A lot of people label Paypal as evil. Usually because they or somebody they know has suffered as a direct result, but I don't think that shows malicious intent.

A lot of people label Paypal as evil. Usually because they or somebody they know has suffered as a direct result, but I don't think that shows malicious intent. Paypal is just lazy —or efficient, if you're on their side— when it comes to risk. That is to say that if they have reason to believe they might lose money with a transaction you make, they make you absorb that risk as inconvenience. The most commonly complained about is holding back funds while they wait for your customers to issue chargebacks. Chargebacks are HORRIBLE because the underlying payment people demand they just happen. It can be a huge loss point for payment intermediaries. With that sort of potential loss, it's simply easier for Paypal —the lawyer-breathing behemoth that they are— to assume you're more likely to suck it up than try to sue (have you read the T&Cs). And they've scaled this so it all happens automagically. How very efficient/evil of them. If you want the best rate as a seller, you have to be a super-low risk and find somebody that understands your business, its risk and is willing to undercut the standard-risk market to process your payments for you. --- Direct wire transfers put [almost] all the risk on the consumer. There used to be a timeframe you could "intercept" a transfer but with things like Faster Payments in the UK, transfers are practically instant and irreversible without a court order. So no, for the purposes of buying stuff, wire transfers aren't better for us. They're free for you, but we take on a LOT of risk.