wire fee 33% from $10 to $15 without notice.

It's not much money but the whole nickel and dimming without notifying the customer thing pisses me off.

[nickbaer]

Squirt - If you have an account with BoA with monthly maintenance fees, e.g. a Keep The Change savings account, ask them if the incoming Wire offsets those fees.

Incoming ACH did for mine, until I got rid of Keep The Change because that is just a fraudulent reason for them to lure customers to open savings accounts, which have huge monthly fees. The interest and match they pay on Keep The Change did not offset the fees.

[Squirt]

Squirt - If you have an account with BoA with monthly maintenance fees, e.g. a Keep The Change savings account, ask them if the incoming Wire offsets those fees.

Incoming ACH did for mine, until I got rid of Keep The Change because that is just a fraudulent reason for them to lure customers to open savings accounts, which have huge monthly fees. The interest and match they pay on Keep The Change did not offset the fees.

Thanks for the info! I called BofA and found out the $15 fee is for my intl wires, not CCBills. My mistake. Evidently they used to take the fee out of the deposit directly, so I never saw the charge before. Now they take the fee out after the deposit is made and the fee was raised from $12 to $15.

I have a keep the change account. It didn't make a difference with anything, they will still charge all fees. bastards :thumbsdown:

I HATE calling customer service for big corporations. HATE IT :worm:

[gaybucks_chip]

I suspect the reason CCBill won't do ACH is, as Lee said, about the fees for wire transfers... but keep in mind that the vast majority of CCBill customers are pretty small sites, and probably don't get wire transfers.

This means that ccbill mails a check on Monday and at the earliest, it hits CCBill's bank on Wednseday or Thursday, so they can invest or use that money for other purposes for an extra several days. Given the really massive amount of money that's being discussed here (thousands upon thousands of sites) that interest, 2 or 3 days a week, amounts to almost a half-years' interest on whatever money is sent out in checks. This is probably a pretty significant revenue stream.

[nickbaer]

Like everything else wrong with the current practice of Capitalism, paying customers by check in order to float or use the money for a few extra days, is just the wrong way to use and make money.

If they need to float money for 3-4 days, then issue ACH on Thursday, rather than Monday!

[nickbaer]

The difference between calling BoA customer service, in comparison to say AT+T, is that the IVR voice is a male, a cute sounding guy.

AT+T's IVR voice is a screeching, snot nosed brat, girl whining about buying stupid things like text bundles and ringtones.

Apple IVR voice is a Silicon Valley guy. Best Buy is either the same guy, or a slightly more suburban teenager.

WAMU IVR is your worst nightmare high school teacher.

Staples IVR is a stockroom clerk.

I hate being asked if I want to speak in English, or...

[ccjax]

I suspect the reason CCBill won't do ACH is, as Lee said, about the fees for wire transfers... but keep in mind that the vast majority of CCBill customers are pretty small sites, and probably don't get wire transfers.

This means that ccbill mails a check on Monday and at the earliest, it hits CCBill's bank on Wednseday or Thursday, so they can invest or use that money for other purposes for an extra several days. Given the really massive amount of money that's being discussed here (thousands upon thousands of sites) that interest, 2 or 3 days a week, amounts to almost a half-years' interest on whatever money is sent out in checks. This is probably a pretty significant revenue stream.

Okay, at the risk of shooting myself in the foot here by jumping in on this...

For CCBill, the main reasons for wire transfers over ACH for payments is security and tracking of funds. With wire transfers, verification of the transfer is provided to us. We get confirmation of the transfer and receipt.
It protects the business and our clients.

[gaybucks_chip]

I've always heard that rationalization from ccbill, but always assumed it was just that - a rationalization.

Our credit card processors have paid us with ACH for 10 years, and you'd assume that they would be as much or more concerned about security and protection of clients and the merchant bank.

While I realize that wire transfers are individual transactions, while ACH transactions are batched, I've never heard of a case where an ACH was intercepted or otherwise there was a security breach. Definitely heard of errors, but those are generally in the realm of the payor using the wrong account number or something... and for that matter, I've had wires that have gotten lost for a day because the receiving bank forgot to post it.

While i have the utmost respect for CCBill in every way, it really does seem pretty crazy that ccbill won't do ACH, while First Data, the largest card processor in the world, with immense security procedures, has no problem with them.

[nickbaer]

First Data, the US Government - IRS and Social Security, AEBN, Amazon.com, PayPal...

If CCBIll wants Wires instead of ACH for the purpose of the receipt, CCBill should pay us the $15 incoming Wire fee that our Banks charge us.

PayPal. ePassport and Payoneer also give receipts.

[Lee]

If CCBIll wants Wires instead of ACH for the purpose of the receipt, CCBill should pay us the $15 incoming Wire fee that our Banks charge us.

Why?

Its a business write-off at the end of the year which imho, is worth more than the 'fee' itself if you account for it correctly $0.02

Regards,

Lee

[nickbaer]

Of course it is a Bank Fee, a line item on (most) business type tax returns.

But I'd still rather spend the same cash on models.

Until we can print money like the Gov't, or get investment cash through cooked books that show false profits, I'd still rather cut costs that don't create visual images for customers to JO to.

C'mon CCBill, cut the cord.