7 ms·

Balanced Payments' implementation[0] recently went into private beta. Interesting to note that between Stripe and Balanced, their fees are typically the same, h

Balanced Payments' implementation[0] recently went into private beta. Interesting to note that between Stripe and Balanced, their fees are typically the same, however an important difference here is that Balanced is charging $1.00 versus 25c at Stripe. [0] https://www.balancedpayments.com/push-to-card https://www.balancedpayments.com/push-to-card

steveklabnik 12y ago
Yeah, unfortunately, Balanced doesn't have the same warchest that Stripe does, as they've raised way more funding than we are, so we can't use any of that money to price stuff mega cheap. There are also multiple ways to build this kind of feature. Balanced is doing it 'the right way,' but you can fake it till you make it, and hope that Visa/MC doesn't get mad at you before you build out the real implementation. That way is also cheaper... As an example of the benefit of 'the right way,' Balanced will be immediate for a large percentage of cards, rather than the 1-2 days that this page claims.
- kmf 12y ago
  What is "the right way", if you're allowed to disclose that? I remember that Square Cash was doing their transfer feature using refunds[1], is that the same way that Stripe is doing it? [1]: http://jonbwhite.tumblr.com/post/66853226398/how-square-moves-cash http://jonbwhite.tumblr.com/post/66853226398/how-square-move...
  - steveklabnik 12y ago
    "Unreferenced refunds" are the 'wrong way': the card networks don't like it for various reasons. ATM networks are starting to offer an API that just does this, which is the 'right way.' Visa OCT was mentioned elsewhere in this thread, for example. This means you have to integrate with a patchwork of different networks if you want to have good coverage. I don't have any special insight into how Stripe is doing it, but the extremely low cost and the '1-2 days' sounds like unreferenced refunds. I could be wrong.
    - invisible 12y ago
      On a tangent: why does the wrong way cost less money than the right way? Is this a form of price fixing by the credit card companies? I'd imagine Visa could offer these at less money (or free) than MC but it sounds like that's not the case.
      - steveklabnik 12y ago
        I don't have an enormous amount of insight into this, but what I can tell you is that in this industry, pricing is all about risk. The reason unreferenced refunds are cheap is because you're exploiting a loophole in the API, basically. The reason they don't like it is that it messes with fraud calculations, which messes with risk. The 'right way' is basically a new product, in my understanding and so, like any product, they charge what the market will bear.
  - abalone 12y ago
    That post credits Square with the refund method, but actually they were not the first. The first I know of is Giftly, a gifting startup (around 2010?). Maybe there are earlier examples.
- pc 12y ago
  > There are also multiple ways to build this kind of feature. It sounds like both Balanced and Stripe will use them :-). But let's not turn this into a Balanced vs Stripe thread. It's not especially relevant for users and we'll stay out of the way when you guys have your public launch. Continued good luck!
  - steveklabnik 12y ago
    > let's not turn this into a Balanced vs Stripe thread. Hey, as I said below, I'm a Stripe customer: you guys are great. Frankly, I don't even see Stripe and Balanced as directly competing. Well, Balanced is deep in a vertical of one of your products. When I took the job at Balanced, I kept on selling my books through Stripe: you guys kick ass for that use case. > we'll stay out of the way when you guys have your public launch. That was gonna be today. ;) :(
  - droopyEyelids 12y ago
    Interesting this is a customer communication/acquisition channel for your business when many of us see it as a peer discussion forum. I hadn't really considered that before.
    - pc 12y ago
      Oh, I think it is a peer discussion forum, first and foremost, and shouldn't be treated as a communication/acquisition channel -- which is why I think that having threads veer off into the competitive weeds does the forum a disservice. (As a reader, I find it kinda tedious when it happens in other threads.)
      - droopyEyelids 12y ago
        Do you think it's useful for peers who are building things to discuss the relative characteristics of their tools?
aculver 12y ago
I think the bigger difference for most of us is that Stripe's implementation is actually available to all of us, vs. being in private beta. No sooner did I see this announcement than I forwarded it along to a friend who could use this functionality today in a service he's building.
- jareau 12y ago
  You're right. See this comment for some insight on why Balanced is releasing to a private beta first: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7785476 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7785476 (Balanced co-founder)
- aculver 12y ago
  Actually, I should amend this comment: I'm not even sure why there is a comparison being made here. The potential applications for Stripe are so, so broad, and when you check out the marketing site for the other, the messaging is so niche in comparison. Maybe I should have said the biggest difference between the two is that Stripe actually seems to be applicable to most types of businesses we're all building. Judging from the homepage with Balanced, it seems like all this payment infrastructure is very tightly coupled with a solution for a niche type of business. I'd expect that latter bit to just be a Stripe Connect SaaS app that plugs in on top of the broadly applicable payment infrastructure Stripe provides.
  - treeface 12y ago
    In what way is Balanced only for "a niche type of business"?
    - aculver 12y ago
      Sorry, I should have been more clear. Their slogan is "payments for marketplaces." That's a very specific type of business.
  - nhangen 12y ago
    I generally refrain from the Balanced vs Stripe debates because I use and like them both, but this comment is unfair, so much so that if I didn't know any better, I'd guess it were from someone with an interest in Stripe.

steveklabnik 12y ago

Yeah, unfortunately, Balanced doesn't have the same warchest that Stripe does, as they've raised way more funding than we are, so we can't use any of that money to price stuff mega cheap. There are also multiple ways to build this kind of feature. Balanced is doing it 'the right way,' but you can fake it till you make it, and hope that Visa/MC doesn't get mad at you before you build out the real implementation. That way is also cheaper... As an example of the benefit of 'the right way,' Balanced will be immediate for a large percentage of cards, rather than the 1-2 days that this page claims.

kmf 12y ago
What is "the right way", if you're allowed to disclose that? I remember that Square Cash was doing their transfer feature using refunds[1], is that the same way that Stripe is doing it? [1]: http://jonbwhite.tumblr.com/post/66853226398/how-square-moves-cash http://jonbwhite.tumblr.com/post/66853226398/how-square-move...
- steveklabnik 12y ago
  "Unreferenced refunds" are the 'wrong way': the card networks don't like it for various reasons. ATM networks are starting to offer an API that just does this, which is the 'right way.' Visa OCT was mentioned elsewhere in this thread, for example. This means you have to integrate with a patchwork of different networks if you want to have good coverage. I don't have any special insight into how Stripe is doing it, but the extremely low cost and the '1-2 days' sounds like unreferenced refunds. I could be wrong.
  - invisible 12y ago
    On a tangent: why does the wrong way cost less money than the right way? Is this a form of price fixing by the credit card companies? I'd imagine Visa could offer these at less money (or free) than MC but it sounds like that's not the case.
    - steveklabnik 12y ago
      I don't have an enormous amount of insight into this, but what I can tell you is that in this industry, pricing is all about risk. The reason unreferenced refunds are cheap is because you're exploiting a loophole in the API, basically. The reason they don't like it is that it messes with fraud calculations, which messes with risk. The 'right way' is basically a new product, in my understanding and so, like any product, they charge what the market will bear.
- abalone 12y ago
  That post credits Square with the refund method, but actually they were not the first. The first I know of is Giftly, a gifting startup (around 2010?). Maybe there are earlier examples.
pc 12y ago
> There are also multiple ways to build this kind of feature. It sounds like both Balanced and Stripe will use them :-). But let's not turn this into a Balanced vs Stripe thread. It's not especially relevant for users and we'll stay out of the way when you guys have your public launch. Continued good luck!
- steveklabnik 12y ago
  > let's not turn this into a Balanced vs Stripe thread. Hey, as I said below, I'm a Stripe customer: you guys are great. Frankly, I don't even see Stripe and Balanced as directly competing. Well, Balanced is deep in a vertical of one of your products. When I took the job at Balanced, I kept on selling my books through Stripe: you guys kick ass for that use case. > we'll stay out of the way when you guys have your public launch. That was gonna be today. ;) :(
- droopyEyelids 12y ago
  Interesting this is a customer communication/acquisition channel for your business when many of us see it as a peer discussion forum. I hadn't really considered that before.
  - pc 12y ago
    Oh, I think it is a peer discussion forum, first and foremost, and shouldn't be treated as a communication/acquisition channel -- which is why I think that having threads veer off into the competitive weeds does the forum a disservice. (As a reader, I find it kinda tedious when it happens in other threads.)
    - droopyEyelids 12y ago
      Do you think it's useful for peers who are building things to discuss the relative characteristics of their tools?

aculver 12y ago

I think the bigger difference for most of us is that Stripe's implementation is actually available to all of us, vs. being in private beta. No sooner did I see this announcement than I forwarded it along to a friend who could use this functionality today in a service he's building.

jareau 12y ago
You're right. See this comment for some insight on why Balanced is releasing to a private beta first: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7785476 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7785476 (Balanced co-founder)
aculver 12y ago
Actually, I should amend this comment: I'm not even sure why there is a comparison being made here. The potential applications for Stripe are so, so broad, and when you check out the marketing site for the other, the messaging is so niche in comparison. Maybe I should have said the biggest difference between the two is that Stripe actually seems to be applicable to most types of businesses we're all building. Judging from the homepage with Balanced, it seems like all this payment infrastructure is very tightly coupled with a solution for a niche type of business. I'd expect that latter bit to just be a Stripe Connect SaaS app that plugs in on top of the broadly applicable payment infrastructure Stripe provides.
- treeface 12y ago
  In what way is Balanced only for "a niche type of business"?
  - aculver 12y ago
    Sorry, I should have been more clear. Their slogan is "payments for marketplaces." That's a very specific type of business.
- nhangen 12y ago
  I generally refrain from the Balanced vs Stripe debates because I use and like them both, but this comment is unfair, so much so that if I didn't know any better, I'd guess it were from someone with an interest in Stripe.