Visa, IPSP's or the webmaster - a debate - GoFuckYourself.com

CoolPiranhaJack · 07-11-2003, 05:33 PM

Friends of GFY - have an interesting debate for you.

The 1% threshold, who should shoulder the burden?

Think about it. Visa puts the screw on IPSP's, they put the screw on us or we (the webmasters) go out of business.

Forgive me for missing the "plot", but whilst us webmasters can:

* Ban trial sign ups.
* Reduce / Ammend Affiliate Schemes.
* Make more refunds to avoid chargebacks.
* Build Websites that are content rich (as we all do!).
* Have a 100 links to the cancel button etc.

What are the IPSP's doing apart from regulating Visa rules?

Surely the IPSP's should accept responsibility for all this madness and actually admit that they are the ones to blame for all this because they have been greedy for business and have left a wide open door on card acceptance.

If IPSP's had from day 1 been more aggressive in the fraud scrubbing arena and actively increased their scrubbing systems to irradicate bad processing then Visa would not be so "harsh" on the web community. But perhaps they widened the net so as to get more processing business at 15% and get hefty fees on chargebacks in the secure knowledge that the 10% held back would ensure that they never lost money.

What if the IPSP's colluded and agreed with each other that its in their own interests to get webmasters below 1% as clearly if they are below 1% then both the webmaster and the IPSP are in business. Better still why did they not do this 2 years ago?

I for one am all for higher scrubbing features and adding in everything possible to mitigate the chance of taking in a fraudulent transaction. So why dont IPSP's:

* Outlaw all hotmail and web-based email accounts and only accept join ups from an email from a recognised traceable ISP with a REAL IP address. Clearly clients wont like it but if 80% of fraud comes by way of hotmail then ban hotmail addresses.

* Ask for date of birth with the sign up and incorporate this into the membership entry to the site - see http://www.eros5.co.uk a site we run with DOB as a feature of signup and password access. This will also help beat the password traders.

* Increase the tollerance level for acceptance of cards - sure we shall lose some good business (like we will for banning hotmail) but is it not better to be in business than be "Terminated" by the IPSP / Visa.?

* IPSP's should cross reference card usage accross their webmasters and cap card usage at a $ level that changes week in week out. This stops a card being abused sometimes because of batching and offline processing the bad transactions do not register fast enough.

* IPSP's should set up a website "Ban this card.com" and actively encourage webmasters to list cards, names and addresses that webmasters have seen fraud through, not necessarily because it was real fraud but because the customer knew he could chargeback and get away with it. Once posted all IPSPs wont take transactions from that name and address or that card. THERE IS TOO MUCH ABILITY FOR TRUE TRANSACTIONS TO BE CHARGEDBACK WITHOUT QUESTION and because there is no penalty to the card holder he actively shouts "chargeback" just to get FREE Porn.

* Ban countries (yes my wife is Russian and I know I am precluding my own family from using the net).

* Visa should not allow its card holders to CB without the webmaster having chance to dispute the CB, currently you see the debit on your bank statement and have to argue it out POST the event - this is crap! Vsa let us prove to you it was genuine before you charge it back!

* All IPSPs adopt verify for visa immediately accross the board and no transaction occurs outside of this system. Harsh I know but hey "be in business of be TMF'd". This would mean clients have to join VFV today and thus they will be hard pushed to CB unless its for a crap website, ie what the tour said it was and what it was are 2 different things.

* IPSP's to only accept websites with quality content that meet advertising standards, ie what the tour said is what the client got.

I emplore all IPSP's to really increase the fraudscrubbing process and adopt a lot of the policies that I have advocate (appreciate they cannot all be legally done - data protection, privacy etc), BUT do something before all your clients are TMF'd and you have no business to police at all - surely you must carry some of the responsibility for weak scrubbing in the past - I truly believe its not all the webmasters fault and all this could have been avoided by tighter controls but I know that would have dented the IPSP's profits over the last few years - am not cynical am I >?

View Poll Results: Are IPSP's partly to blame?
Yes - their profiteering ways have not helped	1	100.00%
No - its all the webmasters fault	0	0%
Voters: 1. You may not vote on this poll

07-11-2003, 05:33 PM	#1
CoolPiranhaJack Registered User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: UK and USA Posts: 7	Visa, IPSP's or the webmaster - a debate Friends of GFY - have an interesting debate for you. The 1% threshold, who should shoulder the burden? Think about it. Visa puts the screw on IPSP's, they put the screw on us or we (the webmasters) go out of business. Forgive me for missing the "plot", but whilst us webmasters can: * Ban trial sign ups. * Reduce / Ammend Affiliate Schemes. * Make more refunds to avoid chargebacks. * Build Websites that are content rich (as we all do!). * Have a 100 links to the cancel button etc. What are the IPSP's doing apart from regulating Visa rules? Surely the IPSP's should accept responsibility for all this madness and actually admit that they are the ones to blame for all this because they have been greedy for business and have left a wide open door on card acceptance. If IPSP's had from day 1 been more aggressive in the fraud scrubbing arena and actively increased their scrubbing systems to irradicate bad processing then Visa would not be so "harsh" on the web community. But perhaps they widened the net so as to get more processing business at 15% and get hefty fees on chargebacks in the secure knowledge that the 10% held back would ensure that they never lost money. What if the IPSP's colluded and agreed with each other that its in their own interests to get webmasters below 1% as clearly if they are below 1% then both the webmaster and the IPSP are in business. Better still why did they not do this 2 years ago? I for one am all for higher scrubbing features and adding in everything possible to mitigate the chance of taking in a fraudulent transaction. So why dont IPSP's: * Outlaw all hotmail and web-based email accounts and only accept join ups from an email from a recognised traceable ISP with a REAL IP address. Clearly clients wont like it but if 80% of fraud comes by way of hotmail then ban hotmail addresses. * Ask for date of birth with the sign up and incorporate this into the membership entry to the site - see http://www.eros5.co.uk a site we run with DOB as a feature of signup and password access. This will also help beat the password traders. * Increase the tollerance level for acceptance of cards - sure we shall lose some good business (like we will for banning hotmail) but is it not better to be in business than be "Terminated" by the IPSP / Visa.? * IPSP's should cross reference card usage accross their webmasters and cap card usage at a $ level that changes week in week out. This stops a card being abused sometimes because of batching and offline processing the bad transactions do not register fast enough. * IPSP's should set up a website "Ban this card.com" and actively encourage webmasters to list cards, names and addresses that webmasters have seen fraud through, not necessarily because it was real fraud but because the customer knew he could chargeback and get away with it. Once posted all IPSPs wont take transactions from that name and address or that card. THERE IS TOO MUCH ABILITY FOR TRUE TRANSACTIONS TO BE CHARGEDBACK WITHOUT QUESTION and because there is no penalty to the card holder he actively shouts "chargeback" just to get FREE Porn. * Ban countries (yes my wife is Russian and I know I am precluding my own family from using the net). * Visa should not allow its card holders to CB without the webmaster having chance to dispute the CB, currently you see the debit on your bank statement and have to argue it out POST the event - this is crap! Vsa let us prove to you it was genuine before you charge it back! * All IPSPs adopt verify for visa immediately accross the board and no transaction occurs outside of this system. Harsh I know but hey "be in business of be TMF'd". This would mean clients have to join VFV today and thus they will be hard pushed to CB unless its for a crap website, ie what the tour said it was and what it was are 2 different things. * IPSP's to only accept websites with quality content that meet advertising standards, ie what the tour said is what the client got. I emplore all IPSP's to really increase the fraudscrubbing process and adopt a lot of the policies that I have advocate (appreciate they cannot all be legally done - data protection, privacy etc), BUT do something before all your clients are TMF'd and you have no business to police at all - surely you must carry some of the responsibility for weak scrubbing in the past - I truly believe its not all the webmasters fault and all this could have been avoided by tighter controls but I know that would have dented the IPSP's profits over the last few years - am not cynical am I >? __________________ Rob Cool Piranha USA Inc. http://www.coolpiranha.com Email - [email protected]