Ideas

This is a profitable idea but I think it needs to be fixed accurately. In my country this platform would be really a good business, for example. I was thinking about something like this idea. We need a payment system where people feels safe and doesn't need to give their credit number or sensitive information about their accounts. Majority of e-commerce sites fail because consumers do not trust on them because of this.

It would make sense for CH to develop their own payment system that could be used for all of these projects. A sophisticated system like mentioned in your Web Payment Clearing house would excel even if the larger percent of these apps failed because every transaction would generate income. Third party web application producers could also take advantage of your proposed system.

Holy crap, AndyDoan, that is genius. If CH did this up front, along with other various 'platform' applications, they could help ensure their own profits, as well as help their next-level apps grow.

I couldn't figure out the difference between this and PayPal, till Harkins pointed out that with PayPal, you get redirected to the PayPal site.

This method would allow you to keep all the code locally, which maintains the integrity of the user experience.

Two possible hiccups: customers will still need an SSL certificate, and you'll have to ensure they get the message when it comes to not storing credit card information on their own database.

I've given this thumbs up.

you know I like it. It is a good idea:) But i will keep trying to come up with better none the less:)

Isnt this what Google's payment system does? (free too?)
gbuy.google.com

Saguy: Google Checkout is does offer the Google Checkout API, but you know what it doesn't take? PayPal.

The Web Payment Clearinghouse integrates with *everything*. Any online payment method, historical or emerging. The point is that once you use the Web Payment Clearinghouse, you're done. No more worrying about new payment methods. However you want to let your customer pay, you can.

If what you are describing is a system WPC is the ultimate payment middle man, allowing websites to contract with you for all payments, then I think we have a winner.

It looks like the Google option is a consumer focused option where I enter my CCARD info and then when I want to pay I use Google to give that info to the vendor. I didn't sign up so can't verify 100%.

Ultimately, WPC should have both the vendor side where they are running the cards for the websites, and the consumer side where they hold consumer CCARD info. Imagine how simple that would be for everybody involved. The website of the vendor wouldn't ever even have to see the CCARD info...

Ok, two things;

first, you'd have like enormous competition. The biggest perhaps, banking and major software companies like Google. That might not help

second, is this in any way like the Dutch IDEAL works? I'm not really sure how it works, but it is used by different banks, so when you pay using IDEAL you get referred to your trusted bank environment to pay using your online banking tools your bank provides. If it is, then it might be done, second, I like IDEAL and it will work, but it is not really taking of yet.

So, my gut feeling tells me CH can't make this work. So I'm voting it down. If you can explain better why your system would make paying micro, would be cheap for the users and easy to build, I might reconsider it.

Good idea, definatly worth a crack.

I'm still weighing this idea and I keep going back and forth on whether it's a good idea or not.

1. Competition will be a problem. What makes us more credible than paypal or google?
2. There's a reason that PayPal isn't in every country, I think there are legal and logistical problems with banks and countries that they're not in. Otherwise, I'm sure they'd have gone to those countries. It's not like PayPal hasn't wanted to expand to those countries.
3. How does this allow micropayments when you still have to pay Visa the transaction charge and the percentage of the purchase(and our charge and percentage would be more than PayPal and Google I can guarantee that).
4. Honestly can we keep it any simpler than Verisign has done? In my experience Verisign has all the functions of this(just a higher price)
5. I don't think that a user would still have to configure an SSL certificate. One app I've been working on uses some sort of tunneling and XML and with the tunneling they can avoid a certificate on the web server. Even if they did need it, most hosted apps support SSL pretty easily now.

All of this said, collection of payments will be absolutely essential for other Cambrian House projects. It would be nice to keep as much of the money in Cambrian House hands as possible.

to be a clearinghouse you need to have much more than a brigade of coders. I will support any great applications on top of existant banking solutions, but i have difficulties supporting solutions parallel to paypal and google chechout on account of reality :)

And it's being done. Neteller and Firepay are two ewallets that manage funds for merchants.

Their focus is on online gaming right now but I'm sure both companies have a eye to expanding into other markets.

I wouldn't count out the credit card providers either, they are accutely aware that the more complex their processing requirements are the less business they do.

Also think about what this endeavour would be: a bank. That means laws have to be complied and accreditations obtained accross different regions (EU/ North America/ Asia).

I don't think this is a fit for crowd-sourcing. More of a bricks-and-mortar problem IHMO.