Brazil's central bank operates their instant payment network Pix [1] [2] [3] for ~$10M/year [4]. Its not that these are small contracts, but that large, inefficient, unnecessary contracts have become the norm (I argue). Similar example from India's UPI payment system [5]. The US has FedNow to move instant payments for pennies, but banking and payment system participants in the US ecosystem are avoiding it to continue to private payment system rake [6] (cc networks, Zelle commercial bank network, private wallets, etc).

The evidence is clear you don't need to skim 3% off of an economy to provide instant payment capabilities. The enterprise value of US payment companies is a function of how long they hold onto this volume for, when competition is ramping up. You're just pushing ISO 20022 XML messages around a bus.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pix_(payment_system)

[2] https://frontierfintech.substack.com/p/55-send-pix-brazils-i...

[3] https://brazilstockguide.com/behind-the-lines/the-cost-of-pi...

> This makes the American dispute more sophisticated than it may first appear. Pix certainly puts pressure on private payment models, card networks and acquirers. It also reduces friction for consumers, small businesses and person-to-person transfers. But its deeper effect is institutional. It turns the bank deposit into an even more efficient payment instrument — and, by doing so, changes the role of banks in liquidity intermediation.

> There is an irony here. For decades, the United States built the narrative of private financial innovation. Brazil, through a public, interoperable and massively adopted system, produced one of the world’s most efficient payment infrastructures. The study notes how unusual Pix adoption was: more than 150 million users in its first year, use by nine out of ten small businesses, and daily volumes capable of reaching about 1% of annual GDP on a single peak day.

> The reading should not be triumphalist. Pix is a powerful innovation, but it is not cost-free for the financial system. It improves the user experience, reduces transaction costs and increases competition in payments. At the same time, it requires banks to hold more liquidity and may reduce the transformation of deposits into credit. For the United States, Pix appears as a digital-trade issue. For Brazil, it is a question of financial sovereignty. For banks, it is a question of liquidity. Pix began as a button inside an app. It became a piece of financial policy — and now, of geopolitics.

[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44753626

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Payments_Interface

[6] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Why bring up Taiwan and China? This feels incredibly cherry picked?

If you know Taiwan’s history, and you understand China - there’s no surprise to be..

There’s a huge difference for small business owners.

Stripe has a Get started button. You click it, fill out a form, get your site approved in maybe a day, and start making money.

Adyen has a Talk to our team button. You close the tab and never think about it again until you’re making serious money.

---

Edit: that is, of course, by design. Adyen doesn’t want small businesses. From the sibling comment:

> only able to support businesses currently transacting more than €5M per year

No point in marketing when you outright reject customers:

Thank you very much for the comprehensive feedback.

I have taken a look at the information you have provided and unfortunately, at this time, Adyen is only able to support businesses currently transacting more than €5M per year or businesses which are currently supported by a Plugin built by Adyen. The reason for this is so that we are able to provide the right level of support and resources to our merchants at the right stage of their company growth.

If you would like to stay up to date with our payment offering please do sign up to our newsletter here.

In the interim, I want to ensure that you find the right provider, so I would like to direct you about payments. They are specialists in finding the most relevant payment solutions for all business models and I have no doubt they will offer you several great options.

I wish you the best of luck with your business moving forward, and hopefully we can reconnect in the future.

Kind Regards,

Ana Sales Specialist

Which part that makes them look bigger than they are? Which services are larger than stripe?

A big reason Stripe got big was because they got their YC cohorts to use it. Payments before that was complicated and even though PayPal existed, most people didn’t know you could process credit cards like Stripe, you don’t need a PayPal account or wallet. It’s why they bought Braintree and that added even more confusion.

The lesson is, marketing to developers works. And the best way to market to them to by making their job easier.

Stripe has a useful tool and markets it well. With that said, I'm glad there are other options.

Stripes revenue is ~$20B seems pretty big to me...

My self assessment refund came through within days of submitting my assessment.

Forcing people through all that means they collect more interest and I assume some people don’t bother.