|
|
|
|
|
by gotothrowaway
4268 days ago
|
|
My understanding is that stripe has always done some level of fraud protection (e.g. Monitoring to ensure someone isn't incrementing through card numbers to find one that works) This seems like a necessary component of any "effective acquiring bank"[1] because of where the liability falls. In the event of fraud, Stripe can get hosed and they need to protect themselves. I imagine they wouldn't have taken the step of lowering their payout delay from 7 days to 2 days unless they were confident in their fraud detection abilities. Can you elaborate on what about WePays fraud protection is better? Am I dead wrong? Note: in no way affiliated with Stripe, just once considered starting something in this industry. [1] I'm defining Stripe and WePay as "effective acquiring banks." I guess you can call them ISO's too. They're positioned somewhere in the web of words - but bottom line is that their the ones that find merchants that need to process cards. |
|
The value proposition of WePay Clear isn't entirely captured in TechCrunch's choice of a headline, though they certainly have sensationalized it by drawing a Stripe comparison.
Yes, WePay Clear takes on fraud responsibility & shields the platform. (as does Stripe Connect)
However, WePay Clear does this in a whitelabel fashion, so that sellers on platforms do not need to create a WePay account.
In other words, it's not just fraud protection or whitelabel - it's whitelabel payments AND fraud protection.
Our launch partner in this is Freshbooks. Freshbooks currently offers several payment gateways/merchant accounts as an option to sellers like Authorize.net and Stripe. But their new primary "Freshbooks Payments" offering is built on WePay Clear. You can check out the experience here: http://www.freshbooks.com/blog/2014/10/01/introducing-paymen...