Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#311

Post by rchaud »

Arrath wrote: post #127
rchaud wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that sounds more like an ideologically-driven venture than something that would be good business.

Call it "providing financial services to a neglected/stigmatized sector of the entertainment industry and bringing the benefits of official banking and regulations", then. Yes my first comment was probably worded with an inflammatory bent, but this does genuinely seem like an underserved sector. Akin to the problems legal marijuana grows and dispensaries have with accessing banking services (though in that case due t…

I understand, but there's usually a good reason why the underserved sectors are the way they are. For the payments industry I would imagine this market is simply not large enough to allow for economies of scale, so the services can't be priced at a level where it can be sustainable.

It seems like an obvious area for crypto to stake a claim, but that doesn't appear to have happened.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#312

Post by jlengrand »

jpeter wrote: post #157
dweekly wrote: post #126

It sure sounds like this was forced on them by their payment processors, not that this was a voluntary move. https://twitter.com/danprimack/status/1428420774449266691?s=...

Why should payment processors force them to. They will make less money

Because it is a high risk area, just like gambling

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#314

Post by pvarangot »

guerrilla wrote: post #293
MomoXenosaga wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why America needs to work beyond it's fascination with creditcards. Your bank can't block shit and has to process whatever transaction you want short of the terrorist watchlist.

> Your bank can't block shit and has to process whatever transaction you want short of the terrorist watchlist. Is that true?

No. I'm in the US and my bank even blocked sign in bonuses "just to be sure everyone is ok with it because it's a lot of money". Using plain old inter banking transfers for something like OnlyFans subscriptions is suicide and the new APIs like Zelle or Venmo are subject to even more internal regulations than credit cards regarding percentage of fraud transactions/porn.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#315

Post by dhosek »

jpeter wrote: post #157
dweekly wrote: post #126

It sure sounds like this was forced on them by their payment processors, not that this was a voluntary move. https://twitter.com/danprimack/status/1428420774449266691?s=...

Why should payment processors force them to. They will make less money

Some years ago I interviewed with a company that served as a payment risk processor for high-risk businesses (in short, porn).

The chargeback rate on online porn is huge. As a result, where a traditional payment processor may be 1.3–3.5% depending on the business and the assessed risk, for a high-risk business, the rate can be much much higher. While Onlyfans keeps 20%, I'm guessing that they'd be badly hurt if they had to give half that to their payment processor. I'm sure they've looked at their numbers and they find the non-porn providers are more profitable to them, especially if it means they can lower their processing fees. Booting the porn providers will likely also make it easier to recruit more non-porn providers.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#316

Post by nix23 »

yibg wrote: post #254
jpeter wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should payment processors force them to. They will make less money

Adult content usually has a high charge back rate. “What? How did this get here? My card must’ve been stolen” when the spouse sees the statement.

IDEA: Master/Slave-Card, available in Black or Brown just chargeable with crypto or cash max amount 300$ no address needed, if lost, your problem.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#317

Post by dmitriid »

serverholic wrote: post #284
rejectedandsad wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that OF is not all in on crypto payments is a massive indictment of crypto as a payment mechanism.

Or that crypto is only 12 years old which is really fucking young for a currency.

Or that just the transfer fees would be more than most payments.

Or that no one would be able to properly use those payouts.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#319

Post by LegitShady »

Freak_NL wrote: post #252
LegitShady wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

pornhub is having this issue exactly. They got PNG'd by all the payment processors. They only have crypto payment options now. My bet is pornhub is doing a lot worse now than they were before. https://bravenewcoin.com/insights/pornhub-crypto-news

Their FAQ is still showing that they offer credit card payments via Probiller, but clicking onwards does indeed show them temporarily not accepting credit card payments, defaulting to a SEPA transfer instead.

i imagine their income from a few years ago is much larger than it is today.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#320

Post by xur17 »

cblconfederate wrote: post #213
nathias wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because the payment providers have 99% of market share?

and 99% of their revenue was from porn so i guess this business-ending decision is close to cryptopayment-parity

I imagine their options were:

* switch to crypto entirely

* keep credit cards, but block sexually explicit content

I doubt there was middleground where they could accept crypto for sexually explicit content, but still accept credit cards for everything else.

Which makes me think that a smart move here would be to spin off a second company that does allow this content, but only accepts payments in crypto. I suppose if they don't, there is a opportunity ripe for a competitor to take advantage of.

Post reply on HN