3 ms·

Their competitors are public and are floating in money but aren't investing in technology to lower transaction costs. Ask yourself why. Its not like their com

by VLM 11y ago

Their competitors are public and are floating in money but aren't investing in technology to lower transaction costs. Ask yourself why. Its not like their competitors don't have money, people, or a desire for profit. Or "the market" isn't interested in middlemen spending money they have (or don't have) to improve their tech, so why would joining "the market" be part of the strategy for a company trying to advance transaction tech? The market doesn't want them to do what they've been doing. So they'll have to pivot, essentially. Into... what? And the what doesn't matter because whatever it is, its not their secret sauce. Their transaction costs are lower than their competitors because they're losing money. I'm sure AMEX would have cheap transaction costs if they were willing to lose staggering amounts of money. I could form a startup to sell gasoline for $1/gallon over the internet. Sure I'd lose tons of money, but look how cheap my gas is compared to BP. Well of course BP is earning a profit whereas I'm losing money on every gallon, but I'm sure after the IPO... They have some traction in very discretionary consumer spending. Not the best place to be in the start of a recession. And public policy has been, is, and will be, to concentrate as much money as possible at the top while draining it out of the bottom. Why would you open a new Ferrari dealership in Detroit? Or rephrased the digital money of the future for farmers markets is EBT "food stamps" cards, not an iphone app. That discretionary money being spent at the coffee shops and farmers markets is "supposed to" by policy all go to .edu, bank mortgages, and health care. The economy is trying to destroy the sector they are trying to middleman off of, good luck with that long term. They're sailing the wrong direction at the customer level. Speaking of competitors... well why even comment in detail about each. The problem with payment middlemen isn't so much that they're there as a class, its that there's so many identical ones. In my alternate life as a volunteer treasurer for a non-profit everyone wanted digital donation/payment processing, however everyone wanted a different one, and I am SO not going to jump thru those hoops, so its cash and checks only. Its like insisting I open a bank account at every branch in the metropolis, good luck with that. Maybe we need a middleman for the middleman to manage the middlemen. I hate to imply history is repeating but this is pretty much Flooz again, isn't it? Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it?

bardworx 11y ago
Your comment is solid but it "feels" jaded. The credit card fee "pie" is HUGE. There is room for square and many other alternatives. As you've said, there is a middle man of the middle man who manages the middle man. That's not Square's bread and butter. They're going after the low hanging fruit: small businesses, food trucks, flee market sellers, etc. They can't compete in the POS world but they can get theirs. However, you are foreshadowing something else, in my opinion: Square is the small fish nipping at the large pie while the big fish are swimming away from Sharks. If Square attempts to grow too quickly or expand too fast, they'll get swallowed up. They won't be bought, just forced out of business. I think they can have value, but in 10 years - slow and steady.

by VLM 11y ago

bardworx 11y ago

Your comment is solid but it "feels" jaded. The credit card fee "pie" is HUGE. There is room for square and many other alternatives. As you've said, there is a middle man of the middle man who manages the middle man. That's not Square's bread and butter. They're going after the low hanging fruit: small businesses, food trucks, flee market sellers, etc. They can't compete in the POS world but they can get theirs. However, you are foreshadowing something else, in my opinion: Square is the small fish nipping at the large pie while the big fish are swimming away from Sharks. If Square attempts to grow too quickly or expand too fast, they'll get swallowed up. They won't be bought, just forced out of business. I think they can have value, but in 10 years - slow and steady.