I can't think of any reason a consumer would benefit from this over a credit or debit card. Except maybe if they regularly overdraft and prefer a $5 fee to whatever their bank charges.
It's targeted more for situations where credit/debit cards are not currently accepted. For example, large transactions for professional services. Think of it more as replacing checks, not cards.
That is one of the goals but the other goal is reducing the cost for the merchant. Merchants will prefer you to pay with Dwolla as opposed to a credit card because they don't give up as big of a fee on each transaction, this earning them more revenue.
Why? Why should there be a percentage-based fee at all for financial transactions? This is an idea that credit card companies have pushed onto the world, but there's no reason it needs to be accepted as fact.
I didn't really mean all. I did say between strangers and especially when the two are not face-to-face. Two other qualifiers: 1) when "good funds" need to be transferred immediately and 2) for dollar ranges from around $10 to $1,000. This makes up the vast majority of retail commerce for which credit cards are so well suited and widely used.
Best approach is to look for areas where credit cards are not widely used instead of trying to displace them in areas where they work really (really, really) well.
I've been wondering why I would use this and I think this comment hits the nail on the head.
But why would want to pay $3? Big payments are usually pretty well-timed and don't need to be "instant."
Hmmm, not sure where Dwolla is going with this, it seems to make more sense to laser focus on those who would find the most use for their product (big ticket buyers and sellers, not people buying a t-shirt on a whim).
I give my customers rewards points for using Dwolla which they don't get when paying with other methods. I'm more of a small business and have to micromanage this all though. (I didn't know this is supposedly against CC terms too haha)
I don't see why my average (online) customer is going to pay $3/mo for this, but then I am probably the only place they are using Dwolla. Also, I am very hands on with them and just take "their word" or fill an order when I get the notice that the 2-3 day travel of funds from their bank to Dwolla is good.
Again, I think this Instant thing all ties back to the CU Exchange feature I discussed before. Dwolla tries to forge a sort of deal where this bank's customers get Instant without the $3/mo fee and Dwolla + the bank chop the other half of money made in "transit time interest".
Long term, I see the success of Instant tied to this, banks being able to offer free Instant as a perk with an account with them, versus Instant used as a cheaper overdraft or standalone feature.
That's exactly my point. In order for me to want to use Dwolla (and pay the $3 set up) I would have to believe that enough merchants out there will let me pay with Dwolla that I would get some unique benefit for using it.
Dwolla is awesome for merchants and neutral for consumers.
CC would be against this but isn't the target merchant the one that does not already take CCs? Street merchant, plumber, kid that shovels my driveway, or wheeled merchant.
this is exactly the point, unless merchants actually display the discount you receive vs using a credit card then it doesn't matter. More than likely merchants will swallow the profits, and consumers won't see the benefit. I earn quite a bit from rewards points as well, the difference in monetary savings vs credit cards would have to be proportional.