posted on October 10, 2000 10:47:17 AM
Hi toyranch,
Yes, I can only respond with policy when it comes to addressing a concern.
Yes, the complaints and compliments by users within these and other forums is distributed to many within the organization. There is a qualitative value to the comments and concerns that you may not find going through a traditional avenue. I can find out why something is bothering someone and address it by making product/policy change recommendations based on user input.
posted on October 10, 2000 10:54:17 AMI can find out why something is bothering someone and address it by making product/policy change recommendations based on user input.
Doesn't it seem odd to you that the majority of the policy changes that are being implemented as of late don't seem to be very well received?
It sure doesn't look (to me, at least) as if the interests of PayPal's customers are being given much consideration at all.
posted on October 10, 2000 11:42:56 AM
I agree mrpotatoheadd, but how about the interests of possible investors in an IPO offering?
Quote
"PayPal is owned by X.com, which is gearing up for an IPO. However, because X.com owns a lot of other properties, PayPal is just one element that may influence the offering's success, Nichols acknowledged."
End Quote
posted on October 10, 2000 01:22:37 PMThere is a qualitative value to the comments and concerns that you may not find going through a traditional avenue. I can find out why something is bothering someone and address it by making product/policy change recommendations based on user input.
What do you think, toyranch? I've run it through my beta Paypalese translation filter, and for me it comes out:
"If you complain to Paypal through normal channels (i.e., via "a traditional avenue" ), we bounce back a canned reply and immediately circular-file your message, but if you post your problem on a public forum (thereby changing the "qualitative value" of your "comment" or "concern" ), I will personally cut and paste a canned reply here and then forward your message to my superiors for THEM to personally ignore when doing the daily revision of Paypal's TOU."
[ edited by HartCottageQuilts on Oct 10, 2000 01:23 PM ]
posted on October 10, 2000 02:29:06 PM
You've got one nice guy racing around all the Web chat forums, fielding customer concerns and solving problems right and left. Yet questions addressed directly to the company go unanswered and ignored. At first blush, it looks like PayPalDamon is handling all four million complaints a day himself.
I already learned from eBay that personable customer support types are the first line of defense. Their actions don't accurately reflect the company's real attitude. I do feel bad that PaypalDamon is stuck in this. He reminds me of the purser on the Titanic shouting "women and children first!" Sadly, he'll go down with the ship.
From what I've read in these forums, with all the new fees and the frozen accounts and lack of customer support from Paypal, I think this has gone way beyond the initial slap in the face we all got when Paypal accused us of "not playing by the rules." I now have very serious doubts about the ethics and especially the legal practices of Paypal. Even ignoring all the hype on all sides, I would be very nervous to do business with that company. I find business ethics to be a fascinating topic, and my conclusion is that Paypal will do whatever they think they can get away with, legal or not. For my own peace of mind, I can not do business with a partner I don't trust.
For those who continue to use Paypal's services, I wish you the best and I hope my fears are never justified. Personally, I can't afford to risk my business for Paypal's sake.
posted on October 11, 2000 04:04:34 AM
You have to wonder if PayPal's LEGAL TEAM spends all their time writing statements for Damon to post on these boards (since his comments are all definitely "canned", indecipherable, and sound vaguely legalese.) He certainly doesn't answer the direct questions I keep posting for him over and over and over again.
And if the lawyers are all busy writing PR spin, who's over in the fraud department deciding which seller accounts get frozen for "suspected fraud"? The janitor???
Does anyone know the projected date for the X.com offering? Is it the reason for the big push to get PayPal out of the red (even at the expense of losing half their customers), or does that really matter since everyone else (except ebay) has been unprofitable when they went public?
HCQ, you think you're well enough to handle one last paralegal assignment (the IPO)? I just bet they'd give you the job (especially with a *glowing* recommendation from Damon), and you might even have a best-selling book to peddle after you're through!
posted on October 11, 2000 07:32:14 AM
Hey, granee, I think I've done my share of deflummerizing for awhile. I nominate you for the task. I think your -get-Paypal-out-of-the-red rationals is probably right on target, although an IPO isn't the only answer - could be a merger/acquisition.
Anyway, if the law firm I used to work for (in securities law, IPO M/A and intellectual property) were Paypal's counsel, it would have begged out of represnting Paypal looooong before this stage. OTOH, they also represented the group that took over The Donald's holdings when HE got himself into a mess, so if this isn't an IPO but a merger/acquisition, they could represent the acquiring side of the deal.
posted on October 11, 2000 10:15:24 AM
Actually, X.com IS planning on going public in the next 8 to 12 months and they are trying to put a pricing structure in place so they can show their investors the profit potential of PayPal. They have finished their last round of financing by raising 30 Million in Series D funding and, unless something untoward happens, they will go forward with the initial public offering.
I have obtained this information from a number of news sources on the net and have also spoken to my stockbroker - this info is no secret and is well known by those in the business sector.
Here is a relevant quote from the dailydeal.com dated August 31 concerning the IPO and PayPal's need to convert their millions of users into paying customers.
quote
"The crucial moment in X.com's 15-month existence was its acquisition of e-mail payment services rival Paypal.com in February, according to analyst Paul Jameson of Gomez Advisors, a Boston-Based financial services consultant. The deal gave X.com the most competitive payment service around, not to mention 1 million non-paying users, inflating its valuation from a pre-acquisition figure of $120 million to $600 million after the close of its $100 million Series C round in March.
Since then, X.com has drawn another 2.3 million users for its services, thanks to a marketing campaign that gives $5 to every new user.
The trick for X.com as it gears up for its IPO will be to turn all those nonpayers into customers willing to pay for the portfolio of online financial services it will be launching in the next nine months, Jameson said. They include wireless payments, Web-accept payment services, which allow businesses to accept payments directly on their Web sites, mass payment options for companies making multiple payments, such as salary checks, via the X.com Web site, Internet auction tools , and accounting tools for businesses and consumers.
"X.com has established itself as the market leader in free online payment services with its Paypal services," Jameson said. "What it will have to do between now and an initial public offering is convert those millions of users to paying customers."
End Quote
You may want to read the entire article since it contains some other interesting info about X.com.