That's not what they're saying, what they're saying is that he doesn't have a value proposition given Paypal's dominance.
That's what the rest of the investors said. But O'Leary specifically focused on Paypal being unbeatable.
Why would someone use his service instead of Paypal? It does exactly the same thing, except probably has a tiny percentage of the features, given the investment to date.
Stripe and Square are totally different, and innovative. All he was doing was trying to remove their 30 cent fee. Something which only really affects small transactions in any noticeable way. I'm trying to even remember the last time I used paypal to send someone less than $5-10...
He also made ridiculous claims that immediately destroy credibility, like saying he's built the most secure payment processor on the net with his investment to date, which was sub 6, let alone 7 figures.
They summed it up perfectly, he's not the guy that's going to disrupt paypal.
Just to clarify - no way is this guy going to beat Paypal. That wasn't my assertion at all. I was simply pointing out that O'Leary spent a chunk of his criticism focusing on the idea of beating Paypal being preposterous (hence the examples of stripe and square), rather than the idea of this particular guy beating Paypal.
The other investors were spot on - this is not the guy for the job. But O'Leary was more preoccupied with smelling the farts coming out of his mouth than focusing on this particular founder.