[Foundation-l] Alternative to paypal

Thu Aug 16 10:18:55 UTC 2007

Hi Gerard 

But do they delay in transferring the monies and if so for how many days?
If there is a delay then the service is not free as they gain interest on
the monies held; this is a classic way for financial collection systems to
make money.

Best

Debbie

  _____  

From: GerardM [mailto:gerard.meijssen at gmail.com] 
Sent: 16 August 2007 11:09
To: debbie at ictmarketing.co.uk; Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Alternative to paypal

Hoi,
Google wants to get into the action and consequently they need people to
adopt their service. It is an accepted practice to provide a service in a
start up period for free. This is what Google is doing.. They do have
sufficient money to start a service in this way :) 
Thanks,
     Gerard

On 8/16/07, Debbie Garside <debbie at ictmarketing.co.uk> wrote: 

Hi Gerard

I know nothing of Google collection systems.

How many days does it take to transfer the money from Google to WMF using 
this system?  If the system delays for even a day that means Google are
getting the interest on the monies held.  If it is direct transfer then
Google are making it just on the marketing side which is OK.

Nothing in this life comes for free ;-)

Best

Debbie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org 
> [mailto:foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of GerardM
> Sent: 16 August 2007 06:29
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List 
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Alternative to paypal
>
> Hoi,
> In 2007 using the financial collection system of Google is
> free. Period
>
> The money collected in this way in 2007 through Google will 
> not cost us money. Google has indicated in the past that they
> are happy to help the Wikimedia Foundation, this gives us the
> opportunity to ask for 2008 if they can do something about
> the cost of the money given to the WMF through Google 
> Checkout. It isa really good marketing tool for Google to get
> the attention of the general public for their payment system;
> the trick is to get people to use it in the first place.
> Thanks, 
>     Gerard
>
> On 8/16/07, Brad Patrick <bradp.wmf at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1 
> >
> > Well put, Delphine.
> >
> > Others will look at this again, but there are no zero-cost
> financial
> > collection systems.  Moving money costs money.  Period.
> >
> > Other charitable organizations around the world are in awe
> of what WMF
> > has achieved.  We are leaders in the field.  Can it be
> better?  Sure.
> > Is there are way to build a consortium of non-profit philanthropic 
> > organizations to get this lowest-cost financial system built?  I'd
> > love to see it.
> >
> > But it will take that level of novelty to make a serious
> dent in costs.
> >
> > Delphine Ménard wrote:
> > > On 8/13/07, Lars Aronsson <lars at aronsson.se> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I agree we should keep our eyes open for alternatives, 
> but the need
> > >> doesn't seem to be urgent.
> > >
> > > I believe that there are way too many things to be taken into
> > > account to actually solve this issue (if issue it is) on 
> a mailing list.
> > >
> > > Let me try and state what the Foundation would need to
> answer before
> > > finding the "perfect" fundraising tool.
> > > 
> > > First, keep in mind that, unless I am mistaken, the Wikimedia
> > > Foundation is about the only organisation in the world
> achieving the
> > > success it achieves with online fundraising (ie. not 
> sending emails
> > > or paper, but by just displaying a site notic on its websites),
> > > which in itself, whether or not paypal is the best way of
> doing it,
> > > is quite an achievement. 
> > >
> > > Now, the things to be taken into consideration to find the best
> > > fundraising tool are:
> > >
> > > 1) who gives and how do they give?
> > > ie. are donors in the biggest donor pool comfortable giving with 
> > > this or that way of giving? In that case, seeing that the
> Foundation
> > > is primarily addressing US donors since it is a
> registered charity
> > > in the US, is Paypal the best recognized system, or would another 
> > > bring us more donors?
> > >
> > > 2) Financial efficiency of the fundraising tool
> Considering tool X
> > > is the right tool for our donors, do we get our money's 
> worth thanks
> > > to this tool (ie. the fact that more people give is not offset by
> > > the fact taht we pay xxx fees on using that fundraising tool).
> > >
> > > 3) International efficiency of that fundraising tool 
> Considering the
> > > Wikimedia Foundation is a US based organisation, but has
> a vocation
> > > to fundraise across the world, is tool X the right tool
> to make sure
> > > that donors across the world will give? 
> > > ie. Canadians/Japanese probably being the next potential
> source of
> > > donations, do Canadians/Japanese trust/use tool X easily
> to donate?
> > >
> > > These are three questions that would help us choose the "better" 
> > > fundraising tool.
> > >
> > > This said, the most important question to answer, in my opinion,
> > > would
> > be:
> > >
> > > "Why do people give? (or not give, actually)" 
> > > - Because it's easy to give (as in practical)
> > > - Because it's in their language
> > > - Because it's in their currency
> > > - Because it's tax-deductible (in their country) 
> > > - Because they love us
> > > - Because they trust the organisation(s)
> > > - Because they wanted to give to something somewhere and
> that's the
> > > first thing that came to mind 
> > > - Because their donation does make a difference
> > > - etc.
> > > - Some of those reasons combined
> > > - All of those reasons
> > >
> > > Answering all of those questions, would probably prevent debating 
> > > whether Paypal or Amazon or Moneybookers is the "best"
> API, because
> > > it would become evident what is the best solution.
> Keeping in mind
> > > that "the best" does not mean "the best for each and 
> everyone of us"
> > > but the best in an average kind of way. Nobody's ever going to be
> > > 100% happy about what tool we use anyway ;-)
> > >
> > >
> > > Delphine 
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> >
> > iD8DBQFGw8A95txwQhyxnbIRAuSoAJ0a8VtH87C9+Y10C9yK1yHzbB6Y3gCeP/EH
> > Hw7VMbsXqOca/j2ftGceB7I=
> > =9W58
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> > _______________________________________________ 
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
<http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l> 
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org  <mailto:foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org> 
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l