Vindicia CashBox StoreFront

Tuesday, March 1st, 2011 at 7:21 am

Call me a masochist if you will but, as I remarked yesterday on Twitter, I do enjoy product launches and the underlying processes that lead to them: understanding client requirements, creating functional specifications, building the product, defining pricing, crafting the go-to-market strategy and publicizing the actual product.  We’ve been busy the last few months on a new initiative that reinforces our mission to help merchants build online revenue and we’re excited about the results of that work announced today: CashBox StoreFront.

CashBox StoreFront optimizes customer acquisition for merchants selling digital content and services. Yes, there are numerous storefronts in the market so our product name by itself doesn’t distinguish ours. Few companies, however, focus on the tight relationship between the typical operational focus of SaaS billing and the marketing focus of customer acquisition and retention. The combination of CashBox StoreFront and CashBox offloads the tedium that most marketers (like myself) have to deal with in maximizing customer lives, whether working with a subscription or a microtransaction-based service.  Given the ongoing burden that PCI compliance puts on merchants (with version 2.0 of the standard rolling out this year), the fact that CashBox StoreFront completely offloads this issue onto Vindicia removes yet another worry for merchants.

Contact us with any questions you have, and we look forward to helping you build online revenue.

Think Different

Tuesday, February 22nd, 2011 at 10:08 pm

Think Different seems to be the message emanating from the would be internet gatekeepers last week. Think your subscription service could be profitable – well, Think Different!

Apple, in requiring “mandatory 30% subscription cut” plans on the App Store have bitten off more than they can chew. Not only is the basic concept economically impossible for many media and content providers, it looks to drastically cut into the value of the iPad. Two of the most compelling applications on my iPad are Netflix and Kindle. Should both of these services be forced out of the App Store, I question whether I should move to the Android platform. I saw value in the iPad if it saved me buying a ebook reader and another television screen, but if those high value content sources can’t economically be available to me as an end user, the iPad starts to become an expensive third screen that my MacBook Air or Netbook outperforms (with no 30% blocker for Netflix and Amazon!) Late breaking word is that Mr. Jobs himself says that the 30% requirement doesn’t apply to SaaS, but that still leaves a lot of gray area in the content sector. Is Netflix SaaS and if it is, why isn’t a Kindle eBook exempt too but maybe Amazon is a publisher? Are only Magazine and Newspaper guys forced to Think Different?

That leads me to Google’s foray. Both services are talking about sharing customer data with content and service providers but if you look at the fine print all that’s shared is name, email, and address. Apple iTunes and Google Checkout maintain firm control over the customer as they retain the ability to bill the end user in the future and in Google’s case, actually control the user’s login and password credentials. Digital providers are left in the embarrassing world of having to beg their existing and probably already paying customers for payment details or a new login should Apple or Google decide they don’t approve of some future service direction. Today those disapprovals are folks like Playboy and European news magazines (OMG! women without shirts!) but what if your service violates some other new found sensibility of these companies. Google has surprisingly wide limitations on what you can sell with Checkout.  Make sure you don’t slander the Queen…

Google One Pass also highlights another issue that publishers need to be very aware of. One Pass takes the current news paradigm and simply attempts to assign a paywall to someone who views more than a few articles. Metering content is a painful business model that almost always migrates to flat rate subscriptions. However, in this case, the news business is only beginning to come to the realization that it needs to be thinking about its value to readers as a productized service instead of simply content to consume. I’ve long said that the news business incorrectly focused on news.google.com as a competitor when they should have focused on Google Reader. Those that add value to the news consuming experience beyond simply supplying the news will create sustainable future “news-as-a-service” offerings. One Pass remains in an old paradigm that forces people to keep asking themselves if they’re getting real value out of that next web page instead of whether their “news-as-a-service” program entertains and informs.

Serious Digital Leaders have to own their customer relationship. The shift to subscription is driven by the perceived drop in value of a digital version versus a physical version. Lowering the perceived average selling price by using subscriptions can succeed only because digital content and services can rely on the much longer average customer lifetime values that can be had in the switch to services. Handing control over the annuity stream profit (and much of the annuity in Apple’s case) is giving your business to a hardware company or a search engine. Maybe they’ll send you a nice T-shirt or an iPad for your trouble…

ROSCA – Federal Law Changes for Subscription Programs

Tuesday, January 18th, 2011 at 1:10 pm

The President signed the “Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act” at the beginning of this year. The act was primarily a response to the Rockefeller hearings into poor online marketing practices around passing data from a primary merchant to a secondary merchant.  Rumor has it that the wife of the counsel to the Senate Commerce committee had her card number shared and opted into a program of one of the major continuity marketers and that prompted these hearings.

Two major consequences of bill S 3386 include eliminating the charging of a post transaction sign up without disclosure or without getting the card data directly from the end user, and banning the passing of card data to a third party after the transaction by a merchant. These so-called “Data-Pass” methods of co-marketing and co-selling were conducted only by a limited set of merchants.

However, this bill will impact almost all subscription merchants. The bill requires that any online subscription merchant – not just those working with continuity marketing partners – observe the following:

  • Clearly disclose all material terms of the subscription;
  • Obtain consent before charging an account of any type; and
  • Provide a simple way to stop ongoing charges.

The FTC has provided some initial comments. Our interpretation is that few merchants who are following best practices will need to make any changes. However, a basic review of your sign up flows is warranted to make sure that both your team and your counsel are comfortable that you are being clear and that you are getting consent.

There are two red flags to watch. The law requires that a merchant “obtains a consumer’s express informed consent before charging the consumer’s credit card, debit card, bank account, or other financial account for products or services through such transaction.”  The key is understanding what “express informed consent” means in practice. The reason for that is the second red flag. Not only did the law authorize the FTC to enforce the law, but it also specifically allows the attorney generals of all 50 states to enforce it as well.

We’re of the opinion that if it’s clear to a lay person that she is signing up for an ongoing subscription at an explicitly stated price, and that the timing of her next payment is well known to her before you perform the initial transaction, your buy process should be fine. In its settlement with AOL in 2003, the FTC used the term “express informed consent” and said, “[for] the subscriber’s consent to be deemed ‘informed,’ the respondents must clearly and conspicuously disclose, before the subscriber consents, certain specified information, including a description of the pricing plan to which the subscriber is agreeing.” The agreement with AOL which includes the specified information is available from the FTC’s AOL action microsite.

One important component of informed consent is the best practice that a confirmation of the initial sign up is sent promptly after subscribing. Though it isn’t specifically called out, it would serve merchants well to include the terms that the end user consented to in the welcome email with a pointer to the customer self service portal for opting out.

On behalf of our clients and readers, we will continue to keep an eye on the definition of “express informed consent” to see if anything more is asked for by the various regulators.

Payment Ecosystem Myths – Part 3

Wednesday, January 5th, 2011 at 1:42 pm

Happy New Year!  Last month we posted Parts 1 and 2 of the Payment Ecosystem Myths series in which we highlighted topics ranging from being the “Merchant of Record” to the customer buying experience.  We have a few more myths to slay in this latest installment…

“There is no way to keep my chargeback rate below the 1% limit imposed by Visa” – This is a myth from companies that have a naturally high chargeback rate, such as gaming and dating, and that haven’t been able to control their chargeback rates in the past. This is simply not true and is a symptom that the company has limited resources and an incomplete knowledge of the possibilities afforded today by technology. As a reference point, we consistently help our clients stay under 1%.

“I don’t have a chargeback problem, our rate is at 0.2%” – On the flip side, many merchants have taken the opposite approach and dedicated resources to eliminating chargebacks altogether. This approach is also flawed for digital goods merchants. For a company with a cost of goods sold that is nearly zero, it makes no sense to turn potentially good customers away — the “false positive” problem of unwittingly turning away customers who could generate significant long-term value.  The cost of turning a good customer away — their lifetime value — often far outweighs the cost of a chargeback.

“Customers don’t like  _____________ (virtual goods, virtual currency, automatically recurring subscriptions).” – Companies regularly make decisions about their business models and customer experience based on incomplete knowledge or stories gleaned from bad past experiences. As many have advocated, testing is the best way to find what really works for your community.  The examples given in the title are encountered often and deserve special mention.

  • Virtual Goods / Virtual CurrencyVirtual goods are a proven method to engage and monetize communities and the market is estimated to be worth several billion dollars, and virtual currency is the best method to date of enabling virtual goods purchases. Virtual currencies are ideal for many digital businesses and should be considered as an option for online monetization.
  • Automatically Recurring Subscriptions – In the same vein, many companies are afraid to offer subscriptions. Subscriptions come with their own set of complications (managing them requires additional thought and solutions), but they are the best method for monetizing digital goods and content that is available. Subscriptions work very well standalone, or in conjunction with a virtual goods business and create a fantastic and predictable revenue stream. Some companies are timid about making their subscriptions renew automatically, but the most common feedback from customers is that they are thankful to not bear the burden of managing their payment.

This list, spread over three posts, spreads some of the knowledge we’ve learned while helping digital goods merchants become successful. We’re always happy to chat with you further about these or other issues — just let us know if you have something else that you’ve always wondered about digital goods or payments.