To: Erik T who wrote (7199 ) 6/26/1999 4:10:00 AM From: Dwight E. Karlsen Read Replies (2) | Respond to
Erik: The way I interpret CKFR statements and comments re bill presentment is this: It must be that the billers want CKFR to foot the cost of the presentment side, in exchange for giving CKFR the contract for doing the payment side--a very good deal for the billers, IMO. In other words, evidently CKFR treats bill presentment as sort of a loss-leader. The billers view must be, "ok, you deliver the bill for a meager fee, and then if you can handle the payment processing into our coffers, then yes, we'll pay you well for that service. If you can do as much as possible to gain economies of scale, then so much the better, and the happier we are for the lower cost of the whole thing.""The growth in bill presentment is expected to drive growth in bill payment revenue through a more complete electronic offering, more so than providing a new stand alone revenue stream. in a timely manner . How many times have you let that electricity bill sit on your kitchen table for a week, simply because you didn't feel like getting out the checkbook, envelope, return address label & stamp, then get the darn thing all ready and you forget to grab it in the morning to bring it to the mail-slot, so it sits another couple days. Time is money.accounts receivable automation. (gee, didn't Shulman just give a speech on exactly this recently? Yes, he did).
