On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 11:47:01PM -0600, POWERHOUSE wrote:
> I'm also an ECHO Agent, and I'll tell you this, I have never heard of any
> actual problems with things like that.
> It's kind of like a disclaimer. It just protects them. They more than likely
> will not be out seeking to harm you,
> by searching for those types of things.

Indeed, that's sort of a restatement of what I said- there are things
in the contract that simply don't apply (and in fact you have to violate
in order to use their service).  Indeed it's common practice
these days to have contracts like that, and sometimes those clauses
are just used as an "ah ha, I got you!" facility if they decide they
don't like you for some reason.  More often it's not even that
insidious, it's just cookbook contracts to cover everything.

Knowing that doesn't make it easier, though.  Some things that do
help are reports from people who have entered into these agreements
and have smooth sailing.  Even more helpful would be reports from
people who have had some disagreements along the way and have not
had punitive enforcement of these things pulled on them.  I've certainly
heard some horror stories about dealings with other credit card
processors pulling some nasty surprises on a whim.

> 
> Plus, I'll state this, that you by law, have the right to make any changes
> to a contract that YOU see fit.
> If they then accept that contract, they are bound by it. If you do make
> changes they of course have
> the right to deny your application. But like I said, if they do approve it,
> with your changes, then they
> are bound by the changes you made. Just like your bound by the terms of the
> contract, so are they.

But of course.  Both parties are free to agree on what they sign.
However as I said they would not entertain any changes, they merely
sloughed off my comments on non-applicable clauses (and clauses I
would have to violate in order to do business with them) with some
assurances that they only applied whatever paragraphs they thought
were relevant.  This may be true, and I've heard from others who have
good experiences with ECHO.  It's definitely a tough choice though, if
you care about what you sign.



> In my mind, the very best part of ECHO is the FREE Chargeback's you get EACH
> MONTH, and
> the waiver of the "statement fee's, aka Support Fee's", if you don't have
> any processing in any
> given month. Those two alone will beat just about EVERY other merchant
> account provider
> out there, as far as expense goes. When doing business online, EVERY company
> is faced
> with Chargeback's at one time or another. The first 5 being free, is
> OUTSTANDING, and
> then only five bucks each thereafter, is also AWESOME.
> 
> Anyways, that is just my 2 cents.
> Richard.
> 
> PS. The Caps are not meant to be "yelling", I personally use them to stress
> the most important
> parts of my comments. Kind of like Sense, Stress and Modulation. :o) Sorry
> if it offends you ;o)

I should be offended?  I'm happy to hear whatever there is to hear.

Thanks,
-mm-


> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark E. Mallett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Brian Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 11:09 PM
> Subject: Re: query..
> 
> 
> > On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 12:32:51PM -0500, Brian Curtis wrote:
> > > Keep in mind the below info is for "ECHO Agents" and are at cost...
> > > Since this is not the BizOps list, and I'm not looking to obtain new
> > > customers with this info, I don't see the harm in posting this info.
> > >
> > > We use ECHO to provide our clients w/ merchant accounts.  We've had
> > > very good results, and we like how we're treated by the people in the
> > > company itself.
> >
> > I looked into echo last year some time-- and ran right into their
> > contract, which is very anti-ISP (not to mention contradictory).
> > You'd end up violating clauses with pretty much anything you did.
> > When I tried to discuss this with them, they agreed with me about
> > the violations- however, they claimed, I could just ignore those
> > things.  Yet they still wanted me to sign them without modification.
> >
> > Curious to know how you dealt with that.  Their batch processing
> > setup did look rather nice.
> >
> > mm
> >
> >

-- 
Mark E. Mallett                  |    http://www.mv.com/users/mem/
MV Communications, Inc.          |    http://www.mv.com/
NH Internet Access since 1991    |    (603) 629-0000 / FAX: 629-0049

Reply via email to