quote:
---------------------------------------------
Thank you for your interest in X.com Online Banking. At this time, X.com Online Banking is not accepting new accounts. Please consider X.com's PayPal service for your online payment needs (PayPal is not an FDIC-insured service).
---------------------------------------------
posted on October 8, 2000 08:55:44 PM
If I were to guess I'd guess they didn't pass regulatory muster to buy Great Western Bank and besides, the unregulated PayPal model is more fun because you can make it up as you go along!
posted on October 8, 2000 09:00:06 PM
Clearly it's because Paypal/X.com are just soooooo popular they can't handle the influx of new account applications and had to draw the line somewhere
posted on October 8, 2000 09:08:13 PM
I was wondering when/if they'd add that information to their website.
When this whole "verification" thing came up several weeks ago, I tried to open an x.com account. I couldn't find the page, called their service # and was told then that they weren't taking new accounts.
posted on October 9, 2000 02:55:58 AM
When I found out recently that X.com's CEO Elon Musk is only 28 years old, and that his work/business experience consists of starting an Internet company and selling it, I *understood* for the first time WHY PayPal has made all of the incredibly unwise (perhaps STUPID is a better word) customer-relations BLUNDERS they have in the last few months.
I don't mean to criticize "youth" in general, but I have a 20-year-old son, a college sophomore getting A's in physics and advanced mathematics, who TRULY hasn't the sense to come in out of the rain. TRULY. I can't believe the amount of "hand-holding" I still have to do. You can encourage independence, but you can't push the baby bird out of the nest UNTIL IT CAN FLY.
My 31-year-old nephew isn't much better, despite having 11 years more business and "life" experience than my son.
Elon Musk may be a computer whiz kid CEO with $305 million in the bank, but HE'S STILL A KID. I think that's a major reason for PayPal's recent display of indecision, waffling on issues, conflicting statements to users, inability to comprehend the magnitude and *repercussions* of their actions, and inexcusably arrogant customer relations.
I don't remember to what extent I was naive, inexperienced, unpolished and "lacking in savvy" at that age, but I DO know that I didn't have THE WISDOM to run a mega-corporation (even one that I had founded), and that I would have REALIZED when I was in over my head and gotten help.
So is that why Musk called in Bill Harris to run the company last December? WHY ON EARTH didn't Musk look for a "superstar CEO", as he now calls it, LAST MAY when Harris quit, instead of starting his search just two weeks ago? Why did the investors LET him try to run the company when it became clear that he was out of his league???
Think of all the mistakes PayPal has made in the last few months that would NEVER have been made had Musk had the SENSE to know he was drowning, and put out an SOS to be rescued.
It's time for me to close my X.com account and take my deposit somewhere else. It may be a pittance to a multi-multi millionaire, but it's a great deal of money to me....and I don't TRUST THEM to keep their hands off it anymore.
[ edited by granee on Oct 10, 2000 06:34 AM ]
posted on October 9, 2000 04:47:19 AMWHY ON EARTH didn't Musk look for a "superstar CEO", as he now calls it, LAST MAY when Harris quit, instead of starting his search just two weeks ago?
Given the company's "indecision, waffling on issues, conflicting statements to users, inability to comprehend the magnitude and *repercussions* of their actions, and inexcusably arrogant customer relations" (well said, BTW), I don't think we should be surprised. They've run it carelessly from the get-go, and I think honestly have NO CLUE that they've done anything wrong. Seriously, I suspect if we personally asked Musk about the whole thing, he'd give the standard post-adolescent po-faced reply: "What."
posted on October 9, 2000 08:45:47 AM
Wasn't it just after May that PayPal started making all those bad decisions?
I'll have to admit, the company comes off as being run by college frat boys. Lots of energy but hormonally unable to listen to anyone.
There are lots of financial schemes out there that would attract lots of customers, unfortunately, unless soundly planned out, after a bit they will attract lots of theives looking to use it. What came off as lucrative and simple at first seems to have bitten X.com and PayPal in the *ss when the predictable happened after a few months and probably fraud and theft just soared.
If nothing else, even if PayPal folds, it did push the other more stable well thought out systems to reduce their fees.
posted on October 9, 2000 08:59:28 AM
My experience with kids of that generation is that if they hear something they don't like they turn up the volume and ignore you. What is even scarier is if they THINK something they don't like they turn it up until cognitive activity is impossible.
posted on October 9, 2000 09:18:48 AM
You know what's really terrifying Macandjan?
When you eventually move off to the old folks home, that's who will be taking care of you! Personally, I believe in turning up the volume of what you don't like so everyone can hear it and see it and will pay attention to it and keep an eye on it
posted on October 9, 2000 09:32:49 AM
Quote
"So here comes Joe Six-Pack onto AOL. What does he know about netliness? Nothing. Zilch. He has no cultural context whatsoever. But soon, very soon, what he hears is something he never heard in TV Land: people cracking up.
"That ain't no laugh track neither," Joe is thinking and goes looking for the source of this strange, new, rather seductive sound.
So here's a little story problem for ya, class. If the Internet has 50 million people on it, and they're not all as dumb as they look, but the corporations trying to make a fast buck off their asses are as dumb as they look, how long before Joe is laughing as hard as everyone else?"
End quote
A quote from the introduction to the Cluetrain Manifesto which I really wish PayPal had taken the time to read. http://www.cluetrain.com/index.html
posted on October 9, 2000 10:04:05 AM
Shows what happens when you lose money on each transaction but try to make up for it in volume...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All rights reserved. All wrongs reversed.
[ edited by amalgamated2000 on Oct 9, 2000 10:04 AM ]
posted on October 9, 2000 10:21:50 AMamalgamated2000, do you mean to imply that loosing money on each transaction but making it up in volume is the wrong way to run a business? I sure wish someone had told me this sooner.
Just as an FYI, I have read the book called , "THE CLUETRAIN MANIFESTO" and it is one of the reasons I asked to be a part of this.
As an employee I will state policy that is not popular with some folks. However, these items are heard and distributed to many within the organization.
posted on October 9, 2000 11:25:17 AM
I can imagine a scene of investors Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Nokia, Qualcomm, DeutcheBanc, et. al. looking over a report from X.com/PayPal.
It says
"We estimate we will handle 1.6 billion in transactions by the end of the year.
We now have 4 million individual users and have 80% of our market.
We expect to start making money at the end of 2002 or beginning of 2003."
They call up Elon and say...
"Uh... Elon, we were looking over your report and it looks like you are doing a great lot of business over there. We gave you $140 million dollars and so we were just wondering... if you have 4 million customers and you are going to handle 1.6 billion in transactions, why is it going to take 2 more years to turn a profit?"
And Elon says...
"Oh, well thanks for the great support you have given me. I want to thank you for the $140 million dollars and I'll let you know of we need some more before we start making money."
And they say...
"Well Elon, see, we kinda expected that if you would be making money already if you had 4 million customers and 1.6 billion in transaction volume. That's really a great lot of business, why aren't you making any money yet?"
Elon:
"Well, you see, we are just interested in increasing our volume. We'll make PLENTY of money just as soon as we get our volume up. Do you have any idea how much this industry is going to grow?"
Investors:
"Elon, how much money do you make on each transaction?"
Elon:
"Oh, we don't make money on transactions yet. We need to get our volume up first. Hey, you wanna come take a ride in my car?"
Investors:
"Elon, where exactly did you learn to run a company?"
Elon:
"Oh, I ran one before this, you guys know that. Zip2! Look, Zip2 didn't make any money either, but we sold it for $300 million in cash! That's a record you know! Don't worry, we don't need to make money, we just need to say we are GOING to make money."
Investors:
"Elon, tell you what. We have a car to, and we want to take you for a little ride, OK?"
The above fiction was written for entertainment purposes only and is only based on facts in this article and another that I can't find right now clarifying that the profitablitly prediction is set at the END of 2002
posted on October 10, 2000 06:29:51 AM"Shows what happens when you lose money on each transaction but try to make up for it in volume..."
Sounds like Amazon.com.
"...after a bit they will attract lots of thieves looking to use it. What came off as lucrative and simple at first seems to have bitten X.com and PayPal in the *ss when the predictable happened after a few months and probably fraud and theft just soared."
Damon, can you comment? Is fraud out of control? Is THAT why all these people are having their accounts frozen unnecessarily?
"Don't worry, we don't need to make money, we just need to say we are GOING to make money."
posted on October 10, 2000 07:36:35 AMAnd X.com is gearing up for their IPO???????
Oh, to be a fly on the wall (or a paralegal) when they do the due diligence on this deal....
As an employee I will state policy that is not popular with some folks. However, these items are heard and distributed to many within the organization.
Can somebody translate this into plain English for me? I understand that the trick to learning Japanese is that the hearer needs to pay as much attention to what is UNsaid as to what is stated. I'm wondering whether Paypaldamonese involves a similar form of semantic construction.
That was an odd statement and caught my attention as well. I'll tell you how I took it, which likely has nothing to do with what Damon meant...
As an employee I will state policy that is not popular with some folks
This means 'you might not like what I have to tell you, but I'm just telling you how it is. I work for PayPal and can only state policy. (and I think it means he might not necessarily agree with it either) In other words, please don't shoot the messenger.
then the other (stranger) part...
However, these items are heard and distributed to many within the organization.
I think he's saying that it is worthwhile to b*tch and moan because our itemized b*tching and moaning is heard within the company. In other words, they pay attention to us... sometimes.
posted on October 10, 2000 08:32:30 AM
Now who's wearing his "optimism hat"?
I read "these items" as referring to the essays in "Cluetrain", and the "many within the organiztion" means "my coworkers." My reading would thus translate PPD's statement into "I'm just reciting the party line, but it kills me to do it, and my coworkers and I realize it's both BS and shortsighted on Paypal's part; we spend a lot of time emailing each other complaining and sharing "subversive" messages like the essays in 'Cluetrain'."
I guess we'll never know whose translation is right.
