well, the thing is that with the current state of affairs, it's a non-sustainable model, bar none. What people is missing here is that Epass had an almost monopolistic situation with quite high fees and an industry boom.
Now, let's think for a minute.
Business has changed. If affiliates as a whole had 40% of the pie, now they have 20% at best. Granted that there are affiliates who are program owners at the same time, but for ease of conclusions, let's consider them as affiliates only.
On the other hand many webmasters have left business, so no only less money, but also a narrower market.
Let's say Epass had 100,000 users. I doubt they were that much, but it is possible. That number could net them around 5M dollars a year once VISA and SKNANB fees were deducted. The strange thing is SKNANB declared only a little over $100,000 coming from financial processing services for 3rd parties (such as Epass), but since they are money launderers, who knows wtf is the real number, so let's stick with that net 5M.
Now, let's say 20% of adult webmasters left business. We're at 80,000 accounts now.
People burnt by Epass who will never touch a solution like that (people from US, people who will use checks and/or wires): around 25% (being optimistic, it could be 50% or even more). We're at 60,000 accounts. However, that 25% could easily be the biggest amount in money. But let's make it all the same to keep it simple.
People that will stick to Paypal: 20% and we're at 48000 accounts.
Now, those 48000 accounts aren't bad biz at all, still enough to net a nice 2/3M a year.
But the thing is that, unlike the previous situation, there are more actors now. So let's consider Payoneer and Paxum will take an equal lion's share of 30% leaving OKPay, Cash-X and a 3rd option of all the remaining companies with 10%
So Payoneer and Paxum could net between 600 and 900k a year (that would require anywhere between 10,000 and 15,000 users). Not bad. everybody else would be at 200/300k per year.
But here's the thing: when I say NET I mean after processing fees by banks, ATM and MC. I'm not considering taxes, fixed costs, marketing, servers, SSL, employees, offices and so on.
If we had to believe Paxum and its 35 employees, let's say they earn on average a quite modest sum of $2000 a month. That makes 70k a month, 840,000 a year. The most optimistic figures would barely cover the employees costs and nothing else.
Of course I don't believe for a second they have 35 employees, not inside their UPS box, not anywhere in the world. I'd be very worried if that was true, it would be like them screaming really hard "we'll disappear in a couple months!".
You may ask "so what's in it for them to try to work on this?" and the answer is simple: it's all about the wallet, baby. If you check Paxum's page, you'll see this:
Quote:
|
By opening an account with Paxum, you automatically create yourself a current account in our e-wallet system.
|
I explained in another thread what the e-wallet feature really means, but if in doubt, check what happened with Epassporte's wallet funds. I'm not saying any of these new companies will do the same, but nobody can deny it SEEMS like they're having an escape plan just in case.
You may say: "well, what about no wallet"? And the answer is even more simple: without the e-wallet feature, these companies couldn't last more than a few months. As easy as that. Epassporte with its market domination AND MILLIONS IN E-WALLET lasted several years. For companies that at best will take 10-12% of Epassporte's share, the e-wallet isn't a feature: it's a necessity. So if Epass lasted 7/8 years with everything on their side, these companies will last no more than 1/2 years at best. Simple financial maths.
There's a last scenario where all these companies try to cape the storm as "basement operations" until the dust settles and other competitors get out of the race. That could work. As a matter of fact, it's the only way I could see it working, but... are you willing to trust your money to a "basement operation"? They have very low costs, but at the same time they face more troubles with less infrastructure and they have no backup plan.
Paragraph apart for Payoneer: they were in the market before the others, they have a broader market and allegedly they belong to CIA and Mossad. They also are financially way smarter than everybody else (surprise surprise). I doubt they will run away, but if they do, good luck asking for your money to CIA and Mossad
All the above being said, I'll use 2 or 3 of these solutions. Will never leave more than a few dollars if anything, but I understand the need for this kind of solutions for my clients, so investing a few bucks on some risky business won't make much harm, IMHO.
In short: do whatever you want, you all are grown ups. Just be careful and never relax on your security measures or you'll end fucked. AGAIN.