ARC - PayPal and Credit Cards

The other way to do it would be to loose the charge in the retail prices but allow a £1 discount for non CC purchases. All the MEs would be knocking down your door as they like a bargain

J

LOL....now thats an interesting idea.

Introduction to Bitcoin.

Martin.

I believe this is true for Arc Euro, but https: URL does not guarantee that your details will be secure for other sites.

If you see https in the browser address bar then this suggests that the information was sent securely from the site (e.g. ArcEuro) to your browser.

However, the more important part is that your details are sent securely to the Site from your browser. The URL that controls that is usually 'hidden'. It can be checked (view page source, search for 'action=' and check that the stuff after it starts with 'https:" rather than "http:" but needs basic understanding.

e.g. this is the important part when submitting your username and password to Arc Euro:

<form name="aspnetForm" method="post" action="https://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/retail/registration/login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fretail%2fcheckout%2fdefault.aspx" onkeypress="javascript:return WebForm_FireDefaultButton(event, 'ctl00_PrimaryContentPlaceHolder_Login'" id="aspnetForm">

I check every now and then on new sites I buy from. I prefer paypal or googlepay. I also hope my card issuer will help if my card details are used fraudulently. So I don't mean to scaremonger... I just don't want people to think https in the url means the 'site' is safe.

I am completely happy to pay by debit card for Arc Euro purchases.

Hi Jack,

I think I generally understand what you are saying, but I don't speak html. I think what you are saying is that our site is secure, and I am happy with that.

As far as my understanding is concerned - simple language: the https: generally makes our site secure. Which is how and why we can put up the SSL Secured logo which you see on the top right hand side of our website. In our case, as far as I understand it, the 'channel/process' to log-in and registration is secure under https. If the URL was not https, then it would be classed as an open channel which can be intercepted by hackers.

Additional Security features on our website: the https also applies for all customers account details, including contact details, previous order history, and even the wish list.

The only public areas are the product pages and the shopping basket - which is to be expected on most websites, but once the Checkout button is clicked, the customers details are automatically protected under https, and all of the check-out process is secure.

When you click on 'Pay by Credit Card' button, once again, you are taken to our secure payment gateway provider 'Sage Pay', which again is a secure platform.

At the end of the day, we are always working towards improving security for both the customers and our benefit. So far, we are happy with the security we provide.

Thanks, Ketan at ARC.

Edit: because I forgot to put in the smiles...as meant to be a positive response to a positive comment

Edited By Ketan Swali on 08/08/2014 16:16:03

By the way, thank you all for your questions and kind comments on this thread.

Ketan at ARC.

That is a very interesting thought. Too soon for the masses though. It is however, inevitable.

graham.

I must admit I'm very sceptical of Bitcoin.

If the bitcoin goes bad, do you have £85K (or whatever it is) guaranteed by the UK government?

What happens when the value of bitcoins crashes...

What about the involvement of organised crime, tax evaders etc.?

And if it all goes wrong and you do get defrauded or worse, who do you go to for redress? the Miners?

Neil

When, not if, Bitcoin goes bad you lose everything.
For example in February this year, Mt Gox, which was the largest Bitcoin exchange handling around 70% of all Bitcoin transactions, suspended trading and filed for bankruptcy. Somehow they had 'mislaid' 850,000 of their customers Bitcoins worth around $450 million at the time. The reason for the disappearance of these Bitcoins has not yet been explained, possibly either fraud, theft, mismanagement or a combination of all three.

Clive

Edited By clivel on 08/08/2014 19:28:15

It's not Bitcoin that we need to worry about. Just have a look at these links to see what's happening to our money.

Bail-in Powers and National Debt Clock

The upper-left cell in the debt clock link (US NATIONAL DEBT), started the year at just under $17,000,000,000,000 if I remember correctly. Looking at the current figure, it seems to be rising at ~ $1,000,000,000,000. per year. The UK is in the same boat I'm afraid. It's just a matter of time before things go pop.

Bitcoins have only ever gone missing when the passwords have been handed over to others (Mt.Gox etc), or insufficient attention has been paid to the security of the passwords.

Martin.

Thanks for the clear explanation Ketan

Bitcoin

Can I use it for.my weekly shop at Tesco, or to buy a beer in the local or to put petrol in the car or to take out a sub to model engineer. In fact what CAN I use it for? .. And where do I get them?

N

Edited By NJH on 08/08/2014 20:56:08

.

Norman,

Apparently you could use it here ... see the second logo, from the left, at the bottom of the page.

MichaelG.

I think you probably meant that humorously, Jason but in the early days of credit cards here in Canada, it was against the merchant agreement with the bank to apply a surcharge to use the card. (I guess the banks felt it would reduce the cards' acceptance with the public.) A number of merchants did just as you suggest, offering a discount for cash and apparently that was a sufficient loophole in their agreements because they got away with it.

I suspect the same ban on credit-card surcharges still applies here since I can't recall ever seeing any stated directly. Some merchants have a slightly different (and perhaps more blatant) scheme now. They state that the prices quoted are already discounted for cash. Credit-card purchases are then subject to the full retail price which is 3% more. This tends to be small companies working to very narrow margins such as computer parts suppliers.

As far as the additional fee described in this thread for CC users but not others, I don't see the logic myself. I know it sounds all nice and "socialist" to charge the actual users for the overhead costs that they cause, while not charging those that don't cause them but logically that should lead to the same attitude with other overhead costs.

For example, I'm sure spending hours on the phone talking to customers who demand a lot of attention (everyone has them) costs quite a bit. Should those who never trouble the retailer pay for that? Should everyone pay for the fact that some people will return product for the most trivial of reasons while others don't? There are probably many other things.

The point is, all these, including the merchant's CC fees, are overhead costs which one expects will be burdened on the whole customer base when setting the selling price of the goods. It doesn't seem fair to single out one item and one group of users.

My own view is that if I was faced with CC surcharges it would be a discouragement .... particularly if Paypal was also limited and I was purchasing overseas (where I have no other sensible options).

This is very true in most cases where sending or receiving payment from outside the UK, Paypal fees are very much less than bank charges.

Emgee

I think so. But my information cannot always be trusted e.g it isn't googleplay, it was google checkout which stopped at end of last year.

Hi Emgee,

I agree with both of you, that PayPal offers an easy option to pay for overseas customers. I also agree that there is an issue of bank charges relating to bank transfers, which can be high. Bank transfers should not be confused with overseas debit/credit card payments.

On the flip side, when referring to fees relating to debit/credit card v.s. PayPal, generally, it is costing us about 1% more than dc/cc to receive PayPal payments from overseas customers. Obviously, this is not the buyers problem. As a buyer, I too use PayPal to pay an overseas seller who offers the service.

With PayPal, for us as a recever of funds, it is more an issue of security, and the revocable nature of the funds being tendered, without guarantees. Depending on country of dispatch of PayPal funds, and nature of the buyers relationship with PayPal, the PayPal guarantee is variable or non-existent, but in ALL cases loaded in the buyers favour in the first instance, until challenged. The recovery process for the seller is well drawn out.

Recently, I saw an advert where PayPal is promoting services to larger import/export businesses. Having studied International Commercial Law and Finance back in the day, I sometimes wonder if they or any of their up and coming new business customers have any clue about INCOTERMS or ICC Rules relating to International Trade, to which all banks abide. Yes, I agree that bank charges are high, but considering the revocable nature of funds on offer through PayPal, I dont really think that PayPal really cares about rules or regulations which result in seller or buyer dissatisfaction. The business model works for them as they have a monopoly

Thinking about it, I don't really think that most of my U.K. competitors have a clue about INCOTERMS or ICC Rules, and they still run successful businesses

'Its all good while the sun is shining'...but when things go wrong with PayPal, it creates an irritation, which sometimes does not allow you to sleep through the night. Its not a question of monitory value, it is a point of personal principal, and every persons principals are different. Believe me, removing PayPal from our offering can have a sizable effect to our sales, but it is not always 'just about the money'. Only time will tell it I have to bury my principals.

Ketan at ARC.

Hi Bandersnatch,

There is no 'socialist' view in our decision making process. This is just a commercial decision with or without logic, depending on your point of view. The other examples of 'overheads' which you gave are not 'constant/continuous' daily every transaction event for us. In % terms, the situations of extra attention or returns are 'minor events' in conducting our business. Payments by credit cards in % terms are 'constant' direct major cost events effecting a good % of transactions, which, if not controlled or balanced in some way, has a direct effect on profitability of our business. I hope you understand my explanation, even if you do not agree with it.

Yes, we are a small business. If the surcharge on cc has detrimental long term effect, we will have to make a commercial decision at that time, for how to address it: Bury it as an overhead and take the hit? May Be. Bury it as an overhead and increase prices as suggested? don't know if the market will accept it. Today, customers have more choice on Ebay, Alibaba and the like. Legal and Illegal operations are springing up every day on these platforms. For example: Many on this forum know of operations in Portsmouth operated by Chinese - illegally - in my opinion, with 20+ doddgy companies operating out of one unit with dummy names, which the U.K. Government working hand in hand with Ebay chooses to ignore, because the idea pleases the masses. Recently, Chinese students studying in the U.K. are even setting up ebay stores, getting products in from their parents/relations factories and selling products through ebay to finance their U.K. studies. If you know where to look, you can get these 'engineering products' at prices which are cheaper than the Chinese factory can export itself, let alone the cost at which an importer can buy!

HMRC/Government does not really give a s**t when it comes to the above situation, because it is a 'victimless crime' in their eyes..Where is the regulation when it comes to them?. If HMRC/Government chooses to, they CAN do something about it. But they wont until it is too late. I have spoken to senior officers in HMRC, and politicians, without success. In Canada - where you are from - a similar discussion was had about six years ago by a person I know, with a senior Canadian Government official. He was ignored. He closed his factory. Last year, the very same government official came begging to him to offer him incentives to re-open the factory...because the government could not afford to pay the unemployment bill in the area. Simply laughable..Can you guess what he told them?

My point is, if we have to bury certain costs in our product costs as overheads, we have to consider global competition too, and at the same time comply with U.K. regulations, to which MANY ebay or Alibaba sellers DONT. There is no finger pointing here. This is just an observation of the environment in which we have to stand and operate. We understand this, and there is nothing we can do about the competitive nature of the market. We just make commercial decisions which are subject to review at all times. No SOCIALIST agenda.

Ketan at ARC.

Sorry you took such offence at my use of the term socialist, Ketan .... perhaps it wasn't the best word. I did quote it to soften it and it was a small (not capital) "s". I just meant it in terms of a "sense of fair play to all" (misguided or otherwise )

>how to address it: Bury it as an overhead and take the hit? May Be. Bury it as an overheadand increase prices as suggested? don't know if the market will accept it.

Are you so sure that the market will accept CC surcharges more easily? It would be risky, I think, to rely on the encouragement of a few sycophants in this respect.

Ketan,

For what it's worth ... I think the small surcharge that you propose in your opening post is entirely reasonable: You have been open and honest in explaining the situation, and you offer a "no-cost" alternative.

I really don't think we could ask for more.

Just as a matter of interest [for the justifiably paranoid amongst us]: Do you also accept payment by Postal Order?

MichaelG.