Cascading billing and charge backs - GoFuckYourself.com

tical · 07-02-2003, 07:39 PM

If you had a cascading billing solution using 3 processors... wouldn't that mean 3 x 1% = 3% cb ratio?

If it is possible to shuffle around your processors in a round robin type fashion that is.

Or is my head way up in my ass here? Way in there.

xxweekxx · 07-02-2003, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tical
If you had a cascading billing solution using 3 processors... wouldn't that mean 3 x 1% = 3% cb ratio?

If it is possible to shuffle around your processors in a round robin type fashion that is.

Or is my head way up in my ass here? Way in there.

drunk?

gothweb · 07-02-2003, 07:40 PM

Cascading is to get around scrubbing. Of course you will get more chargebacks.

jact · 07-02-2003, 07:41 PM

Your chargeback ratio wouldn't go to 3% it'd be 1% for whatever charges went through each processor. I doubt you're going to evenly spread 100% of your transactions out over 3 processors....

Probono · 07-02-2003, 07:41 PM

Use the little grey cells.

1% of 99 is 1 even if you give 33 sales to each of three processors

jact · 07-02-2003, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gothweb
Cascading is to get around scrubbing. Of course you will get more chargebacks.

More chargebacks? Why, because more people get access due to less scrubbing?

tical · 07-02-2003, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jact
Your chargeback ratio wouldn't go to 3% it'd be 1% for whatever charges went through each processor. I doubt you're going to evenly spread 100% of your transactions out over 3 processors....

So no matter how many processors you use and pay your $750 visa reg for... they all share the 1% limit?

I was under the assumption that each processor would be allowed to allow a maximum of up to 1% which would mean 3% if you COULD evenly spread your transactions among the 3.

gothweb · 07-02-2003, 07:48 PM

Cascading doesn't randomly distribute the signups. It tries the first biller, and if they reject it, it tries the second, and so on. This means you will be adding signups, and the ones on the later billers in the cascade will be the ones more likely to charge back. That's why the earlier ones denied them.

gothweb · 07-02-2003, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tical

So no matter how many processors you use and pay your $750 visa reg for... they all share the 1% limit?

I was under the assumption that each processor would be allowed to allow a maximum of up to 1% which would mean 3% if you COULD evenly spread your transactions among the 3.

That's why we have to register the domains with VISA... They all count together, regardless of processor.

Sly_RJ · 07-02-2003, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gothweb
Cascading doesn't randomly distribute the signups. It tries the first biller, and if they reject it, it tries the second, and so on. This means you will be adding signups, and the ones on the later billers in the cascade will be the ones more likely to charge back. That's why the earlier ones denied them.

But you can distribute the sign-ups if you rotate the primary processor.

Kimmykim · 07-02-2003, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tical
If you had a cascading billing solution using 3 processors... wouldn't that mean 3 x 1% = 3% cb ratio?

If it is possible to shuffle around your processors in a round robin type fashion that is.

Or is my head way up in my ass here? Way in there.

It would mean you have a 1% limit with each processor on an account basis per processor.

tical · 07-02-2003, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kimmykim

It would mean you have a 1% limit with each processor on an account basis per processor.

Hmm... so wouldn't a solution (cascading or not) using 3 processors up your limit to (virtually) 3% provided you could shuffle around the primary processor after each sale (impossible?)?

tical · 07-02-2003, 08:06 PM

Here's a lil scenario of what I'm asking:

Processor 1: 1000 signups, 3cbs (.3%)
Processor 2: 1000 signups, 6cbs (.6%)
Processor 3: 1000 signups, 2cbs (.2%)

Total 1.1%

But 1% per processor was never exceeded. Again pimpslap me if I'm wrong

Kimmykim · 07-02-2003, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tical

Hmm... so wouldn't a solution (cascading or not) using 3 processors up your limit to (virtually) 3% provided you could shuffle around the primary processor after each sale (impossible?)?

No. You have a 1% rate, period. 1+1+1 does not equal three. It equals 1% at each processor.

Look at it like this. Every time you roll the dice you have the exact same chance of getting a 1, 2, 3, 4, etc, no matter how many times you roll.

Kimmykim · 07-02-2003, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tical
Here's a lil scenario of what I'm asking:

Processor 1: 1000 signups, 3cbs (.3%)
Processor 2: 1000 signups, 6cbs (.6%)
Processor 3: 1000 signups, 2cbs (.2%)

Total 1.1%

But 1% per processor was never exceeded. Again pimpslap me if I'm wrong

No.
processor 1 -- 1%
processor 2 -- 1%
processor 3 -- 1%

Total transactions among processors is still 1%

Shooter · 07-02-2003, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tical
Here's a lil scenario of what I'm asking:

Processor 1: 1000 signups, 3cbs (.3%)
Processor 2: 1000 signups, 6cbs (.6%)
Processor 3: 1000 signups, 2cbs (.2%)

Total 1.1%

But 1% per processor was never exceeded. Again pimpslap me if I'm wrong

That wouldn't achieve anything. If you sent all those sign-ups to one processor, here's how your numbers would look:

3000 sign-ups, 11cbs...which gives you a 0.36% ratio.

tical · 07-02-2003, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shooter

That wouldn't achieve anything. If you sent all those sign-ups to one processor, here's how your numbers would look:

3000 sign-ups, 11cbs...which gives you a 0.36% ratio.

Oh yeah, my math was wrong there.... woops

Thanks guys (and girls)

Matt_WildCash · 07-02-2003, 09:15 PM

As far as I know, Visa has fragmented there entire system with the banks under them, they do not work together or streamline info between every processor and every bank. you pay 3 x $750 cause there 3 seperate setups, I'd say you can do 1% under each and be just fine. And if you do more than that processors will still probably allow you to keep processing upto 1.5 - 2.0 % assuming a huge number of there rebilling and good quality signups wipe there ratio down so they can afford to do that.

I remember a friend of mine used to have 4% CB with Ibill and they didn't care, when it hit 6% thats when they asked to try to lower it.

Run a good clean business model and you'll be fine, I don't see this effecting chargeback ratio's in a big way.

Driven

07-02-2003, 07:39 PM	#1
tical Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 6,504	Cascading billing and charge backs If you had a cascading billing solution using 3 processors... wouldn't that mean 3 x 1% = 3% cb ratio? If it is possible to shuffle around your processors in a round robin type fashion that is. Or is my head way up in my ass here? Way in there. __________________ 112.020.756

07-02-2003, 07:40 PM	#3
gothweb Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Back in the USSA Posts: 8,849	Cascading is to get around scrubbing. Of course you will get more chargebacks. __________________ Photos by Ian X.: Distinctive photos of goth babes. Blood Money:Your traffic, my sites, our money. MojoHost: Still the best.

07-02-2003, 07:41 PM	#4
jact Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Oakville, Canada Posts: 9,134	Your chargeback ratio wouldn't go to 3% it'd be 1% for whatever charges went through each processor. I doubt you're going to evenly spread 100% of your transactions out over 3 processors.... __________________ Free agent

07-02-2003, 07:48 PM	#8
gothweb Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Back in the USSA Posts: 8,849	Cascading doesn't randomly distribute the signups. It tries the first biller, and if they reject it, it tries the second, and so on. This means you will be adding signups, and the ones on the later billers in the cascade will be the ones more likely to charge back. That's why the earlier ones denied them. __________________ Photos by Ian X.: Distinctive photos of goth babes. Blood Money:Your traffic, my sites, our money. MojoHost: Still the best.

07-02-2003, 08:06 PM	#13
tical Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 6,504	Here's a lil scenario of what I'm asking: Processor 1: 1000 signups, 3cbs (.3%) Processor 2: 1000 signups, 6cbs (.6%) Processor 3: 1000 signups, 2cbs (.2%) Total 1.1% But 1% per processor was never exceeded. Again pimpslap me if I'm wrong __________________ 112.020.756

07-02-2003, 07:41 PM	#5
Probono Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Under the Rainbow Posts: 2,731	Use the little grey cells. 1% of 99 is 1 even if you give 33 sales to each of three processors

07-02-2003, 09:15 PM	#18
Matt_WildCash Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 1,699	As far as I know, Visa has fragmented there entire system with the banks under them, they do not work together or streamline info between every processor and every bank. you pay 3 x $750 cause there 3 seperate setups, I'd say you can do 1% under each and be just fine. And if you do more than that processors will still probably allow you to keep processing upto 1.5 - 2.0 % assuming a huge number of there rebilling and good quality signups wipe there ratio down so they can afford to do that. I remember a friend of mine used to have 4% CB with Ibill and they didn't care, when it hit 6% thats when they asked to try to lower it. Run a good clean business model and you'll be fine, I don't see this effecting chargeback ratio's in a big way. Driven