Are emailed invoices just as good as digital ones?

Most people now believe that electronic invoicing offers significant advantages over paper-based processes (saving direct costs like printing an invoice, stamping an envelope and sending it in the mail etc. and saving indirect costs such as lost invoices, late and missing checks in the mail and often much more difficult reconciliation). However, there is not always agreement on what the term “electronic invoicing” actually means and in this brief article we will look at two very different kinds of e-invoicing-emailed invoices and digital invoices. These are often perceived to be similar and/or equivalent methods but, as we will see, they are actually quite different.

Emailed invoices

Sending an invoice via email is usually done these days by attaching the invoice as an Adobe PDF document. This allows the invoice to be sent cheaply and quickly to the recipient who can use a free product (Adobe Acrobat Reader) to open and view it. The simple idea here is that once the customer has reviewed the document (and even saved it to his or her hard drive) he or she can then pay it. In theory (especially in Business to Consumer or B2C markets) the invoice is not only sent out quickly (and at much lower costs than traditional invoicing methods) but means that the customer can send back a check or phone in a credit card payment within hours or just a few days (and well ahead of the latest date he or should could technically pay) thereby helping to accelerate merchant cash-flow. Unfortunately, although this works in some situations, the process is rarely this smooth and a number of problems can occur.

Firstly, the merchant needs to have a customer’s email address to be able to send a PDF. Secondly, the PDF is still a flat document which most customers will not only have to open, but will often print and put in a pile to deal with later, when they are ready (just like receiving the paper-based invoice in the mail). This means that the customer may wait as long as they did before to pay the invoice (assuming they do not lose their printed piece of paper in the meantime having deleted their original email). In addition to all of this, an emailed PDF does not encourage the customer to pay by electronic means any more than an invoice arriving in the mail does. Research suggests that customers actually often like to have the option to pay online by debit or credit card for example and can often only do so by calling the merchant (and having to spend time and effort, and within the hours of business operated by the call-center). Finally, in Business to Business (or B2B) invoicing, the emailed PDF presents a whole new layer of challenges as these often require a digital signature. PDF technology is now much better at allowing digital signatures to be securely added to invoices when they are sent in the mail. However, the process is by no means simple and presents many logistical issues, particularly when multiple approval signatures are required.

Digital invoices

A digital invoice is available at a web site. Sometimes this is embedded in part of a merchant’s web site or it is “hosted” on a third-party web site (to which customers can go directly or can be redirected from a link on a merchant’s web site). In most cases, the digital invoice rendering process is even quicker than emailed invoices, as there is no need to generate a PDF and attach it to an email address. In addition, although a customer may be notified that a new invoice is available via email, it is not necessary to have an email address (as the customer can be notified about the web address by normal physical mail and then subscribe to the web site service to be later notified by either email or even their mobile phone –via SMS). In practice this means that digital invoices will often collect or “scrape” new email addresses from customers progressively.

Perhaps most importantly, a digital invoice is viewed in a truly online way (and does not require printing (as it can be easily stored and retrieved permanently or resent by a merchant at almost no extra cost). This means that not only can the customer view the invoice (in as much detail as they wish) but they can use many online features to both deal with the invoice (save it, schedule it for later payment or send it on for viewing or approval to another person) or even just pay it immediately of course. And if they do choose to pay it immediately, they typically get to do so via their debit card if they want to use their current bank account or by a variety of credit card options (and in some cases even by cash by printing out a voucher and taking it to a local newsagent or local store that takes cash payments). This is therefore much more likely to accelerate merchant cash-flow than in the emailed invoice situation and means that the payment is much easier to reconcile (as less difficult to reconcile checks or phone-based payments are being made). Finally, the invoice recipient (whether it is a B2C one or B2B one) can elect to pay a bill 24/7 as the bill presentment and payment web site is truly “open-all-hours”.

Conclusion

Emailed invoices are superior to traditional invoices sent in the mail. However, they fall far short of full digital invoices, which offer many additional benefits (which translate into much greater time and cost saving for the merchant). These two approaches are therefore far from equivalent and a merchant can realize considerable advantages by upgrading from an emailed invoice to a full digital one.

Can Merchants really turn off paper bills with digital billing?

Within the billing world, going paperless has been almost like a “Holy Grail” for many merchants, and especially those who are sending out thousands, hundreds of thousands or even millions of bills a month in some cases. And who can blame them? Merchants who send out more than just a few hundred invoices each month are typically spending a great deal of money on printing, putting invoices into envelopes, sending out reminders and/or statements, franking the envelope, having to engage in making sure bills are filed or stored properly and fielding calls from customers who don’t receive a the bill in the mail at all (so it has to be resent) to name but a few things.

By adopting a paperless invoice or digital bill only solution, a merchant can technically avoid all of the above and “switch off paper” immediately. However, despite the apparent significant  advantages to the merchant, this may not be the best way to go (and it should also not be the driver of the change to digital billing).

Most customers have been getting bills in the mail, or at least ones they can print if they are sent by email, for many years and many want to stick with a process that they well understand. Hence, any merchant that removes the option of receiving a paper bill risks losing a customer’s business altogether. Far better therefore to retain the option to receive a physical bill and either deliver it by cost-effective e-mail or allow a customer to retrieve it and print it for themselves from a central website.

With a cloud-based system such as PaySwyft, not only can any merchant post a digital bill but allow customers to print the bill whenever they like. Even better a merchant can email the bill if they so wish, including follow-up or chase bills. And once customers are using such a fully digital portal they can also use a whole range of convenient technology to manage their bill in more flexible ways. This includes:

Receiving a monthly e-mail notification when a new invoice is available to view.

• Decreasing the possibility of mail fraud and identity theft.
• Automatically calendarising or secheduling payments at a time or date to suit them
• Set email and/or SMS alerts as they like
• Store and retrieve all invoice and payment records whenever they like, forever
• Make payment 24 hours a day, 365 days a year
• Pay in a multitude of ways at the same portal and get a receipt there and then
• See all of their invoices and payments when they want
• Analyse invoice trends and patterns as they wish

This does not mean that they will necessarily “turn off” the paper bill, or stop printing it, but over time the resistance to doing so will clearly lessen. And in the meantime, not only is the customer getting a convenient service for free, that they can use at work or home on their computer (and save themselves time if they were previously paying by cash or cheque in particular), but a merchant is saving money on many fronts, including fielding less phone calls, accelerating cash-flow with earlier online payments and reconciling payments in a much more straightforward way than ever before. Given all of this, getting to a paperless world, if and when it happens, is only a minor bonus.

Can Merchants really turn off paper bills with digital billing?

Within the billing world, going paperless has been almost like a “Holy Grail” for many merchants, and especially those who are sending out thousands, hundreds of thousands or even millions of bills a month in some cases. And who can blame them? Merchants who send out more than just a few hundred invoices each month are typically spending a great deal of money on printing, putting invoices into envelopes, sending out reminders and/or statements, franking the envelope, having to engage in making sure bills are filed or stored properly and fielding calls from customers who don’t receive a the bill in the mail at all (so it has to be resent) to name but a few things.
 
By adopting a paperless invoice or digital bill only solution, a merchant can technically avoid all of the above and “switch off paper” immediately. However, despite the apparent significant advantages to the merchant, this may not be the best way to go (and it should also not be the driver of the change to digital billing).

Most customers have been getting bills in the mail, or at least ones they can print if they are sent by email, for many years and many want to stick with a process that they well understand. Hence, any merchant that removes the option of receiving a paper bill risks losing a customer’s business altogether. Far better therefore to retain the option to receive a physical bill and either deliver it by cost-effective e-mail or allow a customer to retrieve it and print it for themselves from a central website.

With a cloud-based system such as PaySwyft, not only can any merchant post a digital bill but allow customers to print the bill whenever they like. Even better a merchant can email the bill if they so wish, including follow-up or chase bills. And once customers are using such a fully digital portal they can also use a whole range of convenient technology to manage their bill in more flexible ways. This includes:

 

• Receiving a monthly e-mail notification when a new invoice is available to view.
• Decreasing the possibility of mail fraud and identity theft.
• Automatically calendarising or secheduling payments at a time or date to suit them
• Set email and/or SMS alerts as they like
• Store and retrieve all invoice and payment records whenever they like, forever
• Make payment 24 hours a day, 365 days a year
• Pay in a multitude of ways at the same portal and get a receipt there and then
• See all of their invoices and payments when they want
• Analyse invoice trends and patterns as they wish

This does not mean that they will necessarily “turn off” the paper bill, or stop printing it, but over time the resistance to doing so will clearly lessen. And in the meantime, not only is the customer getting a convenient service for free, that they can use at work or home on their computer (and save themselves time if they were previously paying by cash or cheque in particular), but a merchant is saving money on many fronts, including fielding less phone calls, accelerating cash-flow with earlier online payments and reconciling payments in a much more straightforward way than ever before. Given all of this, getting to a paperless world, if and when it happens, is only a minor bonus.

Are emailed invoices just as good as digital ones?

Most people now believe that electronic invoicing offers significant advantages over paper-based processes (saving direct costs like printing an invoice, stamping an envelope and sending it in the mail etc and saving indirect costs such as lost invoices, late and missing cheques in the mail and often much more difficult reconciliation). However, there is not always agreement on what the term “electronic invoicing” actually means and in this brief article we will look at two very different kinds of e-invoicing-emailed invoices and digital invoices. These are often perceived to be similar and/or equivalent methods but, as we will see, they are actually quite different.

Emailed invoices

Sending an invoice via email is usually done these days by attaching the invoice as an Adobe PDF document. This allows the invoice to be sent cheaply and quickly to the recipient who can use a free product (Adobe Acrobat Reader) to open and view it. The simple idea here is that once the customer has reviewed the document (and even saved it to his or her hard drive) he or she can then pay it. In theory (especially in Business to Consumer or B2C markets) the invoice is not only sent out quickly (and at much lower costs than traditional invoicing methods) but means that the customer can send back a cheque or phone in a credit card payment within hours or just a few days (and well ahead of the latest date he or should could technically pay) thereby helping to accelerate merchant cash-flow. Unfortunately, although this works in some situations, the process is rarely this smooth and a number of problems can occur.

Firstly, the merchant needs to have a customer’s email address to be able to send a PDF. Secondly, the PDF is still a flat document which most customers will not only have to open, but will often print and put in a pile to deal with later, when they are ready (just like receiving the paper-based invoice in the mail). This means that the customer may wait as long as they did before to pay the invoice (assuming they do not lose their printed piece of paper in the meantime having deleted their original email). In addition to all of this, an emailed PDF does not encourage the customer to pay by electronic means any more than an invoice arriving in the mail does. Research suggests that customers actually often like to have the option to pay online by debit or credit card for example and can often only do so by calling the merchant (and having to spend time and effort, and within the hours of business operated by the call-centre). Finally, in Business to Business (or B2B) invoicing, the emailed PDF presents a whole new layer of challenges as these often require a digital signature. PDF technology is now much better at allowing digital signatures to be securely added to invoices when they are sent in the mail. However, the process is by no means simple and presents many logistical issues, particularly when multiple approval signatures are required.

Digital invoices

A digital invoice is available at a web site. Sometimes this is embedded in part of a merchant’s web site or it is “hosted” on a third-party web site (to which customers can go directly or can be redirected from a link on a merchant’s web site). In most cases, the digital invoice rendering process is even quicker than emailed invoices, as there is no need to generate a PDF and attach it to an email address. In addition, although a customer may be notified that a new invoice is available via email, it is not necessary to have an email address (as the customer can be notified about the web address by normal physical mail and then subscribe to the web site service to be later notified by either email or even their mobile phone –via SMS). In practice this means that digital invoices will often collect or “scrape” new email addresses from customers progressively.

Perhaps most importantly, a digital invoice is viewed in a truly online way (and does not require printing (as it can be easily stored and retrieved permanently or resent by a merchant at almost no extra cost). This means that not only can the customer view the invoice (in as much detail as they wish) but they can use many online features to both deal with the invoice (save it, schedule it for later payment or send it on for viewing or approval to another person) or even just pay it immediately of course. And if they do choose to pay it immediately, they typically get to do so via their debit card if they want to use their current bank account or by a variety of credit card options (and in some cases even by cash by printing out a voucher and taking it to a local newsagent or local store that takes cash payments). This is therefore much more likely to accelerate merchant cash-flow than in the emailed invoice situation and means that the payment is much easier to reconcile (as less difficult to reconcile cheques or phone-based payments are being made). Finally, the invoice recipient (whether it is a B2C one or B2B one) can elect to pay a bill 24/7 as the bill presentment and payment web site is truly “open-all-hours”.

Conclusion

Emailed invoices are superior to traditional invoices sent in the mail. However, they fall far short of full digital invoices, which offer many additional benefits (which translate into much greater time and cost saving for the merchant). These two approaches are therefore far from equivalent and a merchant can realise considerable advantages by upgrading from an emailed invoice to a full digital one.

Can Merchants really turn off paper bills with digital billing?

Within the billing world, going paperless has been almost like a “Holy Grail” for many merchants, and especially those who are sending out thousands, hundreds of thousands or even millions of bills a month in some cases. And who can blame them? Merchants who send out more than just a few hundred invoices each month are typically spending a great deal of money on printing, putting invoices into envelopes, sending out reminders and/or statements, franking the envelope, having to engage in making sure bills are filed or stored properly and fielding calls from customers who don’t receive a the bill in the mail at all (so it has to be resent) to name but a few things.

By adopting a paperless invoice or digital bill only solution, a merchant can technically avoid all of the above and “switch off paper” immediately. However, despite the apparent significant  advantages to the merchant, this may not be the best way to go (and it should also not be the driver of the change to digital billing).

Most customers have been getting bills in the mail, or at least ones they can print if they are sent by email, for many years and many want to stick with a process that they well understand. Hence, any merchant that removes the option of receiving a paper bill risks losing a customer’s business altogether. Far better therefore to retain the option to receive a physical bill and either deliver it by cost-effective e-mail or allow a customer to retrieve it and print it for themselves from a central website.

With a cloud-based system such as PaySwyft, not only can any merchant post a digital bill but allow customers to print the bill whenever they like. Even better a merchant can email the bill if they so wish, including follow-up or chase bills. And once customers are using such a fully digital portal they can also use a whole range of convenient technology to manage their bill in more flexible ways. This includes:

• Receiving a monthly e-mail notification when a new invoice is available to view.
• Decreasing the possibility of mail fraud and identity theft.
• Automatically calendarising or secheduling payments at a time or date to suit them
• Set email and/or SMS alerts as they like
• Store and retrieve all invoice and payment records whenever they like, forever
• Make payment 24 hours a day, 365 days a year
• Pay in a multitude of ways at the same portal and get a receipt there and then
• See all of their invoices and payments when they want
• Analyse invoice trends and patterns as they wish

This does not mean that they will necessarily “turn off” the paper bill, or stop printing it, but over time the resistance to doing so will clearly lessen. And in the meantime, not only is the customer getting a convenient service for free, that they can use at work or home on their computer (and save themselves time if they were previously paying by cash or cheque in particular), but a merchant is saving money on many fronts, including fielding less phone calls, accelerating cash-flow with earlier online payments and reconciling payments in a much more straightforward way than ever before. Given all of this, getting to a paperless world, if and when it happens, is only a minor bonus.

Will Mobile Devices Soon be the Dominant Channel for Payment Transactions?

In the last 9-12 months, those of us in the financial services industry might be forgiven for thinking that the main issues to face and gain advantage from in the near future is going to be who will win the lion’s share of the mobile market when it comes to payment transactions. This arises because of the huge rise in smart phone sales all over the world in the last few years and in more recent times, the fast growth of tablet computer devices (both of which create great mobility for customers). While both of these innovations are certainly exciting and possibly “game-changing” in this article, we will briefly explore whether they will soon really become the dominant payment channel of choice, as many people seem to believe they will. We will therefore look at arguments for and against this prediction.

The arguments for the case
Without doubt, along with wireless access internet innovation, smart phones are a transformational technology. This technology allows individuals to perform many everyday tasks that previously were done via traditional telephony or even on paper in some instances. The same can be said for the newer but just as ground-breaking tablet computers. The added value here is that the larger screen format allows what was previously done mainly on a personal computer in one location to be done almost anywhere because of the high level of portability and touch screen convenience. As we all know, very soon even aeroplanes will allow the use of both smart phones and tablets via the internet (and the last bastion of true peace from cell phones and computers will disappear).

Of course the two “gorilla issues” here are the use of NFC or Near Field Communication technology which allows the smart phone to become a credit or debit card, and the linked facility of a smart phone as an electronic or digital wallet, capable of storing value and therefore having the capacity to readily make may payment transactions including person-to-person payments.

NFC has a short range of about 1.5 inches. This makes it a good choice for secure transactions, such as contactless credit card payments. Smart phones can therefore “tap and go” using infrastructure already in place for credit card systems such as MasterCard’s PayPass program or Visa’s payWave.

Smart phones can now also replace customer loyalty cards, not only by storing retail store credit card information, but also automatically select the right customer loyalty card information for a given consumer purchase.

The “digital wallet” concept could extend to coupons and other offers. Consumers can now download coupons from a web site, which they exchange by having their phone swiped at the point of purchase. The retailers benefit from being able to track who their coupons are sent to and how they are used.

If you add in the benefits of smart phone tickets (for trains, buses an car parking for example) and the use of phone-based barcodes (as infrastructure allows) we can quickly see how this technology will dramatically change the consumer purchase experience in many areas (especially at the retail level) and help many merchants to gain efficiencies and save costs.

The arguments against the case
In considering the arguments against the proposition that mobile technology is soon going to be the dominant channel for payments, it is worth establishing a few facts about smart phones and tablets. Firstly, there were around 450 million smart phones sold around the world in 2011. As there are about 5.5 Billion mobiles phones in total (which means that around 80% of the world population own one) smart phones represent about 8% of the total-a number expected to go to 12% within 5 years and 20% in 10 years-meaning around 1.2 billion smart phones will be owned by 2022.

As far as tablet computers are concerned, there were around 75 million of them sold in 2011 (compared to 440 million PC sales), with predictions of at least 250 million in 5 years and 750 million with 10 years (although these figures are much more speculative of course). As a percentage of all computers (there are around 1.3 billion computers in use in total in 2011), this means that tablets represent about 4% of the market today, predicted to grow to 7% in 5 years and 15% in 10 years. The reason that % growth of tablets is much slower proportionally than smart phones by the way is that PCs have a much longer life, with companies and individuals holding on to them for 4-5 years or longer before upgrading or changing.

Given the above, it is difficult to see how mobile technology can quickly become the dominant channel for payment, even before we consider other issues. At best in 5 years time only 12% and 7% of consumers (with each technology respectively) will be able to pay on their tablets and smart phones (and only if they wish to of course). This is higher in the younger age groups naturally and is still a lot of transactional volume but not dominant by any means.

To add to the above, about 75% of all payments transactions today take place “offline”. In other words, bills are sent out by physical mail or email (with PDF attachments) and are still paid over the counter with cash and debit/credit cards and by cheques in the mail or by phone or voice over IP. Larger payments are made via internet banking via direct debit and by businesses via bank payment systems such as wire transfer for instance. It is hard to see any of these processes changing quickly, especially in the B2B space, although cheque volumes will continue to decline at the expenses of electronic payment for both consumers and businesses.

Perhaps the other major disadvantage of mobile technology is one of available infrastructure. All smart phones and tablets create much greater accessibility but are only useful when they are connected. 3G and 4G is expensive today for large data packets and access to the Internet relies on old-world “hubs”-most of which rely on old copper-wire systems. NFC technology is perhaps less encumbered as it is more like “Bluetooth” but it still needs a device with which to communicate, and in a payment situation this means that every retailer needs a reading device. Installing such devices is happening of course but it will take time and will only penetrate those market verticals where it makes sense.

So what does it all mean?
Now that we have all of the above figures and facts on both the plus and minus side what does all this mean for payments? Well, its obvious that the times are changing and in the consumer world we will see very fast rises in payments being made not only online in years to come (at the expense of more traditional methods) but a large proportion of these will be made on smart phones and tablet computers, especially in the under 30 population. However, as a proportion of the total transactional volume it is likely to be much slower than the media hype suggests. This is because retail (where much of the take-up will occur, makes up only 10% of the consumer transactional volume. Consumers themselves, of course, are typically only half of the total market transactional volume and less than a quarter of the payment value. The rest is taken up by Government and Business and both of these are likely to take many years to adopt mobile technology into mainstream payment systems-perhaps 15-20 years. For this reason, and the fact that we continue to leverage old system payment “rails”, we can conclude that mobile devices are interesting and growing as a payment option but will be far from dominant for a few years yet. Smart phones (with NFC technology) are therefore likely to slowly replace the “bricks and mortar” retail market (helping customers to migrate from a plastic card to a mobile device). And as both smart phones and tablets are effectively mobile enabled PC’s that will make all forms of payments easier and increase/accelerate on-line payment activity this will be a good thing for both merchants and consumers when it comes to the ease with which future payments can be made.

Sending Bills and collecting payment from customers costs every organisation 5% of Revenue on average!-can this really be correct?

According to several leading research companies who look at international billing and payment issues on an ongoing basis, (including perhaps the leader in the field of billing research -Billentis) they say, that on average, the overall cost of sending out a bill or invoice and then collecting payment from the customer, is anywhere from £4 to £17 per invoice. Unfortunately, apart from the fact that this is a pretty big range, it tends to create an unnecessary defensiveness in organisations (and often in the finance department in particular) who understandably become very keen to point out that they spend nowhere near that kind of money on such a mundane and clerical activity (although they will often fail to include many of the indirect and hidden costs of the process). Another recently published general statistic, however, could be much more useful and may make a few divisional heads and even CEO’s sit up and think about the efficiency and effectiveness of their billing and payments practices for the first time. This is the statement that on average, an organisation spends 5% of its revenue on issuing its invoices and in collecting payments from customers. In this article, we will explore this claim and see if it reflects reality for both small and large organisations. To do this we will look at the figures based on two real UK businesses.

First and foremost let’s deal with the “on average” part of the 5% of revenue claim. What is being done here is to look at many organisations of many sizes and types and simply working out the median or middle value in a range of numbers. In this case the median cost of billing and collecting payment in proportion to total revenues is 5%. Of course, this means that they are some companies that may be higher or lower than this but statistically, we can say that around two-thirds of all companies would fall into this average of 4%.

The Small Company
The first company (let’s call them Alpha) employs 26 people, has a turnover of £5 million in total revenues per annum. This is earned by selling goods and services at an average of £500 on average each time. Hence their total bills in a year are 12,000 or 1,000 per month. There are two broad cost categories that we now need to look at –staff and transaction costs.

On the staff side, Alpha have one accountant (on a salary of £45,000 per annum, three clerical admin people (at a salary of £21,000 each) and two people answering the phones (at a salary of £17,500 each). Hence, the all up payroll for this group of people is £143,000. The three clerical admin people devote all of their time to billing and payments but the accountant and customer service people devote only 50% of their time to this activity. Hence, we can say the cost of the people’s time which is devoted to billing and payments is £103,000. However, the company has staff overhead costs of 40% (cost of offices, equipment, training etc) which brings this cost up to a total of £144,200.

On the transaction cost side, 40% of the 12,000 bills are paid by cheque, 10% by BACS, 30% by phone (half by debit card and half by credit card), and 20% by cash. For cheques the bank charge fees of £1,200 (£0.25 pence times 4,800 cheques). For BACS, a charge is made of 15 pence per transaction (so £0.15*12000*0.1 or £180). For cash handling the bank charges a flat annual fee of £500 for all cash deposits of this size. For cost of transactions by phone, on the debit side the company pays £0.35 pence per transaction or £630 and on the credit side 2.5% of each transaction value (£500*0.025*1800 transactions or £22,500). Finally, we have to worry about how long it takes to get paid (and the cost of borrowing money to operate and allow for possibly late payments). Given that this small company has average invoice days outstanding of forty, they have to cover this £500 for 40 days or just under 11% of the year. As Alpha is paying interest at 5%, this means the cost to fund the necessary float is £26,027.

There are also a few direct invoicing costs for Alpha to bear including printing invoices, paper, envelopes, stamps and even marketing material (to also design and print). This adds up to a total of £0.90 per invoice (the stamp alone being half of this). We therefore have a total annual cost of £10,800. This makes the grand total on the transactional side of things £61,837. If we total all of the above, we now have a grand total billing and collection cost of £206,037. As a % of the £5 million in revenues this is 4.12% (or what would be £17.17 per invoice).

The Large Company
The second company (lets call them Beta), employs 525 people, has a turnover of £90 million in total revenues per annum. This is earned by selling goods and services at an average of £58 each time. Hence, their total bills in a year are 1,551,725 or 129,310 per month on average. Once again, there are two broad cost categories that we now need to look at –staff and transaction costs.

On the staff side, Beta have a team of eight accountants (on an average salary of £48,000 per annum each, thirty-two clerical admin people doing bookkeeping, settlement and reconciliation (at a salary of £23,500 each) and a call-centre with sixty people answering the phones (at a salary of £18,500 each on average). Hence, the all up payroll for this group of people is £2,214,000. The Beta company does not keep detailed records but estimates that billing and collecting payments occupies about 60% of the time of this whole team. Hence, the cost of the people’s time, which is devoted to billing and payments is £1,347,600. However, the company has staff overhead costs of 45% (cost of offices, equipment, training etc) which brings this cost up to a total of £ £1,954,020.

On the transaction cost side, 20% of the 1,323,530 bills are paid by cheque, 20% by BACS, 50% by phone (half by debit card and half by credit card), 5% by cash and 5% via Beta’s Internet bank site portal. For cheques the bank charges fees of £52,941 (£0.20 pence times 264,706 cheques). For BACS, a charge is made of 12 pence per transaction (so £0.12*264,706 or £31,765). For cash handling the bank charges a flat annual fee of £15,000 for all cash deposits of this size. For cost of transactions by phone, on the debit side the company pays £0.30 pence per transaction or £99,265 and on the credit side 1.8% of each transaction value (£58*0.018*330,883). transactions or £405,000). Finally, we have to worry about how long it takes to get paid (and the cost of borrowing money to operate and allow for possibly late payments. This company has average invoice days outstanding of 45, they have to cover this £68 for each transaction for 45 days or 12.3% of the year. As the Beta company is paying interest at 5%, this means the cost to fund the necessary float is £553,500.

There are also a few direct invoicing costs for Beta to bear including sending invoices (which Beta does via email not paper unless it is requested by a customer), monthly mailed statements and accompanying marketing material (to also print and design). This is a total of £0.40 per invoice. We therefore have a total annual cost of £620,690. This makes the grand total on the transactional side of things £1,860,054.

If we total all of the above (all staff plus all transaction costs), we now have a grand total billing and collection cost of £ £3,814,074. As a % of the £90 million in revenues this is 4.24%. (or £2.46 per invoice).

Summary
Although the data from these two very different sized companies cannot in any way constitute a statistically significant result, it is nonetheless quite remarkable that both costs of invoicing and collection are so close. At 4.12% and 4.24% respectively they are also only a little less than the 5% average claim made by the research companies. In fact, it is a reasonable assumption that a few more “hidden costs” still need to be added to both sides here (which may completely close the gap). For example, the small company Alpha added no costs for the senior managers (GM and CFO) who both spend some of their time in payment matters, nor for the extra bank charges for bounced cheques, debt collection and writing off-unpaid invoices (issues also not included for Beta). And, in the large company, there were some system and invoice storage costs that were excluded. This may well have made both % numbers even closer to the 5% figure and possibly slightly higher.

In the final analysis, this is just the data from two individual companies. However, they seem to provide a useful general justification to the claim and serve as a basis for calculating the actual figures for almost any business. This may be especially useful ahead of talking with online digital bill presentment and payment companies that often claim that they can reduce these costs by up to 50%-if this is true, what a great way to lift revenues by up to 2.5%!