I still remember the day when our client's digital download store started receiving complaints from customers in countries outside of the US. It turned out that we had implemented a payment system that required users to have a US-based bank account to receive payments. That was a fundamental flaw in the system, one that forced us to rethink our architecture and come up with a new solution.
The Problem We Were Actually Solving
When we initially designed the payment system, our main concern was to reduce the fees associated with transactions. We were working with a limited budget, and we knew that each transaction came with a charge. We chose a platform store that used Stripe for payment processing and Authorize.net for credit card processing. While Stripe and Authorize.net offered competitive rates, the fees were still significant. However, what's worse is that the platform store didn't support international payments without a US-based bank account.
What We Tried First (And Why It Failed)
Our initial approach to addressing this issue was to use Airtable to implement a workaround. We set up an Airtable database to handle international payments manually, which involved our team sending invoices to customers who didn't have US-based bank accounts. We thought this would be a temporary solution until we could implement a more robust system. However, this approach quickly became unsustainable. We spent an inordinate amount of time and resources sending invoices, chasing payments, and dealing with the associated banking fees.
The Architecture Decision
After learning from the Airtable fiasco, we decided to go with a payment gateway that supported international payments without the need for a US-based bank account. We chose PayPal, which offered a more comprehensive solution that included support for international payments in multiple currencies. We integrated PayPal with our platform store and also set up a system to handle payment notifications and reconciliations. This decision was not without its trade-offs, as PayPal fees were slightly higher than Stripe's fees. However, the convenience and flexibility it offered far outweighed the costs.
What The Numbers Said After
The numbers speak for themselves. After implementing PayPal, our international sales increased by 35%, and the number of customers who received payments successfully without any issues rose by 80%. The fees associated with international payments were higher, but the increased revenue more than made up for it. Additionally, we saw a significant reduction in the number of manual invoices sent, which saved us an average of 40 hours of labor each month.
What I Would Do Differently
In retrospect, I would have chosen PayPal from the get-go. While it's true that Stripe's fees are competitive, the hassle and additional costs associated with manual invoicing and banking fees far exceeded the costs of using PayPal. Additionally, I would have set up a more robust reconciliation and notification system to handle payment failures and disputes more efficiently. In the end, the right decision was not about finding the cheapest payment solution but about choosing the one that best served our customers and our business needs.
Top comments (0)