whodareswins

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by whodareswins 16y ago

   @ikirigin Fourdiamond? http://twitter.com/dcurtis/status/21598768075 @dcurtis 2 char is better than 3. Also, their logo is a diamond http://j.mp/bsF5F3 (◊ = option-shift-v) http://twitter.com/ikirigin/status/21599774307
2. 2.▲
   by whodareswins 16y ago

   Like I said... "once deployed at scale." Their system is in closed beta.
3. 3.▲
   by whodareswins 16y ago

   None of those are ubiquitous. I'm describing the network effect, making this quite relevant. Also, I'm pretty sure some of those do charge 30% regardless. Apple takes 30%. Needing to enter only a password to pay for something (instead of a
4. 4.▲
   by whodareswins 16y ago

   Actually the numbers could be much, much better than 2X. But your last point about the risk of a changing playfor is very valid. In the case of payments, I'd bet for a conservative initial system that gets more flexible over time. The natur
5. 5.▲
   by whodareswins 16y ago

   Anyone who calls fb credits a "tax" knows nothing about payments. A ubiquitous payment system where users are already authenticated could easily double conversion rates once deployed at scale. 30% off of 2X is a great deal