Why is this NOT MORE Common/

Apr 12, 2008
1,397
12
0
Wisconsin
I was just reading a thread on Clickbank, yes yes IM GAY, not the point.

Why are there not more people processing through mobiles, instead of using paypal, google checkout and credit cards.

I know there is a very high charge for this. What I am failing to understand is why no one is using the mobile short codes to get conversions. Honestly I think the EPC, CONV rate would be much higher if all a person had to do was enter in a number then a code. Am I missing something here
 


Mobile payment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Poor reliability - transactional payments can easily fail as messages get lost.
Slow speed - sending messages can be slow and it can take hours for a merchant to get receipt of payment. Consumers do not want to be kept waiting more than a few seconds.
Security - The SMS/USSD encryption ends in the radio interface, then the message is a plaintext.
High cost - There are many high costs associated with this method of payment. The cost of setting up short codes and paying for the delivery of media via a Multimedia Messaging Service and the resulting customer support costs to account for the number of messages that get lost or are delayed.
Low payout rates - operators also see high costs in running and supporting transactional payments which results in payout rates to the merchant being as low as 30%. Usually around 50%
Low follow-on sales - once the payment message has been sent and the goods received there is little else the consumer can do. It is difficult for them to remember where something was purchased or how to buy it again. This also makes it difficult to tell a friend and friend.
 
the problem with billing on mobile phones is fees

why pay 40-60% in fees when credit cards take 2-4%? or paypal who takes 5-6%?

It works well for low value content subscriptions but for products on other services its a bad billing mechanism.
 
bizzykehl, then why do we have a mobile banking gateways working? If its all slow and non-reliable?

That was copypasta'd from wikipedia.

There are a few 3rd party systems that let you do this, but for example the cost to the user would be $10, and you're only pulling in $3 off that sale. Hardly worth the "convenience", I use quotations because unless it's tested vs accepting credit cards on any given page there's no way to really know what converts best.
 
the problem with billing on mobile phones is fees

why pay 40-60% in fees when credit cards take 2-4%? or paypal who takes 5-6%?

It works well for low value content subscriptions but for products on other services its a bad billing mechanism.

Is this because the cost for cell phone providers is that much higher to process a mobile transaction, or is it because they know they can get away with charges that high?
 
Is this because the cost for cell phone providers is that much higher to process a mobile transaction, or is it because they know they can get away with charges that high?
well from looking into it most "Major Carriers" take about 30% right of the top, then you add in other costs, like maintaining, sending. I just do not see how it is not more popular and viable as there are costs associated with just about anything,

there are peeps banking on IQ offers why has no one, taken it to the next level?
 
well from looking into it most "Major Carriers" take about 30% right of the top, then you add in other costs, like maintaining, sending. I just do not see how it is not more popular and viable as there are costs associated with just about anything,

there are peeps banking on IQ offers why has no one, taken it to the next level?

What I'm asking is do most "Major Carriers" charge 30% because it is really expensive for them to process, or is it because they know they can get away with charging this much?
 
What I'm asking is do most "Major Carriers" charge 30% because it is really expensive for them to process, or is it because they know they can get away with charging this much?
A bit of both would be my guess. They do all the "actual" CC/debit billing after all.
 
well from looking into it most "Major Carriers" take about 30% right of the top, then you add in other costs, like maintaining, sending. I just do not see how it is not more popular and viable as there are costs associated with just about anything,

there are peeps banking on IQ offers why has no one, taken it to the next level?

How is 40% plus other charges vs. 2% fees on credit card transactions not sinking in to you? Wireless carriers and gateways also pay out net60 most of of the time while credit card sales are authorized and cleared 1-2 days after. It's at minimum $500/month maintenance fee and up to 2 months for dedicated shortcode approval vs. next to nothing and a few days for a credit card gateway setup. Get paid 98% of your sale in 1-2 days into your bank account from cc processor or wait potentially 90 days to get paid out 50-60% of the transaction from a wireless carrier? CaN U SeeS WhY DiS NoT MoRE COMmON now/?

You were right above, you were missing something and I'm not sure how you're still missing it at this point since people have already spelled it out.
 
That was copypasta'd from wikipedia.

There are a few 3rd party systems that let you do this, but for example the cost to the user would be $10, and you're only pulling in $3 off that sale. Hardly worth the "convenience", I use quotations because unless it's tested vs accepting credit cards on any given page there's no way to really know what converts best.

lol never mind, i got confused with the whole mobile payment system.

I was thinking of actually paying via mobile through the banking gateway :P. Of course, the mobile PIN submits can't be tied down to high price items.
 
I think it is more popular in other countries where calls don't get dropped as much

Indeed. Mobile payments are a common thing in many European countries. Sms delivery is excellent so it's reliable enough for transactions.

You can pay for concert/movie tickets, online purchases, and soon even gas and groceries as the systems are becoming more commonplace.