|
Did I just see a post from John in here about how they verified this as true? I don't have any horse in this race, but I did spend two years as one of the VP's at CCBill, and back then, our contract was with the MERCHANT. Not with any third party software vendor.
What does that mean, some of you may be asking yourselves right about now? Well, that means that other than the NR folks, NO ONE would have access to their CCBill account UNLESS they had given them access to it. I can't, in any real sense, imagine that CCBill has changed their contract to allow others to access accounts that don't belong to them.
In that case, did NATS have access to NR's CCBill account at some point? And was that access limited to whatever they needed in the install process? Or is there something in the NATS terms that say you have to give them ongoing access to your processing accounts?
And the fact that NATS is basically holding sales hostage so that no affiliates get paid at the moment is what this appears to be in my eyes.
As I said above, I don't have any particular interest in either party... and I'm not saying that either party is right, or that either party is telling the whole story. I just find this odd beyond belief that something could be verified through CCBill without the account owner allowing access either on an unlimited basis or specifically at different times and it doesn't really sound to me as if Chris, on his drive from FL to NC, would have called up CCBill and authorized NATS to access his account. Nor does it sound like he would have given NATS a user pass to that account if he was angry and hung up on them.
I'm sure there's ALOT more to this story than meets the eye.
|