First AOL/Time Warner and now this. It’s almost like two companies that have nothing to do with one another merging into a single entity is a terrible idea…
Well, except in this case they kinda DID have something to do with one another, since Paypal was already being used quite extensively as a payment method for eBay auctions before eBay purchased them.
AOL was seen as a distribution system for Time Warner, but again, they don’t really share industries. PayPal and eBay may have been used hand in hand but they have completely different goals and philosophies.
Airlines can merge, banks can merge, these things makes sense. An online bank and a glorified garage sale should not merge and they are now splitting as a result.
If it means I can use something other than paypal for ebay purchases I am happy.
I have had to go elsewhere for years cause PayPal decided that purchasing gas was ‘sketchy credit card use’ and locked my account, no way to challenge, etc etc. Luckily I had no funds but I have told many online merchants that sorry oops they lost my sale by being paypal only. The sooner PayPal dies in a fire the better.
I don’t recall PayPal as a bank at that time, just a payment processor, primarily for online auctions, primarily eBay.
I personally don’t like their baloney attempt at regulating “morality” by blocking purchases for firearms and some firearms related accessories.
Why do you hate capitalism, Paypal?
Is it reasonable to suggest that whenever hedge fund managers start encouraging changes like this, it’s because they want to gut something and leave it a smoldering ruin?
I’d rather prefer to see eBay given a good shaking-up; it doesn’t seem to have changed all that much in the last decade.
Well neither company has a pension fund or substantial assets, so what’s there to plunder? Credit card numbers?
In related news, that first link is hilariously wrong.
This is the perception problem Ebay has created for itself, and will hopefully fix with this change. You actually can use your credit card to check out on Ebay, but PayPal will still process the transaction. As Ebay pours you down the PayPal funnel, it’s not at all clear that you don’t actually need a PayPal account. But ultimately you can get through the process without it.
For that matter, I have two repeat customers that only pay by postal money order.
Yeah but it is the same credit card that paypal decided to close my account over so I can’t use that one with paypal ever again nor can my wife. I boggled the first time I tried but then had to email the vendor and have them cancel. Heck I have read of married couples getting locked out because they don’t like one card number used by 2 people for some stupid reason.
It looks more like the linked article explains what the split means for PayPal as a business – not so much what it means for users.
Ex paypaler here, all views my own, etc. Etc.
I have no doubt eBay is salivating at the thought of stripe and square integration. The fraud levels on those two services are much higher than PP, but if it is the issuer or processor that takes the hit–and not the parent company – then who cares, support the hippest platform. PP will continue to be supported if for no other reason than interia, but it will have to “earn its keep” by stepping up innovation.
An ex amex leader makes me nervous though. There are two obvious choices he can make–turn PP into an honest-to-fsm retail bank (and through legislative pressure put the screws on square/stripe to also have a banking license), or try and be a “hip innovative CEO”.
If he can choose the middle way and delegate the technology to some new blood while keeping an arms length; work to compete with stripe/square on quality of merchant experience; and push a stone cold legal and legislative agenda the PP may have a fighting chance.
Just my opinion.
P.s. the “PayPal has a moral agenda” meme is bupkis. They have a make money agenda, and fraud rates on some categories are too high to make cents (or dollars).
As AcerPlatanoides said, I don’t recall them being much of an online bank at the time that eBay bought them back in 2002. My (hazy, 12 year old) recollection of Paypal at the time was as pretty much “The company you use to pay for eBay purchases”.
Also, looking up just how long ago it was that that purchase happened, I feel immensely old.
I am utterly confused. My Paypal account takes the money via direct transfer out of my bank account whenever I buy something and that’s it. How the hell does it have access to what you’ve bought via other services?
Well there you go, you’re just a wee pup! Some of us were thirty or so at the time and a lot of their talk was about having them hold on to your money and how easy it was to send money instantly without dealing with checks.
That Musk latched onto the largest e-commerce site and made his fortune riding their coattails isn’t a surprise, but x.com’s original premise was just as a banking/transaction site where one was encouraged to keep a balance in an account that created a tiny amount of interest.
Interestingly, reading their wikipedia, the founder claims they are not a bank because they don’t loan out more money than they have, but yet, PayPal has a European banking license. In the States they are a “money transmitter” like MoneyGram or Western Union, which is something I didn’t even know we had a term for.
Could that be a capitalistic concern for being drawn into civil suits?
Oh, I remember that talk coming from Paypal. I just don’t remember anybody actually doing it.
Understandable! If you’re twelve and concerned about APR’s you need to get out of the house. If you’re thirty and unconcerned about APR’s, you need to stop going to the bar.
Seems ridiculous to me, but I’m sure it could be used as an excuse. I have no idea what insane argument you could make that wouldn’t be laughed out of court. If I bought a car off of eBay and paid with paypal and it turned out to be unsafe and I got injured, could I sue Paypal for making the transaction possible/convenient?