Dwolla Raises $16.5M from Andreessen Horowitz

Post by jebeng » Wed, May 01, 2013, 4:35 AM UTC

wahsd wrote: post #50

marknutter wrote: post #37

So I tried Dwolla last week to pay somebody back for some concert tickets and it was not a good experience. I, naively I suppose, thought that maybe Dwolla had come up with some clever new workflow for on-boarding people you wanted to send money to. Alas, I got a few angry texts from the person complaining about having had to input their social security and bank account numbers and, after feeling uncomfortable about…

Come on. That may have been a bit of an uncomfortable situation, but it was primarily your fault. Just forcing some unknown service on someone you owe money to that they then have to provide all kinds of rather sensitive information to is not good etiquette. If someone owes you money and you offer that they transfer it using Dwolla, and tell them they'll have to sign up for an account and add their SSN of security, s…

Post by walkon » Wed, May 01, 2013, 6:54 AM UTC

thinkcomp wrote: post #39

jyu wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, good point, faulty assumption on my part. Here are some further details on their stance: Dwolla does not receive, hold, or transmit User funds; Dwolla only maintains and manages information associated with User ownership of the funds; (3) Veridian is the entity that provides money transmission services upon instructions issued through the Dwolla software platform; and (4) Funds in the Veridian Holding Account ar…

This is nonsense. Although I'm not a lawyer... Dwolla is a money transmitter according to most (if not all) state statutes. Its relationship with Veridian does not satisfy any statutory requirement necessary for exemption. Veridian itself does not have a charter, and is not a credit union. In my personal opinion, Dwolla has been breaking laws since day one and continues to. Its investors are no different.