[HN Gopher] Amazon-Stripe partnership
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Amazon-Stripe partnership
        
       Author : polyrand
       Score  : 230 points
       Date   : 2023-01-23 15:38 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (stripe.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (stripe.com)
        
       | l8again wrote:
       | Amazon has its own Uber, own fulfillment service down to
       | monitoring tools that are built in house. So, not sure if it's a
       | change in their "buy vs build" strategy or there's a more
       | business play here to gain traction in the global markets?
        
         | elforce002 wrote:
         | Uber? Which division is that? Are you referring to Amazon
         | fresh?
        
           | __derek__ wrote:
           | Amazon Flex. It's more like Uber Eats or DoorDash.
        
             | devmor wrote:
             | It's unrelated to either other than sharing the gig economy
             | model. It's just another part of their Fulfillment
             | Operations that relies on individuals with their own
             | vehicles instead of a fleet.
        
               | __derek__ wrote:
               | I think that was clear from the context of the thread,
               | where OP alluded to an in-house Uber, and I noted that
               | the model was more similar to the local delivery services
               | than to Uber per se.
               | 
               | Anyway: Amazon Flex drivers actually did handle delivery
               | for Amazon Restaurants, which was a direct competitor to
               | Uber Eats, DoorDash, GrubHub, Caviar, etc.
        
         | karmasimida wrote:
         | It is a deal to keep Stripe lock on AWS. Same with Slack, where
         | Amazon agrees to adopt Slack internally in exchange for Slack
         | to use AWS for video conferencing.
         | 
         | You got to give something in return. In this case I think both
         | parties have something that the other side wants so why not?
        
           | kotaKat wrote:
           | Hell, Amazon bought a fairly not insignificant stake in a
           | random no-name Korean handhelds company (Point Mobile). Their
           | devices have been rolling out in FCs to replace Zebra
           | handhelds left and right.
           | 
           | Though... that was also because their main handheld vendor
           | (Zebra) bought their own warehouse robotics company, so a bit
           | of a signal to Zebra that they don't play well when their
           | partners become competitors.
           | 
           | https://renovotec.com/press/amazon-2nd-largest-
           | shareholder-p...
           | https://www.communicationstoday.co.in/koreas-point-mobile-
           | ex...
        
         | pwarner wrote:
         | I suspect the economic environment may trigger reevaluations at
         | Amazon and many other companies. I am not sure this is a bad
         | thing? Fewer, but better choices may be OK?
        
       | numair wrote:
       | This seems like one of those "unlock greater efficiencies" type
       | deals where both parties earn an effective 0% margin on each
       | others' business. Both payment processing and cloud computing are
       | very low margin when you're handling business for a savvy
       | customer who knows how to reduce costs.
       | 
       | From a data perspective, it would seem that there would be some
       | major implications for this particular deal. If Stripe can gain a
       | window into the purchasing habits and volumes of Amazon's massive
       | customer base (not the actual items, but the size and frequency),
       | it seems like it'd be a major boost to the depth and breadth of
       | its machine learning models. For Amazon to give that sort of
       | capability to another company -- which seems to have begun a few
       | years back -- seems quite remarkable to me.
       | 
       | On this same line of thought, I would assume that Apple has been
       | working to bring more and more of its payment infrastructure in-
       | house, as it's a major area of data leakage (regardless of
       | whether the data is merely used to train fraud prevention models,
       | or to do something more "interesting"). Maybe someone with actual
       | knowledge on these matters will comment here...
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | aabhay wrote:
       | In enterprise, it's often the case that your biggest customer
       | effectively owns you. They get to dictate roadmaps, you're forced
       | to spin up a special team just for them, and it becomes harder to
       | justify your investment into long tail customers because this big
       | golden monkey is on your back.
        
         | snird wrote:
         | If managed well, you can ride this "golden monkey" to heaven.
         | So is the case of TSMC with Apple.
        
           | ketzo wrote:
           | To expand on this great example a little: TSMC is a really
           | smart case, because the chip business is all about
           | extraordinarily high up-front development costs and near-zero
           | marginal costs.
           | 
           | TSMC uses Apple as their first-and-best customer for their
           | bleeding edge chips, using fat stacks of iPhone cash to push
           | the limits of semiconductor technology.
           | 
           | Then they can keep selling chips built on that process for a
           | decade or more (to a _very_ long tail of other customers).
           | 
           | Nobody would say that TSMC isn't dependent on Apple! They're
           | certainly tied very tightly. But they've turned that
           | dependency into just the _top_ of a very profitable funnel.
        
           | ajb wrote:
           | TSMC has many customers. If they lost Apple (and I don't see
           | how) they could have to make some hard decisions but they
           | would still be the world's top fab.
        
             | ketzo wrote:
             | Yeah, but that's looking at them _today_ , as the
             | definitive #1 fab in the world.
             | 
             | The path they took to get here was all about doubling down
             | on Apple.
        
         | throwawaysleep wrote:
         | The long tail also requires support and that doesn't scale
         | well. At one of my jobs, the rule is basically that any company
         | under around 5K-10K ARR (it is arbitrary) doesn't get any real
         | support and just gets strung along until they quit, as giving
         | any developer time to their issues makes them unprofitable.
        
           | bilbo0s wrote:
           | There's just a lot of harsh facts about business out here in
           | the real world. One of those facts is that some customers are
           | just more trouble than they're worth. And "trouble" can be
           | cost, or PR blowback, or your largest investor just doesn't
           | trust the guy. Whatever it is, it's a reality you _probably_
           | have to accept and deal with.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | JCharante wrote:
           | I can see how this makes sense, but at my job with thousands
           | of devs each team has the independence to choose their own
           | tech stack/tooling and what ends up happening is if 1 team
           | finds a product they really like then it slowly starts to
           | spread across the organization. Seems bad to ignore a team
           | when they're trying out a new product.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | ketzo wrote:
         | I worked briefly at FedEx corporate, and they made a big deal
         | about their policy that a customer could never account for more
         | than 30% of total volume.
         | 
         | Leadership often made it clear that Amazon was right at that
         | limit, and wanted to send a lot _more_ volume, but FedEx wouldn
         | 't let them, in order to maintain "independence."
         | 
         | To your point: it didn't stop them from working to cater to
         | Amazon's every whim, and it _did_ provide Amazon the incentive
         | to build a (better and more cost-effective) fulfillment and
         | shipping network themselves.
         | 
         | I don't know what the "right" play was, and obviously the story
         | is far from over. But FedEx always seemed to me like they chose
         | the worst of both worlds.
        
           | Laremere wrote:
           | Amazon was likely to build out their own shipping network
           | anyways. Their MO in all other spaces is to observe others
           | doing it, then undercut by vertically integrating.
           | 
           | Over expanding to fullfil a single large customer who isn't
           | actually reliant on you is a good way to end up bankrupt.
           | Seems like FedEx made the right move here.
        
           | mritchie712 wrote:
           | What % of FedEx revenue was from Amazon? Would have guessed
           | it'd be much less than 30%.
        
             | scottyah wrote:
             | In 2018 (latest I could find with a quick search), it was
             | 1.3%. FedEx said that no customer is more than 3% of their
             | revenues.
        
               | ketzo wrote:
               | Wow, that's a _lot_ lower than I would have thought. I
               | wonder if my memory is wrong? The  "30% of volume" stat
               | stands out in my head, though.
        
             | ketzo wrote:
             | I wasn't high-up enough to have that kind of number, sadly
             | :D
             | 
             | It's an interesting question, though -- I'm sure Amazon had
             | a very favorable contract, so to your point, probably less
             | than 30%.
        
         | michaelt wrote:
         | _> it's often the case that your biggest customer effectively
         | owns you_
         | 
         | I read an article back in ~2006 that made a similar point [1]
         | 
         | If you're a lawnmower manufacturer and Wal-Mart comes to you
         | and says they want to make you their main supplier of
         | lawnmowers and they need X units per year (which will double
         | your sales) that sounds like a great deal which will really
         | grow your business - right?
         | 
         | But once you've built a second factory to deal with all this
         | extra sales volume and hired a bunch of extra workers, if Wal-
         | Mart decide that $250-retail-price lawnmower is going to cost
         | them $20 less next year you can't walk away, because you've got
         | to pay the loans you took out to build this new factory.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.fastcompany.com/54763/man-who-said-no-wal-mart
        
           | acdha wrote:
           | Here's an even older one about the Wal-Mart effect:
           | 
           | https://www.fastcompany.com/47593/wal-mart-you-dont-know
           | 
           | > The gallon jar reshaped Vlasic's pickle business: It chewed
           | up the profit margin of the business with Wal-Mart, and of
           | pickles generally. Procurement had to scramble to find enough
           | pickles to fill the gallons, but the volume gave Vlasic
           | strong sales numbers, strong growth numbers, and a powerful
           | place in the world of pickles at Wal-Mart. Which accounted
           | for 30% of Vlasic's business. But the company's profits from
           | pickles had shriveled 25% or more, Young says-millions of
           | dollars.
           | 
           | > The gallon was hoisting Vlasic and hurting it at the same
           | time.
           | 
           | > Young remembers begging Wal-Mart for relief. "They said,
           | 'No way,' " says Young. "We said we'll increase the
           | price"-even $3.49 would have helped tremendously-"and they
           | said, 'If you do that, all the other products of yours we
           | buy, we'll stop buying.' It was a clear threat." Hunn recalls
           | things a little differently, if just as ominously: "They
           | said, 'We want the $2.97 gallon of pickles. If you don't do
           | it, we'll see if someone else might.' I knew our competitors
           | were saying to Wal-Mart, 'We'll do the $2.97 gallons if you
           | give us your other business.' " Wal-Mart's business was so
           | indispensable to Vlasic, and the gallon so central to the
           | Wal-Mart relationship, that decisions about the future of the
           | gallon were made at the CEO level.
           | 
           | > Finally, Wal-Mart let Vlasic up for air. "The Wal-Mart
           | guy's response was classic," Young recalls. "He said, 'Well,
           | we've done to pickles what we did to orange juice. We've
           | killed it. We can back off.' " Vlasic got to take it down to
           | just over half a gallon of pickles, for $2.79. Not long after
           | that, in January 2001, Vlasic filed for bankruptcy-although
           | the gallon jar of pickles, everyone agrees, wasn't a critical
           | factor.
        
       | ecommerceguy wrote:
       | So is Amazon Pay just arbitraging Stripe's standard 2.9%?
       | 
       | https://pay.amazon.com/
        
       | morpheuskafka wrote:
       | I don't understand how Amazon needs or can use Stripe in the US
       | (I can see how it would be useful for the emerging markets they
       | were previously using). As the largest merchant in the country,
       | don't they already have direct negotiations with banks and
       | compete for the lowest possible fees?
        
         | hopefulengineer wrote:
         | [dead]
        
         | bethling wrote:
         | From my time with Amazon's payments team, they do. However they
         | do like not depending on any one particular provider, and being
         | able to spread the payments to different providers does give
         | them leverage to negotiate rates from a stronger position.
        
         | jaywalk wrote:
         | I bet fraud detection is a big part of it, if not the only part
         | of it.
        
         | capableweb wrote:
         | Judging by this release, Amazon seems to acknowledge they
         | cannot handle payments as well as Stripe (makes sense,
         | companies focusing on one thing usually does that thing better
         | than a company focusing on 100s of different things). Also,
         | isn't the saying something like "outsource anything that isn't
         | your core competence?" and I'm guessing Amazon is doing just
         | that here.
         | 
         | This statement is what lead me to have the above perspective:
         | 
         | > "Stripe has been a trusted partner, helping accelerate our
         | business at every turn," said Max Bardon, vice president of
         | payments, Amazon. "In particular, we value Stripe's
         | reliability. Even during peak days like Prime Day, Black
         | Friday, and Cyber Monday, Stripe delivers industry-leading
         | uptime. We appreciate Stripe's relentless commitment to putting
         | users first."
         | 
         | Translated: Stripe has better reliability than the systems
         | we've setup ourselves, especially during peak days.
        
           | ceejayoz wrote:
           | I don't read that as "Stripe has better reliability", just
           | "theirs is as good as ours, don't worry". Amazon doesn't tend
           | to have trouble with payments on Prime Day or Black Friday;
           | they've got a fairly huge benefit of not having to charge in
           | realtime, as they typically charge at the time of shipping.
           | 
           | I suspect the bigger appeal to Stripe is all the
           | international alternative payment methods that Amazon doesn't
           | have to worry about with Stripe handling it.
        
             | devmor wrote:
             | Agreements (and pull) with card issuers and banks is
             | definitely a large part of the value in payment processors.
             | You may be right.
        
       | lnxg33k1 wrote:
       | I wish everyone would switch to Stripe, I hate to be forced to
       | keep an account on PayPal in order to deal with some partners
       | because PayPal can't just get a credit card and let me pay
       | without trying to be a social network, when some partner send me
       | stripe, it's so easy and straightforward without any fuss
        
         | kennywinker wrote:
         | Monopolies don't usually work out well for the end user, so i
         | really hope everyone _doesn't_ switch to stripe.
        
           | lnxg33k1 wrote:
           | Yeah I agree with you, let me rephrase, I hope everyone I
           | deal with switches to stripe then :D
        
         | Etheryte wrote:
         | As a user, Stripe is super convenient. As a provider, Stripe is
         | often a nightmare with no explanation provided terminations,
         | nonexistent support and roboemails.
        
           | d4rken wrote:
           | Eeriely similar to how Google treats Android developers...
        
           | lnxg33k1 wrote:
           | Well, as a user I will get as much as convenience I can get
           | ^^
           | 
           | But yeah I understand that today is a bit of the culture of
           | tech companies to be unreliable, was just thinking about it
           | today, I had few updates on iPhone apps, and all the apps
           | didn't have any explanation, just trying to be funny about
           | having fixed bugs, but no details, software engineering is a
           | bit of a joke nowadays, and I think it's not just software
           | engineering but it's just that companies are a joke, no
           | explanation to customers, not explanation to users, no
           | support etc.
        
           | joshmn wrote:
           | My primary email address is somehow flagged globally on
           | Stripe, so I have to use an alternative to get any payment to
           | go through regardless of what card I use: whatever@domain.com
           | causes the payment to fail, but whatever+1@domain.com works.
           | It's sad but hilarious but sad.
        
             | lnxg33k1 wrote:
             | I guess you booked it with a guest at the start
        
             | juujian wrote:
             | If you have the authority, why not create
             | whatever.stripe@domain.com? Looks official, like it's done
             | on purpose.
        
             | smca wrote:
             | Just dinged an email to the address listed in your bio.
        
               | Etheryte wrote:
               | [flagged]
        
               | lnxg33k1 wrote:
               | [flagged]
        
       | college_physics wrote:
       | Do these "partnerships" ever specify more binding conditions
       | (exclusivity in some market, a minimum commitment of business
       | over some period of time etc). Obviously the public announcements
       | are a great opportunity to co-promote respective entities, but
       | how much do these actually constrain business options?
        
       | sfmike wrote:
       | fast forward to future post title "I can't checkout anymore on
       | Amazon because I'm banned on stripe from black box algorithms and
       | I don't know why"
        
       | vishnugupta wrote:
       | I worked on Amazon Payments systems for quite some time back in
       | the day. We took pride in being the best payment processors. Had
       | direct connections with card networks, banks and what not. We
       | even launched a PayPal competitor[1]. They launched a Square like
       | device for physical retailers[2]. They invested some serious
       | money in building and maintaining all of that.
       | 
       | However going by this news seems like Amazon has more or less
       | given up on their payments ambitions. Could be also due to recent
       | layoffs. This is a big news. Maybe Amazon wants to focus on being
       | good at few things instead of running hundreds of experiments.
       | 
       | Edit: References.
       | 
       | [1] https://pay.amazon.com
       | 
       | [2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2015/10/30/amazon-
       | kills...
        
         | ROFISH wrote:
         | Just noting from my experience that many e-commerce platforms
         | like Shopify have started charging an extra "third-party
         | payment fee" for not using their own payment platform so all
         | the savings gained from lower fees would've been ate up by the
         | other platform.
         | 
         | Being aggressive in banks is only half the equation. You also
         | need to be aggressive against the e-commerce platform's own
         | greediness.
        
         | MuffinFlavored wrote:
         | > Could be also due to recent layoffs.
         | 
         | Just a quick guess I am pulling out of my ass.
         | 
         | Did somebody high up do a cost analysis/breakdown that said: is
         | this entire business org making the company money or can we
         | just use Stripe for less money?
         | 
         | Does it boil down to that gross oversimplification or not?
         | 
         | I'm sure it isn't easy to quantify the intangibles (if there
         | were any) on what edges Amazon had over Stripe and benefitted
         | from by choosing to do it in house. I'm sure it might not seem
         | like an apples-to-apples comparison, but I guess when you zoom
         | out high enough (company spending $X money in, getting Y out)
         | it's comparable to any other purchasable good/service?
        
           | ericmay wrote:
           | > Did somebody high up do a cost analysis/breakdown that
           | said: is this entire business org making the company money or
           | can we just use Stripe for less money?
           | 
           | That would definitely be a factor, but also competitive
           | strategy and product placement. Do they really want to try
           | and take on Stripe, Apple Pay, Shopify, etc? What exactly are
           | they offering that's unique? Is it a core competency? How
           | does this work alongside existing business interests?
           | 
           | And more.
        
             | MuffinFlavored wrote:
             | > Do they really want to try and take on Stripe, Apple Pay,
             | Shopify, etc?
             | 
             | Is the answer "they did when the Federal Reserve had
             | interest rates at 0.25%" and now that interest rates are
             | currently are 4.5% headed toward potentially 5%+ and/or
             | just staying in the 4-5% range for at least 6-12 months
             | "no"?
             | 
             | Somebody (multiple people?) obviously signed off on
             | investing resources into this in the first place. How long
             | ago, I'm not sure. Could some clairvoyantly even back then
             | that this would get scraped? No clue, I have no internal
             | leg up/leak/data.
             | 
             | Why was the answer yes then (yes = invest in it) and now,
             | when they have a finished-ish product, no (no = don't try
             | to internally compete with Stripe)?
        
               | ericmay wrote:
               | Low interest rates can mask poor business decisions, or
               | make it cheaper to place bets on new products. Higher
               | rates change the IRR calculation and perhaps overall
               | business strategy too. So yea probably re: 0.25%
        
               | MuffinFlavored wrote:
               | Where do companies like Apple park their cash short term?
               | Obviously not 10Y bonds most likely?
        
               | ericmay wrote:
               | Short-term yea treasuries and things like that.
        
               | MuffinFlavored wrote:
               | How do you get notified of HN comment replies, or do you
               | also incessantly check your profile comments like I do?
        
               | ericmay wrote:
               | I check them incessantly depending on how the day is
               | going :)
        
           | ethbr0 wrote:
           | Good note when talking about large businesses and org-wide
           | initiatives.
           | 
           | It's easy to forget (looking from the bottom-up) that when
           | you're surveying from the top-down, there are _always_
           | alternative places to spend $1.
           | 
           | So it isn't enough to make >$1 in return for every $1
           | invested, you have to offer better return than the other
           | things the company could be doing with that capital.
           | 
           | F.ex. in retail, there's an everpresent alternative of
           | investing in logistics and warehouse automation, which saves
           | the business a LOT of money
        
             | MuffinFlavored wrote:
             | > So it isn't enough to make >$1 in return for every $1
             | invested, you have to offer better return than the other
             | things the company could be doing with that capital.
             | 
             | And the big thing now (at least I think it is, although I
             | don't have any proof that companies are actually doing
             | this) is...
             | 
             | https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-
             | funds/sectors/sp500-compa...
             | 
             | I don't think every one of these corporations is going to
             | take 100% of their cash on hand and stash it into 10 year
             | bonds overnight...
             | 
             | But I'm lead to believe some variation of this is
             | happening. Corporations can make 3-4% risk free + short
             | term. If you work on a project that doesn't bring the
             | company at least 3-4% ROI after it's all said and done
             | (you, your managers, all expenses, etc.)... why are you
             | owed a job?
             | 
             | Very cruel and mean reality, right?
        
         | DueDilligence wrote:
         | "good at few things".
         | 
         | .. track history proves otherwise.
        
           | firstSpeaker wrote:
           | Elaborate?
        
         | morpheuskafka wrote:
         | I'm not surprised that they are giving up on Amazon Pay, as
         | that never seemed to get much traction or customer recognition.
         | 
         | However, I am very surprised that they are abandoning their own
         | first-party payments to Stripe. Don't you all already have the
         | very best rates possible, directly negotiated by every bank? In
         | other countries Amazon has even threatened to stop accepting
         | cards because they couldn't negotiate the fees they wanted, and
         | they are about the only merchant big enough to dare doing that.
         | 
         | I'm sure they won't be paying Stripe the standard 2.9%, but
         | still--what value does Amazon get out of this? Stripe is
         | supposed to make payments easy from both a coding and business
         | perspective for developers. Everything Stripe does, from card
         | acceptance to fraud handling to UX to ACH payouts Amazon
         | already has working at large scale.
        
           | ghostingbanana wrote:
           | > I'm sure they won't be paying Stripe the standard 2.9%, but
           | still--what value does Amazon get out of this?
           | 
           | These deals are priced on a cost-plus basis. Amazon might pay
           | Stripe the cost of the underlying network fee plus .1% or
           | half of cent.
           | 
           | Stripe negotiates fees with leverage.
           | 
           | note Stripe is publicly commuting to AWS in this
           | announcement. It's likely that the exchange here is "we use
           | you for payments and you commit to $Xbn in AWS spend."
           | 
           | Similar to MSFT and OpenAI. We give you billions, you spend
           | it right back on Azure.
        
             | di456 wrote:
             | > Stripe negotiates fees with leverage.
             | 
             | Same with Amazon's leverage for vendor negotiation. They
             | will go for stock warrants if it's a big enough deal and
             | they have the right leverage. More upside that way and it
             | creates a competitive moat.
             | 
             | No idea if that's the case here though.
        
           | cstejerean wrote:
           | It's not clear from the announcement that they are giving up
           | all first-party payments to Stripe.
           | 
           | > Stripe will become a strategic payments partner for Amazon
           | in the US, Europe, and Canada, processing a significant
           | portion of Amazon's total payments volume across its
           | businesses, including Prime, Audible, Kindle, Amazon Pay, Buy
           | With Prime, and more.
           | 
           | That makes it sound like some things (and certainly a
           | significant percentage of the total) will be processed by
           | Stripe, but not all spend. For example it doesn't seem like
           | normal purchases on amazon.com would actually be processed by
           | Stripe at this time.
        
         | ChrisNorstrom wrote:
         | _joke_ So how long until an Amazon representative complains on
         | HNews about Stripe locking them out of their account and not
         | telling them why?
         | 
         | No seriously, I used to use Amazon Pay for years long ago when
         | it first became available for woocommerce powered stores and I
         | specifically stopped because I had to manually download and go
         | through all my weekly reports and add up the fees I was paying
         | for my business's taxes. As advanced as Amazon can be sometimes
         | they are very dinosaur like when it comes to financial reports
         | or taxes. It took decades for them to collect taxes from
         | sellers. Took years for them to finally catch a couple that
         | were scamming millions of dollars in returns out of sellers. I
         | stopped bothering with any Amazon products because of the years
         | of glitches, gotchas, lack of reports, lack of understanding
         | user intent or use cases. And the thing is, Amazon Pay was
         | great, I had a lot of customers that used it and prefered to
         | pay that way.
        
           | ShinTakuya wrote:
           | Payments are hard, it's no coincidence that only a handful of
           | tech companies do it well despite it being one of the more
           | lucrative areas to do business in.
           | 
           | Makes sense for Amazon to work with a market leader in this
           | case rather than spend years playing catch up. Perhaps in the
           | long run they'll acquire Stripe instead of simply partnering.
        
             | qqtt wrote:
             | It's pretty wild that Amazon is playing "catch up" at all.
             | Amazon Pay was launched years before Stripe was even
             | founded. Not to mention Amazon has been at the forefront of
             | online payments since the 90s (Amazon itself was founded 4
             | years before PayPal).
             | 
             | There is some dogma that Amazon is peerless at building
             | platforms and developing APIs, but this is a pretty big
             | failure to capture the market given a huge head start.
        
         | johnmaguire wrote:
         | It's odd too because I recently saw this headline across my
         | screen: Amazon hopes to increase checkout dominance via Buy
         | with Prime expansion[0].
         | 
         | [0] https://www.insiderintelligence.com/content/amazon-hopes-
         | inc...
        
         | remus wrote:
         | > However going by this news seems like Amazon has more or less
         | given up on their payments ambitions. Could be also due to
         | recent layoffs. This is a big news. Maybe Amazon wants to focus
         | on being good at few things instead of running hundreds of
         | experiments.
         | 
         | This does seem very un-amazon from my outside perspective. In
         | the past I've always had the impression that amazon are very
         | happy to shovel money in to an area if they think it'll improve
         | their margin and/or protect them from reliance on third
         | parties. This seems exactly the opposite of that! Stripe must
         | be spending a shit load of cash with AWS and offering amazon a
         | pretty attractive rate for processing.
         | 
         | I wonder if GCP has been fishing for stripe's business?
        
           | acdha wrote:
           | > I wonder if GCP has been fishing for stripe's business?
           | 
           | That would make a lot of sense: they mention increasing their
           | use of AWS and this is something that neither Google nor
           | Microsoft could really match as the carrot for an exclusive
           | commitment. Stripe is already pretty big but being able to
           | say Amazon trusts them with payments is a pretty strong sales
           | pitch.
        
         | tempsy wrote:
         | this just sounds like stripe will handle some of the payment
         | processing volume for digital purchases
         | 
         | doesn't sound like it's a replacement for the amazon pay button
         | at all
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | pwarner wrote:
         | I have no inside knowledge, but maybe rather than stop
         | experimenting, they'll just declare some failures rather than
         | keeping mediocre offerings alive. I have no first hand
         | knowledge that Amazon payments was good or bad, but I also took
         | note of Amazon partnering with Slack. That seemed as an ack
         | that Chime's chat was never going to be good as Slack, might as
         | well join them.
         | 
         | To me it's big step up in maturity for Amazon to find the right
         | areas to focus on, and get the right partnerships.
        
         | strgcmc wrote:
         | As another former Amazonian (but not near payments stuff by any
         | means), judging from the outside, this doesn't sound like it
         | equates to the death of Amazon Payments at all.
         | 
         | The PR statements are very carefully worded to say, strategic
         | partner that will be "processing a significant portion of
         | Amazon's total payments volume." If significant portion was
         | going to mean anywhere near 100%, I'm sure Stripe would have
         | shouted that fact from the rooftops even louder (what a huge
         | win that would be!).
         | 
         | For my money, this really just reads like mostly a quid-pro-quo
         | deal, you give me X% of payments volume, I'll give you Y level
         | of commitment to AWS. With no insider knowledge of any kind, I
         | would wildly speculate that "significant portion" could mean a
         | value of X as low as 5-10%.
        
           | argc wrote:
           | Amazon is ok with internal competition, so this could just be
           | a way of keeping options open while locking in a large
           | customer. Maybe Stripe is better in some markets or verticals
           | but Amazon will still rely on Amazon Payments for others.
           | Long term there could still be a convergence on one or the
           | other. (Amazonian but this is complete guesswork)
        
         | jacurtis wrote:
         | This announcement to me is possible the strongest argument
         | against building your own payments platform that I've ever
         | seen.
         | 
         | Next to Walmart, Amazon is probably the largest single credit
         | card payment recipient on planet earth right now, at least in
         | volume of transactions. If Amazon went through the work as you
         | mentioned, to build our their own payments solution for several
         | years and eventually abandoned it in favor of using "off-the-
         | shelf" Stripe. Now, I do recognize that I am sure Stripe is
         | somewhat customized for Amazon's use case and they obviously
         | aren't charging Amazon anywhere near 2.9% + 30C/ per
         | transaction. So its a little different than the Stripe we use,
         | but its still a fascinating argument in the "Buy vs Build"
         | debate to favor buying over building.
         | 
         | I find it also interesting coming from Amazon. Since much of
         | the work I am doing right now is moving internally-built
         | technical systems to AWS' managed and built solutions. So I am
         | deep in the transition of moving built technical systems to a
         | buy model from AWS across many different technologies. To see
         | Amazon dishing off their payments to another company instead of
         | maintaining it in house just feels like the ultimate "circle of
         | life" or rather, "circle of specialization".
         | 
         | Tech is getting so complicated now that its becoming harder and
         | harder to justify in-house solutions to problems. It seems like
         | anymore we are moving everything to be managed by a different
         | provider with companies focusing on one or two things they are
         | amazing at and everything else being passed to another company
         | who specializes at that other thing.
        
       | mmaunder wrote:
       | Why? Amazon is known for vertical integration. And AWS has so
       | many big customers that losing Stripe shouldn't move the needle.
       | Is Amazon playing possum to acquire them, and Stripe is playing
       | along?
        
       | xfour wrote:
       | Wait, obviously Amazon has their own checkout software. Is this a
       | name recognition play to have AWS come with Stripe batteries
       | included?
        
         | __derek__ wrote:
         | It seems like payments is traveling the inverse of the
         | shipping/delivery route: first build in-house, then add on
         | other fulfillment partners that are able to handle certain
         | payments better.
        
         | agloeregrets wrote:
         | My guess is that Stripe is way better at international payments
         | and by moving US to stripe they can have a single payment
         | processor worldwide.
        
         | julianlam wrote:
         | They do, but Stripe may have other advantages that Amazon's
         | home-grown billing does not... fraud detection comes to mind.
        
           | Hermitian909 wrote:
           | Stripe's superior fraud detection is an open secret in
           | FinTech. There are apparently a lot of large companies with
           | their own payment rails that route riskier looking payments
           | (e.g. a new account who you haven't yet settled a transaction
           | with) through Stripe for this reason.
        
             | habitue wrote:
             | which probably makes stripe's job even harder, because now
             | there's adverse selection
        
               | BurningFrog wrote:
               | You can charge extra per detected fraud.
        
           | mschuster91 wrote:
           | If there is one company _besides_ Stripe that I 'd expect to
           | have high quality fraud detection, I'd name Amazon actually,
           | maybe add PayPal. The largest online retailer in all major
           | markets sans China and Russia by far, you don't get to that
           | position if you're lacking in the anti-fraud department.
           | 
           | (Alternatively, one might say Amazon simply is large enough
           | to eat up the cost of fraud...)
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | If Amazon has good fraud detection, they should consider
             | using it on sellers.
        
       | marban wrote:
       | ~2025: Stripe becomes Amazon SBS -- Simple Billing Service
        
         | Bhilai wrote:
         | Stripe internal valuation is around $65B. I think its unlikely
         | Amazon is going to spend that much to acquire Stripe.
        
           | fisherjeff wrote:
           | $65B for payment processing is a lot. $65B to be magically
           | inserted into the checkout flow of like every small to medium
           | independent online retailer out there (exaggeration, I know)
           | starts to look like a much better deal.
        
         | joshstrange wrote:
         | I... I... I don't hate this idea...
         | 
         | I'm all-in on AWS and I've drank the kool-aid so I'm obviously
         | biased but I've quite enjoyed living in the AWS walled garden.
         | Stripe is one of 1-2 external services I use, bringing that "in
         | house" would be nice, especially if CDK had full support for
         | creating merchants/etc.
        
           | mritchie712 wrote:
           | What do you think would improve by Stripe being in AWS? As a
           | Stripe customer, I like the way Portal[0] allows me to
           | outsource payments (almost) entirely. I don't see the
           | advantage (relative to the cost) of building it into my
           | product.
           | 
           | 0 - https://stripe.com/blog/billing-customer-portal
        
             | enahs-sf wrote:
             | Hopefully getting Stripe's designers to take a crack at the
             | AWS UI would be nice.
        
             | devmor wrote:
             | Resolving support issues is the only one I can think of. I
             | have seen a non-trivial amount of Stripe integrators have
             | to resort to social media, HN or reddit to get any real
             | response to issues like Stripe holding their balance
             | hostage.
        
         | lechacker wrote:
         | Amazon has around USD 58 billion in cash and short term
         | investments according to their last quarterly report. Stripe's
         | last "valuation" in 2021 was at USD 96 billion so today, based
         | on the market cap behavior of similar companies like Square or
         | PayPal, that number should be at USD 30-40 billion today.
         | 
         | It would be a large acquisition but not unheard of.
        
           | 7ewis wrote:
           | Would it really benefit Amazon though? If Stripe are already
           | putting hundreds of millions through AWS, they'd essentially
           | be losing a large customer by buying them.
        
         | ignoramous wrote:
         | You kid, but AWS had 2 year head-start on Stripe [0] and here
         | we are...
         | 
         | [0] https://archive.is/R7m9s /
         | https://www.allthingsdistributed.com/2007/08/the_amazon_flex...
        
           | mardifoufs wrote:
           | What went wrong? Why didn't it take off, and why doesn't
           | amazon have a similar offering on AWS? They have such a wide
           | variety of products there that I'm surprised they didn't try
           | again after 2007.
        
             | kijiki wrote:
             | I used it at the time.
             | 
             | It was very ambitious, supporting a scripting language for
             | what are now called smart contracts, and very complex
             | payment schemes.
             | 
             | It was also a huge pain in the ass to integrate, and the
             | user payment flow was wonky, with a redirect to multiple
             | amazon branded pages to log in to amazon, then redirect
             | back to finish the transaction.
             | 
             | I've not used stripe, but people who have tell me it is
             | super easy to integrate.
        
         | jahewson wrote:
         | Amazon Simple Transactional Revenue Internet Payment Exchange.
        
           | marcosdumay wrote:
           | The acronym is too long and distinctive. Amazon doesn't do
           | that.
           | 
           | Except for this, it's great.
        
             | ojkelly wrote:
             | AWS Systems Manager Payment Manager
        
           | banana_giraffe wrote:
           | Amazon Simple Salary Swapping Service, or S4
        
         | napolux wrote:
         | And the logo will be a blue square with the $ sign in it,
         | rotated 45 degrees
        
           | marban wrote:
           | A pyramid with Jeff's eye embossed on it.
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | The marketing firm will charge $10,000 for each degree.
        
             | hbn wrote:
             | And note that they actually rotated it 315-degrees in the
             | other direction
        
       | capableweb wrote:
       | > We couldn't run without AWS [...] said David Singleton, chief
       | technology officer of Stripe
       | 
       | I know this is a PR piece, but shouldn't a CTO know better? What
       | could they possible not have achieved if they weren't using AWS?
       | Literally every feature of AWS exists somewhere else. Maybe not
       | all of the same features in the same place, but to say they
       | couldn't run Stripe without AWS strikes me a bit silly.
        
         | sofixa wrote:
         | > Literally every feature of AWS exists somewhere else. Maybe
         | not all of the same features in the same place, but to say they
         | couldn't run Stripe without AWS strikes me a bit silly.
         | 
         | At AWS' scale, fully managed, when Stripe was founded (2010)?
         | Bullshit. Back then, and even up until ~2013-2015 the state of
         | the art was either VPS, colo where you DIY everything from the
         | nuts and bolts to databases, Heroku/Google App Engine where you
         | have little control, hosted VMware (utter shit), and slowly,
         | AWS.
         | 
         | You're making the classic Dropbox mistake. Today yes, the
         | majority of what you can do on AWS can be done elsewhere
         | (mostly Azure and GCP, depending on specific features needed
         | maybe one of the smaller ones like OCI).
        
         | jaywalk wrote:
         | You said it yourself, it's a PR piece. After signing a massive
         | deal with Amazon, you want the CTO to say "yeah, our software
         | could easily run on Azure or GCP, but Amazon just gave us a
         | massive deal so we're sticking with AWS."
         | 
         | Don't take it literally.
        
           | capableweb wrote:
           | Even so, saying something like "We really like AWS so that's
           | what we're doubling down on" (but with more PR/flowery
           | language) rather than "Stripe would be impossible without
           | AWS" would have been a more balanced statement while still a
           | giving them praise.
        
         | chuckwnelson wrote:
         | I just assumed its hyperbole. In the same way I would say "I
         | couldn't live without Diet Coke."
        
         | spiderice wrote:
         | Meh, I feel like you're taking a common expression and reading
         | it too literally.
         | 
         | "I couldn't have made it to the top of the mountain without
         | these specific hiking boots" doesn't mean it was literally
         | impossible without that exact brand of hiking boots. It means
         | they like the boots, it made the experience better for them,
         | and they think the hiking boots are better than comparable
         | ones.
         | 
         | I don't think the CTO is claiming that Stripe is solving a
         | problem that would be impossible to solve without AWS. He's
         | saying we wouldn't be as well positioned today if we had to
         | solve the problems that AWS solves ourselves, or by relying on
         | their not-quite-as-good competitors.
        
         | devmunchies wrote:
         | A little hyperbolic marketing for AWS in exchange for a fat
         | deal. This deal will probably help Stripe further penetrate
         | fortune 500 companies on case study alone.
        
       | napolux wrote:
       | Good. Guess why PayPal after leaving eBay wasn't moving on
       | Amazon.
       | 
       | Maybe they were doing enough money already :)
        
       | rabuse wrote:
       | Still waiting for the Apple Pay partnership.
        
       | captn3m0 wrote:
       | Interesting how India is not in the list of countries where
       | Amazon is relying on Stripe.
       | 
       | Amazon is doing its own fintech play here, with heavy investments
       | into Amazon Pay, Amazon Credit cards, and more. None of that
       | seems to be driven via Stripe, but other local partners and banks
       | instead.
        
         | Brystephor wrote:
         | India has special regulations for payments which blocks a lot
         | of payment processors from doing business there. Adyen and
         | Braintree don't process payments there. Stripe probably doesn't
         | also.
        
           | captn3m0 wrote:
           | Stripe was among the first payment processors to get approval
           | for a Payment Aggregator license, which was just introduced.
           | 
           | https://business-standard.com/article-amp/finance/rbi-
           | clears...
        
           | chimeracoder wrote:
           | > India has special regulations for payments which blocks a
           | lot of payment processors from doing business there. Adyen
           | and Braintree don't process payments there. Stripe probably
           | doesn't also.
           | 
           | Stripe processes payments in India, and has for over five
           | years:
           | 
           | https://stripe.com/global
        
         | sidcool wrote:
         | Payments infrastructure in India is years ahead of those in the
         | US or Europe. Amazon uses it's own Amazon Pay here in India.
        
           | singhambesh wrote:
           | Not Europe. I pay with my Apple watch everywhere. UPI is good
           | for merchants due to no MDR (for now) and no capex
           | requirement in terms of devices etc. From a customer POV, UPI
           | hardly adds value (ApplePay / GPay / Contact-less works much
           | better).
        
             | chimeracoder wrote:
             | > Not Europe. I pay with my Apple watch everywhere.
             | 
             | Maybe everywhere that accepts Apple Pay, but given how low
             | credit card penetration is in Europe overall (relatively),
             | it's almost impossible to avoid falling back on cash at
             | some points unless you're very limited in the places you
             | patronize.
             | 
             | UPI adoption is _massive_ (and not just in India). The
             | ubiquity of it is a huge benefit to the consumer - simply
             | the knowledge that you can reliably depend on using it even
             | for a random street vendor is a huge paradigm shift,
             | compared to the status quo of knowing that it might be an
             | option, or might not, depending on who you 're talking to.
        
               | singhambesh wrote:
               | Debit card -> Add to ApplePay/ GPay -> Touch the POS ->
               | Done. UPI is good for 3rd word as a) most merchants cant
               | afford (wont get a POS) b) need working capital daily (as
               | working capital loans are not available or merchants
               | don't have a bank account).
               | 
               | From a customer POV, UPI with it's lower success rates,
               | no chargeback/dispute mechanism and with higher latency
               | (take out your phone -> unlock -> open app -> click scan
               | QR button -> enter pass -> Look at loader for 3-10 sec)
               | is worse than debit card set up on phone / watch.
        
           | bjacobt wrote:
           | Can you share some examples of what makes payments in India
           | ahead of US or Europe?
        
             | sofixa wrote:
             | India's UPI allows for free instant transfers with
             | email/phone number, regardless of amount. Business have
             | started using it for payments, that's how good it is. In
             | the Eurozone there's SEPA Instant which is close but
             | requires a bank account number. In the US... checks in the
             | mail? Or third party middlemen for the fun of it.
        
               | chimeracoder wrote:
               | > In the Eurozone there's SEPA Instant which is close but
               | requires a bank account number. In the US... checks in
               | the mail? Or third party middlemen for the fun of it.
               | 
               | SEPA's equivalent in the US is ACH, and in recent years
               | ACH (which is a much older system) has mostly closed the
               | gap with SEPA. Also, SEPA Instant exists, but not all
               | banks are guaranteed to support it - as of even just a
               | few months ago, many popular banks don't support it,
               | which means that using SEPA reduces to ACH (in terms of
               | payout settlement and information flow at POS).
               | 
               | Europe also has additional country-specific methods, so
               | you can lean on (e.g.) iDEAL or or BACS if you know
               | you're primarily dealing with Dutch or British customers,
               | but that's not going to help you if you need seamless use
               | across Europe.
               | 
               | ACH just never took off culturally in the US as a popular
               | payment scheme - in part because of the easy availability
               | of credit cards, which are usually free to the consumer
               | and provide additional protections (such as chargebacks)
               | that both ACH and SEPA lack. By contrast, credit card
               | adoption is historically much lower in Europe (especially
               | when segmented by country), so it makes sense that SEPA,
               | for all its drawbacks, would catch on as a more popular
               | method.
               | 
               | Of course, all of these pale in comparison to India's
               | payment schemes, which are light-years ahead.
        
               | devmor wrote:
               | ACH also never took off in the US because
               | 
               | A) You have to initiate a transfer at your bank, there's
               | no way to use ACH independently as a consumer without a
               | commerce setup or relying on a 3rd party (like Zelle).
               | 
               | B) There's no confirmation step. If someone has your
               | Account Number and Routing Number and does have a
               | commerce setup, they can debit your account at any time.
        
               | chimeracoder wrote:
               | > You have to initiate a transfer at your bank, there's
               | no way to use ACH independently as a consumer
               | 
               | That's actually not true - it appears that way because in
               | practice ACH is only used in corner cases in the US, but
               | it is absolutely possible.
               | 
               | > There's no confirmation step. If someone has your
               | Account Number and Routing Number and does have a
               | commerce setup, they can debit your account at any time.
               | 
               | ...I have bad news for you about what the SEPA standards
               | require!
        
               | JCharante wrote:
               | For smaller quantities (sub $1000) USA's Zelle allows for
               | free instant transfers 24/7 with email/phone number. It
               | does have daily limits but if a business was dealing with
               | $15k MRR or $30k MRR then surely they would just buy a
               | POS. So if you wanted to act as a merchant selling $200
               | of groceries out of your garage in your neighborhood in
               | the US then you could feasibly do it using Zelle.
               | Basically all banks support it. You might say that
               | requiring a bank account is a barrier but they're
               | literally free at many banks. You can even create a bank
               | account completely online with companies like Charles
               | Schwab.
        
       | FpUser wrote:
       | Friendship without the limits ...
        
       | bluelightning2k wrote:
       | Amazon must have seriously considered not only bypassing a
       | company like Stripe but also competing with them.
       | 
       | I'm sure Amazon Pay or AWS Payments or whatever must have got
       | some serious consideration. Not to mention every bank offering a
       | direct relationship.
        
       | Brystephor wrote:
       | I had a short period where I worked in Amazon payments. Max
       | Bardon was the L10 or whatever above me.
       | 
       | Amazon likes to diversify their payment processors. They don't
       | have one payment processor for one region because it's an
       | availability issue for them. Cost of payments is big. So this is
       | likely some agreement to help Amazon reduce their cost of
       | payments, by essentially redirecting costs to the AWS side of
       | things. India likely isn't being processed because India has
       | regulations that most other countries do not. Adyen, Braintree,
       | and maybe not even Stripe can be payment processors there (if
       | they are, they're likely just a proxy for another processor).
        
         | alsodumb wrote:
         | It's also party because India has a robust ecosystem of local
         | companies that handle payments, including real-time payment
         | methods such as UPI that are specific to the country and these
         | are already well integrated into Amazon.in
         | 
         | Honestly the ubiquity of UPI and the rate of it's adaptation in
         | India always surprises me. I hear stories of how small, often
         | illiterate vendors selling tea for 10 cents on the streets
         | would insist on getting their payment through UPI and not cash
         | because it's more seamless.
         | 
         | UPI handles about 200 million transactions a day in India. I
         | think Visa does like 150 million on their global network?
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Payments_Interface
        
           | chimeracoder wrote:
           | > It's also party because India has a robust ecosystem of
           | local companies that handle payments, including real-time
           | payment methods such as UPI that are specific to the country
           | and these are already well integrated into Amazon.in
           | 
           | Just to add, UPI is actually no longer limited to India.
           | Several other countries either are currently using it or have
           | contractually agreed to and are in the process of integrating
           | it and rolling it out.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-01-23 23:01 UTC)