Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Well, you're not saying that didn't work out for PayPal, are you? :)


No, I'm really not. All I'm saying is it's a similarly audacious, capital-intensive strategy that can only happen in very favorable capital markets.

It's worth looking at how PayPal tried to steer towards profitability in later days, though. They basically became more evil. When paying merchants, they try to trick you into preferring ACH transfers direct from your checking account over using your credit/debit card. The former has weaker consumer protections, no rewards and risks overdraft fees, but lets PayPal keep almost all of their 2.9% + $0.30 fee, since ACH costs just pennies.

Not saying Square is going to become evil. Just saying they'll have to figure out how to break even with it eventually, because right now there's a built-in operational loss that scales with usage.


It worked out for them (being bought), but I think you could relate it to a pump and dump scheme.


It's called solving the chicken-and-egg problem by funding one of them. There was an Elon Musk interview about that stage - IIRC they invested/gifted ~100 million (!) in such activities; but this marketing paid back afterwards in billions.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: