P.S. If you accept online checks... hit me up and I will prove it to you .. by signing up and using all your bandwidth:Graucho

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

We hear this trash talk all the time bro. Have you noticed that the ones who complain about bandwidth tend to be the smaller webmasters with small paysites???

None of the big dog's have stopped accepting checks... maybe you should think about why that's the case!

I'll be waiting for your response... hopefully we'll get more CAPS & BOLD to back up your ridiculous claims. lol

:glugglug

I'm not even sure why they still accept checks since the majority of them always seem to either be NSF or not even their account.

With all due respect, and I am sure that you were not aware of this because this is not something that we openly or publicly advertise, but CCBill can absolutely match the claim that our clients are collecting 75%-80% or more of their initial online check sales

In fact, I noticed that the site that newbreed is advertising in his signature, arikaames.com, is a site that is using CCBill for their online check processing and I invite them to post their online check return stats for just initial sales, or all sales, for the past month, 3 months, or since the beginning of the year. Although I am tempted to mention the return %, I will not do so, but will mention that on new sales, it is considerably under 20%

We have a very elaborate check scrubbing system that we are constantly making improvements on. No system currently on the market is 100% infallible, online check transactions do not have the luxury of a real-time central clearinghouse like credit cards.

That said, WTS appears to be a established, well run company and I would not have posted on this thread if I was not so proud of our online check system. ;)

For the record, this thread was not aimed at nor much considered for Arika's site. Corvett and I did speak today and I am happy with the check billing solution that CCBill offers. And he is correct, for Arika's site, the % is around 15.

There is a problem with online checks, one that everyone who deals with them will suffer from at one point or another. If you run many sites or other businesses (not just adult) this problem will hit you one day, make sure you have your options open when it does... :2 cents:

good job ccbill

So what you are saying is that small webmasters are not important to your company ...because they can't absorb the large amount of bandwidth that the thieves use on their site fraudulantly with online checks?

You are a great sales person.... I'm sure there are tons of webmasters on here that want to do business with you now!!

LOL ! :1orglaugh


:BangBang: WTS
:ak47: Online Checks

And oh yeah... :321GFY

Hence the fact that no matter how many times they have spammed my threads, I have never spoken with them. :)

Big chargebacks?

As far as whether you should accept checks or not:

Let me say that online checks do add to the bottom line as a healthy supplement to your credit card income?as an additional payment option or to be offered on a cc decline.

I recall KK mentioning some of this years ago? If a surfer has a credit card, they most likely have a checking account to pay the monthly credit card bill. In addition while a credit card may not be enormously necessary to survive, it is difficult to pay normal bills (rent, elec.,ISP/broadband, etc) without a checking account.

You access 2 additional markets; someplace to send a surfer when his cc declines and you have a viable payment option for the people that do not have access to a credit card.

Moreover, it is general industry knowledge that online check transactions normally recur for a longer period than credit card transactions...

Once again, Corvett owns the stage... :thumbsup

51 assholes with insufficient funds :321GFY

we quit accepting online checks about a year ago due the massive check returns,never considered offering them when the credit card attem,pts have been exhausted

wtsben, what is the check return rate if the surfer only sees it on a credit card decline, not as a seperate option on the payments page? do you have those stats? it has to be lower than offering that as an additional option, as the fraudsters do not see it right away and might not know it is gthere

For the year we are at 21% returned checks....

whatif_3, i don't think there's that much difference.... :2 cents:

Good to hear!:thumbsup

Our average rate (including recurring) is at about 80% :)

thansk for answering

hmm, i would think that most people that give bad information would look for easy sites to take advantage of, not try to attept legitimate cc transactions, then try to defraud when the cc declines send them to an online check page

one last question, what is your normal decline rate for check transactions, both by unique and raw? i can have a tiny chargeback rate if my processor is scrubbing 80% of my transactions, this is important to know