Bio not provided
Come to Texas. Seriously. Austin is awesome. Dallas too. Same weather as CA -- plus it's an incredibly business-friendly climate. No state income tax and the housing market was relatively untouched by the real estate bubble.
And if you must stay connected to either coast, two major airlines are based in Dallas and one in Houston. You can be anywhere in the U.S. with a three hour flight. For its size, DFW is one of the best airports in the world. Austin-Bergstrom airport is one of the best airports in its class.
There's a reason why DFW, Austin, San Antoni and even Houston are growing and why major companies are relocating their headquarters in the state.
11 months, 2 weeks ago on Because of asset seizures, I am starting my new company outside California
A few issues to consider:
First, this struck me as being a little off: "The developers who control what payment system gets installed, or in some cases, uninstalled."
Braintree has done a masterful job of catering to developers. Stripe too. That's smart and they're reaping the benefits at sites where developers control how payments are processed and by whom. The trouble is, that's a long tail play. It's a good business, but at major online retailers, developers don't "control what payment system gets installed." They have a seat at the table to be sure, but the ultimate decision is based on costs (processing, not development), convenience (for customers) and acquirer. (And the acquirer relationship is based on a whole host of other issues.) In other words, if I'm PayPal, I'm much more concerned that Amazon or Walmart.com (or any of the other top 20 online retailers) accept PayPal than a site where a developer is calling the shots on payments. (For some context, Amazon's payment processing costs to card brands, acquirer, etc. are probably close to $200 million. They'll gladly pay developers to struggle with code to affect that a few basis points.)
Second, in a two-sided market like payments, you offer what your customers want. If they want to pay with PayPal (and they still do), then you give them what they want or risk losing business. That's where being aligned with eBay, and working with people who don't have merchant accounts (the really long tail), is important to PayPal and where they'll never lose to any other company.
And now PayPal is looking to a completely different market that is much larger than any of the small online sites where a developer runs payments: offline. Only 10 percent of retail is online. The rest is all done in "old fashioned" brick-and-mortar. (The world's largest online retailer, Amazon, if ranked with other international retailers by revenue, isn't in the top 25.) That's why PayPal's offline strategy is now more important to them than peeved developers at smaller sites. ("Small" is not meant in a pejorative sense, nor am I belittling the frustration caused by PayPal's APIs.) Their partnership with Discover means PayPal's 50 million U.S. account holders can use their accounts at 3,000 retailers nationwide, most of which would bring more to PayPal than a dozen of the small websites. Plus, the Discover deal means PayPal is turned on "instantly" at the POS without a retailer even needing to deal with any development.
In other words, the developers who are complaining (probably justifiably) and sending this article around may not be PayPal's business any more. That doesn't mean PayPal is screwed; they're just not the "old" PayPal.
1 year, 6 months ago on It’s Starting to Dawn on PayPal: We Might Really Be in Trouble