I will say it one more time here and now. This was not out to harm anyone, but when another man (John Albright, owner of NATS to my knowledge) calls our Company or any of its employees liars, I am forced to defend all. I speak the truth. We run a solid business built on firm ground, and I will have words (or initiate immediate legal action) with anyone the makes such defamatory claims saying otherwise.
If anyone thinks NATS is UNSHAVEABLE then you need to see this. Here is a screencap of what NATS reports I should pay my affiliates for all rebills (recurring charges) for ELECTRACASH (one of our check processors)
5 total rebills.
Here is what ELECTRACASH says I should pay.
275 total rebills.
270 missing rebills because of NATS. FACT.
Do you know how long it takes to even find that problem, and THEN cut separate checks for the affiliates to make sure you do the right thing and they get paid for their hard work? This is one of the many problems we had with NATS and one of the many reasons we moved far away from it.
Now, you can expect John or one of his tech guys to jump on this board and give you all a line (or explanation depending on how you decide to view it) about how this is some security loophole, and it has to do with it being ELECTRACASH's fault, and so on. It always seemed to be someone else's fault when it came to the blame being pointed at NATS (and I have further proof of this as well). The only reason we went with Nats was because of the NO SHAVE feature.
This is just the beginning?
If anyone thinks NATS is UNSHAVEABLE then you need to see this. Here is a screencap of what NATS reports I should pay my affiliates for all rebills (recurring charges) for ELECTRACASH (one of our check processors)
5 total rebills.
Here is what ELECTRACASH says I should pay.
275 total rebills.
270 missing rebills because of NATS. FACT.
Do you know how long it takes to even find that problem, and THEN cut separate checks for the affiliates to make sure you do the right thing and they get paid for their hard work? This is one of the many problems we had with NATS and one of the many reasons we moved far away from it.
Now, you can expect John or one of his tech guys to jump on this board and give you all a line (or explanation depending on how you decide to view it) about how this is some security loophole, and it has to do with it being ELECTRACASH's fault, and so on. It always seemed to be someone else's fault when it came to the blame being pointed at NATS (and I have further proof of this as well). The only reason we went with Nats was because of the NO SHAVE feature.
This is just the beginning?
Comment