Cash-still a key method for consumers to pay merchants

In the last 10 years we would be forgiven for thinking that the use of cash to pay for things has been declining so rapidly that it is now a minor payment method (with debit and credit cards being the dominant force in western society these days). However, even in 2011/12, the figures just do not back these up with cash and debit having about 40% of the total pie, with credit cards a long way behind with only 15%.

The UK Payments Council publishes a full report on “the way we pay for things” as consumers in the economy, in April of every year. In summary, their latest research suggests that cash accounts for about two-thirds of all financial transactions in the economy and about one third of the value of the transaction (meaning that cash is typically used for lower value transactions). In fact, there are around 21 billion consumer payments in cash, but close to 80% of these are below £10. Around two-thirds of these cash payments are made in retail environments (such as supermarkets, service stations, shops and pubs etc).

For our regular commitments (bills etc), cash payments account for about 10% of the transactions and around 7% of the value.

Many individuals choose to use cash to shop on-line (often citing security and risk issues with credit and debit cards as the reason). However, many other have no choice but to use cash when they are trying to purchase goods or services (whether these are on or off line). 

Although the numbers vary, the population of people in the UK who do not have a bank account (often called the unbanked) is around 2 million people or about 1.4 million households. This is therefore around 7.5% of the entire UK adult working population and is therefore hard to ignore if you are a merchant or a payment provider.  Of course, this includes many people who are socially disadvantaged or poor in society but even they have to buy products or services or pay their bills. This is not easy to do without a bank account and can only be accommodated if payment providers recognise their need.

Is online Direct Debit a “Win-Win” for Everyone?

Direct Debit or Direct deposit as it is called in some countries has been around for decades now and making steady inroads as a payment method offered these days by many large merchants, often with incentives (such as vouchers or money off a bill) to customers to sign a direct debit mandate. Merchants who are part of the Direct Debit scheme (called Originators) claim that the service not only saves time and hassle for customers in general, but also that it facilitates easier scheduling, easier storage, is more secure, involves less cheques and reduces errors. Of course, both the merchants and the banks also gain these same benefits, not to mention the capacity to reach into a customer’s bank account directly to collect payment for a bill (something that a customer is not always completely happy about).

Despite its steady progress, Direct Debit’s growth has slowed until very recently, when on-line billing and/or payment portals have come into being and offered to speed up quite an old-fashioned process, in which a paper-based form still had to be sent in and signed before service could commence (and the whole process repeated when a direct debit amount changed). These new portals (such as the one at www.Payswyft.com as an example) not only offer traditional benefits to consumers (shown in the table below to the right-the top 4) but adds new customer benefits that are only possible online (shown in the 5 blue italics items in the right column below). The online portal therefore gives consumers even more reason to either use direct debit some of the time or use it as their primary payment channel.

Banks and Originators win too
It’s always critical for a customer to gain substantive advantage with a payment service of any kind but it is even better if the service provider can win at the same time. In the two columns to the left above are therefore the advantages gained by both the banks and the originators/merchants by pushing direct debit as a payment option. For the banks the primary advantage is that online direct debit payments reduce data entry time and staff, but not far behind is the new revenue possibility of opening up new markets (e.g. smaller merchants being introduced to the scheme). For the originators the primary advantage is that it helps to retain customers, who typically like all their payment history to be available at the portal. Just as important though is the cash-flow benefit. Direct debit payers almost always pay on time (and many pay early). No more cheques in the mail on the last possible day.

Summary
Direct debit is not a new service but online billing and/or payment portals such as PaySwyft offer even more reasons for everyone to gain the benefit of using this payment channel.

Will an “iTunes” Type of Web site for ebilling Ever Come into Being?

Last month an interesting article was published on a blog which made a very useful reference to on line music, and iTunes in particular, in relation to ebilling. In his article the author suggested that if we thought about bills in music terms:
• CDs (and the artists that produce them) are like paper bills;
• Listening to music online is like logging in to a portal to view and pay your bill; and
• Downloading a song (file) to your chosen device from iTunes is like receiving your bill as a file (attachment) to your PC, tablet, iPhone, Android, Blackberry etc.

This article rather strangely goes on to conclude that all music and bills should be delivered by email attachment so that customers can open it/them on all their different listening or reading devices.

Despite that fact that this article seems to get a little lost quite quickly, it does draw a useful general analogy and it is therefore worth looking at the core question that it hints at but never answers-will an iTunes type of web site for ebilling ever come into being (and how of course)?

First and foremost let’s get the comparisons right here:
• Songs (or “albums” of songs) should be compared to bills in general
• Artists should be compared to merchants (and some of both are very large and some are tiny)
• Record companies should be compared to banks
• Music listeners should be compared to customers or bill payers
• CD’s (or Vinyl) should be compared to paper-delivered bills
• Online Audio type files (MP3’s, WAVs etc) should be compared to online emails with attachments
• An online store (like iTunes) should be compared to an online bill-payment portal

You’ll notice that we do not yet talk about a delivery device like a smart phone or tablet in the above table-we’ll cover this later.

The Music Scene
If we look back at recent history, up until as little as 10 years ago, the music industry had been operating in similar fashion for decades. Artists produced songs and approached record companies to back them. If they were successful, the record company would help getting the song(s) to market on vinyl as a single or a long play record, getting the songs played on radio and elsewhere so that people would buy what they liked in main street record stores. Innovation in the music industry was very slow to come. Vinyl eventually became CD’s and radio went slowly from analogue to digital. However, the biggest changes were in listening devices, which became increasingly portable. This was led by Sony’s “Walkman” in 1979-the first step towards MP3 players which led to the huge industry paradigm shift-the iPod-introduced in late 2001 (and the new iTunes music store two years later in 2003).

When Apple arrived on the music scene the portable MP3 scene was ripe for change to something simpler and more appealing to customers. In this sense, the iPod, iTouch and finally the iphone and iPad all became the simplest and most user-friendly way to listen to music (both on a live streaming basis and recorded). As a result, the music industry has been almost completely transformed commercially and listeners (or at least those with a 3G/4G connection and/or access to the Internet) have more choice and convenience than they ever had before.

The Billing Scene
So how does this compare to the billing sector? Like music, billing has operating in similar ways for decades. Bills (the song comparison) have been and still are delivered mostly in very traditional ways, especially by small and medium sized merchants (the artist comparison). This is by paper in the mail as the simplest format (a bit like the vinyl single) or by mail with a plain PDF attachment (the CD comparison). In some cases, the email with attachment may be a little more dynamic and sophisticated and can collect signatures for example (used in the B2B billing world). This is more comparable to the MP3 or wav files in the music world.

Although a dominant player like Apple and a site like iTunes has yet to “explode” in the billing world, we are getting very close to it happening now. For some years, online bill payment has been available at a merchant’s web site, although this does make for some inconvenience for customers when they need to pay a lot of bills (or listen to a lot of songs from different artists at different record companies). Online bill payment has also been available at bank sites for many years now and has become quite well-used by the same people who took quickly to Internet banking. Unfortunately, full digital presentment is not normally available via this channel, so both of these valuable innovations are comparable to the “Walkman”-they have taken us some of the way but there is room for improvement.

The private “cloud-based” bill presentment and payment portal is a much newer innovation in the last 2-3 years, and is much closer to being the billing “paradigm shift” we talked about earlier. In this system, customers can see bills from a given merchant (an artist in music terms) and subscribe to get all the bills they send (or songs they release). Because this is non-merchant owned or bank owned (the equivalent of sometimes cutting out the record companies), customers can see many merchants (or artists), and thus have the capacity to ultimately start to see all of their bills in one place. Naturally, paying bills is never a fun activity like listening to music but the quicker and more easily you can deal with them the better (and you can get back to what you like doing much more speedily). Having all your bills in one online place (with free back and storage and easy retrieval whenever you need access) is the equivalent of getting all of their songs in one playbook-just as iTunes allows now. Customers can then keep these bills (or songs) permanently stored in one place and revisit them whenever they like. These bills are all fully digital and do not have multiple file formats that have to be tackled (much as Apple made MP3, WAV and other music file formats an irrelevance to the listener).

Perhaps most importantly, customers can access their bills at the portal from any device that is connected to the Internet by some means-a computer, a smart phone, a tablet etc. And because this is all digital, customers can use all of the currently available and evolving technology that is available such as bookmarking, flexible sorting (like assembling playlists) and using SMS alerts for example (to prompt the customer when there is a bill to pay or a credit card to update, just as you would when a new song or album by an artist has been released). Of course this is not to exclude other ways of getting a bill in any other format that may be wanted-you can still send an email or a PDF or even print them if you like.

Summary
We are not suggesting that bills are anywhere near as much fun to ‘access’ as music and you will of course listen to the same song a lot more than you will use the same bill. However, we think the broad analogy here is a useful one. Our general conclusion is that the online bill presentment and payment portal is already here and like iTunes will transform the bill payment sector over the next few years just as Apple did. There are a few innovative companies that are competing to be the “big gorilla” at the moment but it is inevitable that one of these will emerge soon as the dominant player in this space. A few early adopters (the merchants or artists as they would be in the music scene) already understand this and are quickly getting on board. For these merchants this is a relatively painless transition, with no capital outlay and they can be in the online bill presentment and payment space almost immediately to reap the benefits.

What will happen to bank fees in the future?

In my last blog article I stated that Merchant Banks are now making a large proportion of their profits by charging fees to both end consumers or account holders (although they worry about overdoing this to prevent customer “churn”) and to merchants who want to offer payment services to their customers. In the latter, I also suggested, there are many direct and indirect fees in the mix that need to be closely scrutinised. In this follow-on article I want to look take a more philosophical perspective and gaze into the crystal ball a little. I am therefore going to look at what the future might hold for merchant bank fees of all kinds.

The future of Direct Customer fees
Banks tend to charge transactional fees only when a customer has gone beyond what is deemed to be the core commercial relationship. Hence, fees are typically charged to customers when they have overdrawn an account, written a cheque in circumstances where they are insufficient funds to cover it, written a banker’s draft, made a wire transfer or carried out a foreign exchange transaction etc.

Although different banks are likely to try different approaches, most of them will want to move to a more transparent business model with customers. This will involve no fees whatsoever for customers that maintain a minimum positive balance and are willing to tie inward payments to their checking account (such as regular salary payments for example). It may also be that the bank will require some other accounts to be maintained to keep fees at zero (such as having a separate savings account or buying insurance through the bank etc). However, the model here will typically be not to charge fees for normal everyday transactions, and this will include items such as electronic bill pay, peer-to-peer payments online or via a smart phone app and even account balance enquiries online or at an ATM.

Of course, while this free service approach may work well for customers who can maintain a minimum float in a checking account (and also meet the other standards that may be required), many customers will not be able to do this and may actually pay more than they are charged today. As this encompasses many customers who are potentially still very valuable to a bank in the long term, another strategy here (and one that has been adopted already in several banks) is to charge a single standard account management fee (such as £20 or £30 per month perhaps-often also involving some rewards or loyalty benefits being offered too). This would either render all transactional fees at zero (or at least all but the ones that involve a customer going into debt).

Merchant fees
There has been much controversy about merchant bank fees in recent years. This controversy arises mainly from two factors: The first is the scale of these fees (both fixed and variable). And the second is the number of different fees that are levied (leading to much complexity and frustration on the part of a given merchant, much of the time). As we saw in the last article, there are often many separate charges rendered by merchant banks including: Cash processing fees, Cheque processing fees, Discount Fee Rates, Inter-change Transaction Fees, Address Verification Service (AVS) fees, Batch Fees, Monthly Statement or Customer Service Fees, Monthly Minimum Fees, Gateway Fees, Annual Fees, Chargeback/Retrieval Fees, and even Cancellation/ Termination Fees (not to mention other administrative fees relating to copy statements or reminder letters etc). The shear volumes of these different and often layered fees make not only for extra hidden costs but often considerable internal merchant time and effort to check that they are accurately applied.

While it is highly unlikely that merchant side fees will disappear completely, we are already seeing a shift to fees that fall into two categories. Those fees that are seen by a merchant as relatively arbitrary and unrelated to any real cost or contribution (let’s call them bank overhead recovery fees) and fees that are seen by a merchant to relate directly to a particular service or tangibly valuable outcome (let’s call them convenience fees). The future of these two fee categories will be very different.

Overhead Recovery Fees
Overhead recovery fees (rightly or wrongly in reality) are seen to be things like Discount fee rates, Bank Interchange rates, Gateway Fees, Batch Fees, Monthly minimum fees, Annual fees, Cancellation/Termination fees and any fees related to administration (such as charging for an email being sent) etc. What these fees have in common is that most merchants see these costs as having no direct benefit to their business or add little value as far as they are concerned. In fact, most merchants take the view that many of these tasks and processes have been automated or made very simple and cheap in the advent of modern software and/or Internet based technology, and yet fees have remained broadly the same or in some cases gone up. Debit cards in the US, provide a particular example where fees which often average 75 cents or higher were known to be costing a bank 70-80% less than this.

All Merchant banks will continue to compete aggressively with one another to win new customers or to retain existing ones, and price will be their primary tool. This is likely to drive these perceived to be low valued-added overhead recovery fees down strikingly in the next few years. Furthermore, as more and more mainly internet-based payment providers come to the market (with far less overhead to have to recover of course) there is every chance that all of these fees will evaporate completely-very good news for merchants of all sizes and types.

Convenience fees
Convenience fees (again rightly or wrongly in reality) are seen to be things like Cash and Cheque processing fees, Monthly Statement fees, Chargeback/ Retrieval fees etc. Not only do most merchants appreciate that these services have more easily seen effort and cost associated with rendering them but can more readily appreciate the value that they add to them. In other words, these activities would be as costly or even more expensive if they were to be performed by the merchants themselves or some other third-party organisation. In addition, these activities are perceived to add value in many cases by providing efficiency, or even a direct customer service benefit (which either increases satisfaction or can justify a particular pricing position on goods and services). You’ll notice that Address verification fees or Customer Service fees are not automatically listed here as convenience fees. These qualify to be included but merchant banks need to work hard to explain why and how this is the case (whether it is describing the benefit of having a real live person available in a call-centre to help with an unusual transactional event or bring about better credit card security by using look-up database services etc).

For all of these fees, if well-presented and explained, there is every opportunity to continue to charge for the service offered. However, the real opportunity here (to both retain fee income and then to grow it) lies in really getting alongside merchants in helping them to reduce their costs or to increase their revenue (in tangible ways). In this respect the opportunity is to help the merchant get bills/invoices seen more quickly and in digital form, to set up calendarised and recurrent type payments when they want them, the offer aggregate bulk payments (especially in the B2B space), to offering currency exchange service options, to offer greater payment type ubiquity and to offer better analysis and reporting on progressive transactional activity. In addition to this, merchant banks can offer modern internet-based technology to store invoice and payment data, offer alerts and reminders when wanted and even to provide links to better goods and services pricing and payment options in the future. Simply put, fee income in this convenience category can grow, and do so substantially, but only when there is a true partnership and the bank and merchant can both gain from the relationship in real and visible ways.

Summary
The merchant bank fee scene will change dramatically in the next few years. Overhead recovery type fees will reduce dramatically and ultimately disappear altogether in the competitive landscape ahead. However, convenience type fees, or those that can be seen by a merchant to add-value will continue to exist and can grow. This growth however, will be heavily dependent upon each bank’s ability to work in partnership with their merchants and offer technology and services that tangibly lead to lower costs or higher revenues. This will therefore be the big challenge for merchant banks in the next few years.

Why do all businesses need a Merchant Account and what is the best way to go about getting one?

Traditionally, to be afforded the opportunity to accept credit and debit cards from their customers any organisation (typically called a “merchant” by the financial services industry) must be granted so-called “proper” status as a bank. This proper status is given to a merchant through the vehicle of a unique Merchant ID (or MID) from the bank and allows them to participate in the payments chain. Pretty much all large businesses have a merchant account like this. However, the smaller the organisation gets, the less likely that they will have one and may be missing out on the benefits.

The banks which provide a merchant account are not quite the same as the ones with which we are most familiar as personal current account holders. All major high street banks have what is known as an “acquiring” bank arm or division. For example, in the UK NatWest has 'Streamline', Lloyds-TSB has 'Cardnet', HSBC has 'HSBC Merchant Services' and so on. In addition, some organisations outside the high streets banks (like American Express and PayPal for instance) have a license and do their own acquiring. Subject to a range of pre-conditions, all these “acquiring banks” issue a Merchant ID and allow an organisation of any sort to start taking credit and debit cards. They will then approve or decline each customer transaction made, collect any payments on the merchant’s behalf and pay the money into a merchant’s nominated bank account.

There are clearly costs involved in setting up this merchant account - in most circumstances the acquiring bank will include setup charges, monthly or annual fees, monthly rental of a physical terminal (or PDQ machine) for the merchant to process card details, and they may require a merchant to pay for a dedicated telephone line for the terminal. A merchant will also be charged a percentage of each transaction which they process, may have a minimum monthly volume of business imposed, and in some cases, have to provide a substantial “bond” or deposit as additional security (to cover any potential card “charge-backs” that may occur).

Sadly perhaps, that's the relatively easy part of the process! - before a merchant can even start the process, they will have to convince the acquiring bank that they are worthy of their trust, and a merchant will usually have to provide two years audited accounts and demonstrate a sound business track record in order for the application to proceed (which is why some banks also require a cash bond and an full business plan if a merchant cannot satisfy all that, for whatever reason).

Even if a merchant meets these requirements, they will usually only be able to accept card payments in the “traditional” part of the business only. If a merchant wants to set up a web site to accept card payments they will find that the acquiring banks will not accept any information coming from the merchant directly via the Internet. The banks will only accept information from a web site which has been processed by an approved Payment Service Provider or PSP (who will do this on a bulk basis and in a safe and secure way –and according to PCI or Payment Card Industry compliance rules).

A Payment Service Provider’s function is to integrate a merchant’s e-commerce enabled web site with the major credit card networks so that orders generated by a merchant’s own or chosen 'shopping cart' software can be authorised and payment collected. This payment is then transferred to a merchant’s account for onward remittance to another receiving bank account as necessary.

As you might expect every merchant has to go through quite a formal application process in order to get an agreement in place with a PSP. Their terms and conditions and charges vary enormously from one PSP to another and it is very difficult to make exact comparisons. Merchants also need to be aware that whatever charges any PSP makes will always be added to those charges which are levied by the acquiring bank providing the Merchant Account. This means any merchant may well end up paying two lots of set-up charges, monthly/annual fees, and, worst of all, two lots of percentages (plus fixed fees in some cases) on every transaction.

So, you might be thinking, with all of these hurdles:
1. why would a small organisation in particular bother with all of this? and
2. are there better ways to go about the necessary merchant account sign up steps if the journey to doing so is deemed to be worthwhile?

The answer to the first question is relatively straightforward. For most businesses turning over say more than £100,000 a year, the ability to offer credit and debit cards payments will bring not only extra revenue but will also accelerate cash-flow (to some extent at least). This will usually easily recover the outlay made on setting up a merchant account and make incremental profit into the bargain. Fixed fee payback would be expected to be within the first 6-9 months and thereafter the benefits would typically be significant for most businesses.

The answer to the second question is also a positive one. As the Internet (and web 2.0 technology in particular) has evolved in recent years, there are now several businesses that a merchant can approach to be a “one-stop-shop” when it comes to taking payments (credit, debit and even other types). In other words, these businesses will handle all of your merchant needs, including setting up the necessary relationship with both the bank (the acquirer) and the processor (the PSP) and may offer other services also. At a simple level this is likely to be more flexible customer service (a single point of contact with a real person for example) but may include other services (such as e-wallet capability-such as PayPal offers for instance or electronic billing capability-such as PaySwyft offers for instance). In addition these “one-stop-shop” businesses can often lower overall costs and reduce administrative hassle as well as operate on a “pay-as-you-go” basis. This means that even small merchants can accept credit and debit cards quickly and cost effectively and start to reap the benefits that have mainly only been available to the larger organisations in the past.

Useful additional information on this subject can be found on many websites. One of these is www.web-merchant.com (see www.web-merchant.co.uk/howdoesitwork.asp ) from which some of the above material was drawn.