81–90 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More likely "we managed to get a deal in place with our payment processor". The only reason why they were going to do this was their payment processor saying they would stop processing their payments.
mastercard denied saying this. what a clusterfu*k.
Isn't "OnlyFans without sexual content" basically Patreon?
Another parallel could be comparing HomeDepot and HobbyLobby. Both stores sell you things for DIY stuff, but they target different kinds of DIYers (even if they could sell some of the same items).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh damn... I wasn't expecting this from them... > Adult Content and Services: Pornography and other obscene materials (including literature, imagery and other media); ...
Why would a service that desperately tries to get normalized shoot itself in the leg like that and allow something controversial?
aka "Our valuation is dropping like a rock"
More likely "we managed to get a deal in place with our payment processor". The only reason why they were going to do this was their payment processor saying they would stop processing their payments.
It should be noted that the cams see a lot lower chargebacks than subscriptions because of the shady tactics a lot of subscription adult sites use. Example would be not noticing a "$1 trial" addon being offered that recurs at like $44.95/month.
The rest of the chargebacks can be offset with 3DS/3DS 2 to shift the liability off the merchant (In this case OnlyFans) and onto the issuing bank.
I can answer any questions within reason if someone wanted to know anything more.
Source: Worked/wrote code for a high risk payment processor with volume +$1B/Yr.
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are solely my own and only my own.
When are we going to see a Medium or Substack for pornographic content? Even better an opensource LAMP or MEAN stack to host your own adult entertainment site?
The fact that they're able to now reverse the announcement makes me wonder what changed. Did they find a new banking or payout partner? Existing ones had a change of heart? Feels like there would be more to it than these possibilities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wasn't MasterCard that was the problem rather their banking partners according to the FT.
oh, ok. i was actually looking now for the source, I remember I read that mastercard delined forcing them,but there was nothing mentioned on that article about who actually requested this. thanks for the information edit: converting the url posted below this into archive link, to skip paywall: https://archive.is/Aqx8x
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More likely "we managed to get a deal in place with our payment processor". The only reason why they were going to do this was their payment processor saying they would stop processing their payments.
AFAIK a relevant credit card company said "we haven't done anything"