Where does Ccbill, Epoch and other processors stand on Shaving? - GoFuckYourself.com

.:St Ides:. · 12-20-2004, 04:14 PM

With all the heat going on across many boards between MPA2 and Nats and the shaving issues, I'd like to know where the actual credit card processors stand on this issue.

The biggest issue that processors deal with is fraud to the customers, well the webmasters being shaved are their customers as well.

There will always be dishonest business tactics when there is large somes of money to be made. I feel MPA2 was not at fault by giving the program owner what they wanted. People seem more pissed at the fact that MPA2 provided a shave feature more then the people who used it.

Yes MPA2 got caught up, yes having a shave feature is not the best idea, but what about the people who all used MPA2. Just because you switched to NATS does not mean you did not have it before. If MPA3 has no shave feature they are in the same boat as you, they had it before, but don't now.

Anyways, I'd like to know how ccbill, and epoch and other processors feel about people they make millions of dollars with feel about shaving?

.:St Ides:. · 12-20-2004, 04:47 PM

Figured no one would touch this one

DeanCapture · 12-20-2004, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by .:St Ides:.
Figured no one would touch this one

Nickless · 12-20-2004, 05:38 PM

they get their cut no matter if the sale was made by the site directly or referred by an affiliate

so in theory they shouldn't care.

at least ccbill shows affiliates the % of rebills being shaved.

anyway it's up to the processors to answer this.

RODRIGO EL' PETRO · 12-24-2004, 05:45 PM

I shaved my asshole and then Juicy D Links fucked it

FIX01 · 12-24-2004, 06:19 PM

I dont think the processors look at the affiliates of a program as the customer. I was terminated by a program that claimed the processor said i was flagged as a cheater. I contacted the processor and found out that this was false and their was no problem with the sales i was sending. I asked the processor to email me a statement that confirmed this and they said no because i wasnt the actual customer of the processor, the program i was sending traffic to was. Obviously the program was frauding me by calling me a cheater and keeping my money but they didnt care to confirm this in writing becasue of the money the program was making for them.

nofx · 01-27-2005, 02:50 AM

good thread , no answer.

12-20-2004, 04:14 PM	#1
.:St Ides:. Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 4,857	Where does Ccbill, Epoch and other processors stand on Shaving? With all the heat going on across many boards between MPA2 and Nats and the shaving issues, I'd like to know where the actual credit card processors stand on this issue. The biggest issue that processors deal with is fraud to the customers, well the webmasters being shaved are their customers as well. There will always be dishonest business tactics when there is large somes of money to be made. I feel MPA2 was not at fault by giving the program owner what they wanted. People seem more pissed at the fact that MPA2 provided a shave feature more then the people who used it. Yes MPA2 got caught up, yes having a shave feature is not the best idea, but what about the people who all used MPA2. Just because you switched to NATS does not mean you did not have it before. If MPA3 has no shave feature they are in the same boat as you, they had it before, but don't now. Anyways, I'd like to know how ccbill, and epoch and other processors feel about people they make millions of dollars with feel about shaving?

01-27-2005, 02:50 AM	#7
nofx Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Virgin Mary's womb Posts: 16,826	good thread , no answer. __________________ Often times I wonder why There's love and hate, theres live or die. When sickness comes I must decide: When feelings go, theres suicide.

12-20-2004, 04:47 PM	#2
.:St Ides:. Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 4,857	Figured no one would touch this one

12-20-2004, 05:38 PM	#4
Nickless Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: homeless Posts: 1,955	they get their cut no matter if the sale was made by the site directly or referred by an affiliate so in theory they shouldn't care. at least ccbill shows affiliates the % of rebills being shaved. anyway it's up to the processors to answer this.

12-24-2004, 05:45 PM	#5
RODRIGO EL' PETRO So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 103	I shaved my asshole and then Juicy D Links fucked it

12-24-2004, 06:19 PM	#6
FIX01 Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Far to the left Posts: 183	I dont think the processors look at the affiliates of a program as the customer. I was terminated by a program that claimed the processor said i was flagged as a cheater. I contacted the processor and found out that this was false and their was no problem with the sales i was sending. I asked the processor to email me a statement that confirmed this and they said no because i wasnt the actual customer of the processor, the program i was sending traffic to was. Obviously the program was frauding me by calling me a cheater and keeping my money but they didnt care to confirm this in writing becasue of the money the program was making for them.