New Articles

Payments Processing Solutions Market to Witness Steady Growth During 2020-2026

processing solutions

Payments Processing Solutions Market to Witness Steady Growth During 2020-2026

According to a recent study from market research firm Global Market Insights, the payments processing solutions market is set to grow from its current market value of more than $60 billion to over $140 billion by 2026, gaining remarkable traction over the 2020 to 2026 period.

The payments processing solutions market is set to record significant gains over the forthcoming timeframe due to the increasing digitalization of payment methods, growing adoption of mobile wallets, and increasing popularity of cashless transactions. As the consumer preference for m-commerce rises, in tandem with the high penetration of smartphones, the preference for payment processing solutions is becoming more and more apparent.

Payment processing refers to how transactions are being automated between the merchant and the customer. Online payment processing further enables merchants to allow for any add-on payment methods, simply by setting up recurring payments, or approving transactions remotely. In other words, a payment gateway means software that interfaces in a secure manner between an eCommerce website and a customer’s preferred payment mode.

The mode of payment could be the customer’s bank account, gift card, debit card, credit card, or any other online wallets. A few examples of recognized payment gateways are Amazon Payments, PayPal, BrainTree, PayTM, Skrill, PayU among many others. As per research, nearly 86 percent of customers make online purchases via debit or credit cards, and more than 60% consider it to be their preferred method of payment while making a purchase.

At present, mobile payment acceptance is helping to satisfy the coming generation of customers with simple and seamless payment experiences. Mobile devices such as tablets and smartphones are changing the way business is done.

The payments processing solutions market is divided into different segments in terms of technology, deployment model, mode of payment, organization size, end-use, as well as regional landscape.

In terms of end-use, the overall payments processing solutions market is categorized into government and public sector, BFSI, healthcare, retail & commerce, and tourism and hospitality. Among these, BFSI end-user segment is anticipated to witness a respectable CAGR of more than 9% over the projected time period. The segmental growth is chalked up to the increasing digitalization of payment methods across the BFSI sector.

Government & public sector segment will witness substantial growth over the coming time period. In fact, in 2019, the segment held a market share of over 8% due to the increasing popularity of cashless transactions in federal agencies.

From a regional frame of reference, the Latin American payments processing solutions market will witness a CAGR of more than 13% through the forthcoming time period owing to the increasing penetration of mobile wallets in the region.

Meanwhile, Middle East & Africa is set to record momentous gains in the upcoming time period. In 2019, the region held over 5% industry share of the overall market. This anticipated growth is ascribed to the increasing consumer’s preference towards m-commerce. In fact, high social and digital penetration in the Gulf states or GCC has led consumers to shift to mobile or m-commerce.

Source: https://www.gminsights.com/industry-analysis/payment-processing-solutions-market

COVID

Could COVID Kill Entrepreneurship? How to Make Sure It Doesn’t

It’s no secret that the COVID-19 pandemic has left many existing small businesses struggling, and the continued economic uncertainty threatens to kill the ambitions of entrepreneurs who planned to launch new businesses but now must put their dreams on hold.

“This crisis will end up being much worse for small businesses than the 2008-11 sub-prime mortgage crisis,”  says Andi Gray, president of Strategy Leaders (www.strategyleaders.com), a business consulting firm. “That 2008 crisis mostly hit banks, mortgage, insurance, automotive – all of which were primarily big, publicly owned stock companies. The only small business dominant category was the construction sector which was devastated for years.

Today’s crisis hits and potentially harms nearly every type of small business.

“During that 2008-2011 period, for the first time, the number of business starts fell below the number of business failures. In other words, more businesses were killed off than were launched, and many people wondered whether we had killed entrepreneurship itself. It took five years or more for the small business community to recover from that. The COVID-19 pandemic impact is so much larger and deeper.”

And when a small business takes a hit, the country as a whole suffers, she says.

“Small businesses make up 50 percent of the gross-domestic-product and also employ half the workforce,” Gray says. “What happens to them determines what happens to the overall economy. We as a country cannot afford to fail them.” So, what steps should small business owners take to make sure they come out on the other side of the current crisis in good shape? Gray suggests a few questions for them to consider:

How is your online game? If business owners aren’t already thinking of themselves as all-virtual, e-commerce sellers, they need to be, Gray says. “That’s how your customer of today and the future is going to want to buy and receive products and services,” she says. “You may need to update your website. Evaluate how good you are at social media communication and promotion. Rethink how you can get orders, track delivery, and receive payments virtually.”

What’s happened to banking and access to capital? In recessions, banks shut down their credit lines, and reduce capital access if they have any concerns about a customer’s ability to pay down debts on time, Gray says. “This will get worse before it gets better. That means you may wake up one morning to find your business is facing challenges with access to capital,” she says. “To keep your credit lines open and approved, it’s essential that you put in the time and effort to work with your bank.” Without access to the proper amount of capital, she says, your business may not be able to function.

How have employees been affected? Businesses must be prepared for challenges that impact work production, Gray says. She points to a study by Microsoft that showed employees’ brains are measurably more stressed working remotely than in an office. It’s harder for remote workers to process information and they get fatigued more easily. “And that’s just one aspect of what our employees are dealing with as the world around them changes so rapidly and dramatically,” Gray says. Build in as many communication and interaction tools as possible.

Is your supply chain stable? “Get prepared for more disruptions as COVID continues to emerge and reemerge and some vendors fall away,” Gray says. “And with hurricane season followed by winter weather, many poorly funded state and local support structures could struggle.” Look at how your supplies get to you. If you’re part of the supply chain, look at how you deliver supplies to your customers. “Explore alternate shipping solutions and routes – trains, planes, cars, trucks, boats,” Gray says. “Now is the time to investigate all of them. Build-in redundancy.” Staying in business is difficult even without a major crisis, Gray says, as three out of four businesses fail in every 10-year cycle.

“The good news is that small business owners are known for being nimble, flexible, and resourceful,” she says. “Many of them are finding new opportunities by solving problems that didn’t exist, or weren’t priorities, at the start of 2020. If we can buy them some time, they’ll be able to retool, market their new services and products, and keep good people employed.”

__________________________________________________________

Andi Gray is president of Strategy Leaders (www.strategyleaders.com), a business consulting firm. Gray’s career started in sales, marketing and new business development at Xerox, American Express and Contel. Gray earned an Executive MBA from Columbia University while conducting research on success and failure drivers for entrepreneurial businesses. Gray writes a weekly column called “Ask Andi” in which she provides practical advice to business owners. She also authors a monthly column in Chauffeur Driven Magazine. Gray is also the co-founder of the networking group BOHCA (Business Owners Hemp and Cannabis Association), where she helps industry-specific owners grow their business through strategic planning.

blockchain

The Advantages of Blockchain over Traditional Payments

E-commerce is expected to surpass $4.6 trillion globally by 2022, with the seamless experience of e-wallets boosting its popularity. The simplicity of services like PayPal and Stripe has helped to improve customer experience while giving merchants easy access to new markets.

Blockchain-based solutions represent the next logical evolution of this trend. By eliminating middlemen, cross-border blockchain payments can result in even faster transfers while significantly reducing costs for both merchants and customers.

The cost in trust in traditional payments

In a traditional payment flow, three to five parties facilitate a single transaction. Together, they make up what is called the “payments stack.” These different parties work together to create trust. They check that transactions can be carried out and manage the transfer of funds. At the same time, this trust has a cost, which is ultimately borne by merchants. Each party within the payments stack takes a small cut of a transaction.

A typical transaction involves a payment processor checking with the issuing bank if a customer’s card can be charged. Once a transaction is validated, which occurs within a few milliseconds, a merchant has a guarantee that they will be paid at a later date. Over subsequent days, funds are transferred from the issuing bank to the acquiring bank.

The traditional stack involves numerous charges. Card networks and other parties can also raise their fees. As recently as September 2019, Visa added a fixed charge of 0.02 EUR for merchants using 3D-Secure, which is increasingly required under new PSD2 legislation.

Cash flow, holdbacks and fraud

Cost isn’t the only issue merchants face with the traditional stack. The speed of transactions can also be a problem. While validation takes place in milliseconds, it can be days before money finally arrives in a merchant’s bank. This is not ideal for small-to-medium-sized businesses that depend heavily on cash flow to pay suppliers and employers.

When we look beyond card payments, the picture is even worse for merchants. In the US, the average B2B payment cycle takes 34 days to complete, with 47% of invoices being paid late!

So-called “holdbacks” are another issue that has come to prominence recently. Here, acquirers keep a percentage of a merchant’s revenue as collateral in case a service is not provided, and refunds must be issued. Holdbacks have particularly affected the travel industry as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Most travel is booked long in advance, and given the uncertainty introduced by COVID-19, holdbacks have increased significantly. This has led to reduced cash flow for merchants – and ultimately to the insolvency of Thomas Cook and Flybe.

While traditional payments are geared towards creating trust, 78% of businesses reported attempted or actual B2B payments fraud during 2018, with international fraud rising 136% from 2017–2019. Although nearly half of payment fraud is related to pen-and-paper processes, digital methods and credit cards are not immune.

Faced with this situation, it is not surprising that more and more companies are turning to fintech to reduce payment costs, particularly when it comes to B2B payments, where 1.8% interchange fees for cards introduce excessive overhead.

The promise of blockchain

When we view the payments stack as a means of generating trust, the promise of blockchain becomes clear: eliminating the stack entirely. Customers send funds directly to merchants, with transactions being verified by a decentralized network.

Blockchain promises great improvements for merchants in terms of speed and cost. No middlemen are required to check whether funds can or cannot be sent – the network will reject a transaction if a wallet has an insufficient balance. Once a transaction is confirmed, funds arrive within minutes. The only cost is a network fee, paid by the customer themselves. 

What’s more, blockchain is ideal for protecting against fraud and encouraging transparency. The fundamental problem blockchain solves – the “double spending” problem – is directly related to preventing fraudulent transactions. Blockchain is designed to make it impossible to spend coins you do not have. Moreover, since blockchains are public ledgers, regulators can easily perform automated audits.

Blockchain is also a universal solution. While the US has ACH for bank transfers and the EU has SEPA, Bitcoin works the same everywhere. No bureaucracy is required to send funds overseas. Not only does this make designing integration protocols relatively simple, but it gives merchants easy access to new overseas markets.

A 2019 report from the European Payments Council indicated an increase of cryptocurrency use alongside the growth of e-commerce.

Blockchain has too many advantages over traditional payment solutions for merchants to ignore. By accepting cryptocurrency, merchants can tap into a growing multibillion-dollar market and get a taste of a cashless, borderless future.

______________________________________________________________

Kellogg Fairbank is Executive Sales Leader for Nash Link, a solution for merchants designed to make it as easy as possible to accept cryptocurrency from customers.

banks

THESE ARE THE U.S. BANKS YOU SHOULD BE TRUSTING WITH TRADE FINANCE AND CASH MANAGEMENT

Global Finance editors, with input from industry analysts, corporate executives and technology experts selected the best trade finance banks in 97 countries and eight regions.

In addition, Global Finance selected the best banks for trade by U.S. region, a list that was based on various service categories, such as document management and export finance.

This year’s winners were revealed during Global Finance’s 20th annual World’s Best Trade Finance Providers awards luncheon on Jan. 15 in Frankfurt, Germany, during the BAFT Global Annual Meeting.

The American winners were:

New England: Webster Bank
Mid-Atlantic: M&T Bank
Great Lakes: KeyCorp
Plains: Commerce Bank
Southeast: SunTrust Bank
Southwest: Comerica
Rocky Mountains: Zions Bancorp
Far West: U.S. Bancorp 

Globally, HSBC took the top spot in Euromoney’s Trade Finance Survey for the third year running, with Deutsche Bank in second place and UniCredit in third. Citi fell out of the top three to take fourth position. One of the biggest upsets was JPMorgan, which fell to 17th after reaching ninth place in 2018.

“Many of the American banks have enough trade business in their home market,” explains Eric Li, research director at Coalition. “So it’s no surprise that when it comes to a global survey, European banks will thrive.”

Global Finance editors say the winners are those banks and providers that best serve the specialized needs of corporations as they engage in cross-border trade. The winners are not always the biggest institutions, but rather the best—those with qualities that companies should look for when choosing a provider.

A proprietary algorithm with criteria—such as knowledge of local conditions and customer needs, financial strength and safety, strategic relationships and governance, competitive pricing, capital investment and innovation in products and services—weighted for relative importance was employed by Global Finance.

A DIFFERENT TAKE FROM GREENWICH ASSOCIATES

As of press time, the most recent Greenwich Share and Quality Leaders in U.S. Large Corporate Banking was released during the fourth quarter of 2019.

“For a business that is generally considered stable and rather slow to evolve, large corporate banking is changing fast,” notes a statement from Greenwich Associates. “The globalization of U.S. corporate business coupled with a disruptive trade war, the proliferation of digital technology, the rise of fintech providers, and the strategic retreat of certain global banks are just some of the variables shaking up the corporate banking industry and putting more corporate clients and business up for grabs.”

From April through September 2019, Greenwich Associates conducted interviews at U.S.-based companies with $2 billion or more in annual revenue with 422 chief financial officers, treasurers and assistant treasurers, 441 cash managers and other financial professionals in cash management, and 136 corporate trade finance professionals.

Participants were asked about market trends and their relationships with their banks. Trade finance interview topics included product demand, quality of coverage and capabilities in specific product areas.

THE WINNER’S CIRCLE

The 2019 share list is topped by J.P. Morgan, followed by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citi and HSBC—in that order.

The order of the top two changes when it comes to U.S. Large Corporate Cash Management: Bank of America; J.P. Morgan; Wells Fargo; Citi; and HSBC.

“Despite the trade war between the United States and China, the ongoing Brexit saga and other signs suggesting that globalization might have temporarily peaked, U.S. companies actually increased their exposure to overseas markets last year—at least in terms of their banking needs,” according to Greenwich. “For example, the share of large U.S. companies using at least one bank for payments/receivables and/or cash management in Western Europe increased to approximately two-thirds in 2019 from just 58 percent in 2018. The uptick was equally impressive in Latin America, Central and Eastern Europe, and the Middle East and Africa.”

BANKS CHARGE INTO CASH MANAGEMENT

The biggest U.S. banks are placing a new strategic focus on the cash management business. In part, this new emphasis comes from a desire to capture the cash deposits of large companies, which provide a much-needed source of balance sheet stability.

However, banks are also looking to capitalize on an inefficiency in corporate treasury management by creating new client values. International payments, receivables transactions and even corporate cash transfers often trigger a corresponding foreign exchange trade. Some companies put those trades out to bid—but many don’t.

Even for trades up to $20 million in size, many companies simply pass the trade on to their cash management providers. For that reason, margins for FX transactions on the back-end of international cash management transactions can be especially attractive.

U.S. TRADE FINANCE AMONG LARGE CORPORATES

Trade finance is an area of renewed interest by the major banks. Citi, Bank of America and J.P. Morgan all vie aggressively to be the lead trade finance provider among U.S. large corporates, with each bank doing business with just under half of the market. Wells Fargo and HSBC round out the top five banks. Bank of America, Citi, HSBC, J.P. Morgan, and Wells Fargo are all recognized for distinctive quality and share the title of Greenwich Quality Leader.

GREENWICH EXCELLENCE AWARDS

The accompanying table presents the complete list of 2019 Greenwich Excellence Awards in U.S. Large Corporate Banking and Cash Management.

Greenwich consultants John Colon, Don Raftery and Chris McDonnell specialize in corporate banking, cash management and trade finance services in North America. Consultant Chris McDonnell also specializes in digital banking.

B2B

LATEST: 2020 is Shifting the B2B Payments Scene

B2B payments have historically been slow to adapt to automated payments but COVID may be the vehicle to forever change how business payments are processed. Josh Cyphers, President of Nvoicepay, a FLEETCOR company that transforms the way firms pay their suppliers, provides insights into the changes and trends businesses are experiencing in B2B and mobile payments and how it’s impacting businesses moving forward.

What are some of the big trends driving B2B payments?

Paper checks still reign supreme in B2B payments, but COVID has created a compelling event that is really pushing companies toward fully automating payments. This is a big shift. Over the course of the last 10 to 15 years, check use has been ticking down ever so slowly. According to the 2019 AFP Electronic Payments Survey Report, organizations made 42 percent of their supplier payments by check in 2019, down from 81 percent in 2004.

Now that accounts payable departments are working remotely, companies are trying to minimize the amount of manual work that requires trips to the office, or to employee’s homes to get them to sign checks. Suppliers are asking to be paid electronically because they get the money faster and they don’t have to go to the bank. It will be interesting to see the 2020 AFP report and see if the pandemic pushes organizations to finally give up checks.

The other thing that’s happening is an extreme focus on managing cash. Given the economic environment we’re in, a lot of companies are looking for ways to conserve cash. They’re looking at the timing of payments; extending payment terms to suppliers or delaying payments. With an automated solution, all of the payment approvals and workflow are online, and you have visibility into every payment as it moves through the system, and that gives you precision control over cash flow.

What are some innovations you’ve noticed in contactless payments lately?

In B2B payments, I would define contactless as not having to do manual work. Cloud-based software is enabling accounts payable departments to automate work they’ve previously had to do manually. That includes the handling of paper checks but also a lot of the work that goes into electronic payments as they’ve historically been done through banks. For example, if you want to do ACH payments, you have to pick up the phone or send out emails and collect suppliers’ banking information and probably manually key that into a system. For card payments, you have to phone or email to find out who will take a card payment, and then you might have to phone the supplier with the card number, and then they enter it into a terminal. There’s a surprising amount of manual work that has to be done to get the funds to move electronically through the banking system.

The cloud is what is enabling payment automation providers to transform that disjointed process, with all its manual touchpoints, into a single automated workflow.

 

The cloud also makes implementation very fast and easy, so automating payments is something that an organization can now accomplish in a matter of weeks.

How has COVID impacted mobile payments?

Having a cloud-based solution allows accounts payable professionals to make payments anytime, anywhere. But up until COVID, that kind of mobile capability was a nice to have, not a must-have for business payments. I’ve never in my finance career seen an AP team that was completely remote. With everyone in the office, mobile just wasn’t a consideration. The construction industry is one exception; in that industry, many of the people who approve payments are out in the field, so mobile capabilities are a real selling point for a payment solution. Now that AP teams have been out of the office, every industry is looking for payment solutions that allow them to work remotely as much as possible.

What do you see as the biggest future trend for mobile payments?

B2B payments are about ten times as big as consumer payments, yet the adoption of cloud-based solutions is still in the single digits. Given the size of the market, the adoption of mobile payments by businesses is a big trend in and of itself.

Mobile payments have changed consumer life by making payment so easy and convenient that you hardly have to think about it. That has had a huge impact on how we live our lives and has really sped up commerce and increased our options. When you think about that same kind of frictionless, mobile payment experience becoming widespread in the business world, which it inevitably will, I think it will fuel all kinds of innovation and change.

______________________________________________________________

Josh Cyphers is the President of Nvoicepay, a FLEETCOR Company. For the past 20 years, Josh has managed successful growth for a variety of companies, from start-ups to Fortune 100 companies. Prior to Nvoicepay, Josh held leadership roles at Microsoft, Nike, Fiserv, and several growth-stage technology companies. Josh is a lapsed CPA, and has a BS in Economics from Eastern Oregon University.

automation

Making Your Case: The Four E’s of Payment Automation

Paying suppliers by check is a practice that has endured for much longer than anyone would have imagined. For a while, it looked like COVID-19 might be the tipping point for companies to go completely electronic. After an initial push in that direction, however, many accounts payable departments still send their workers into the office to process invoices and manage the manual check process.

It’s not enough to want to get rid of paper checks. The case against them is not strong enough on its own. It has to be combined with a strong business case in favor of something else.

Even though manual processes are expensive, there are some rational arguments for relying on check payments. You don’t have to enable suppliers for electronic payments, manage banking data, or worry about ACH fraud. You can even outsource the process. While suppliers generally like the idea of electronic payments, they can also be deterred by complex enrollment processes.

People may also still be attached to the idea of check float. Even though interest rates remain at historic lows, it can provide a sense of security to see money in bank accounts for longer. Some businesses even have tenured employees who are used to older processes.

So is the check-writing process that bad?

The answer might have been different last January, with easy access to check printers. But now that accounts payable teams are sheltering in place, their processes often involve driving into the office and to other residencies to get checks signed. Add in the other check-stuffing and mailing steps, and you’ve got a significantly time-consuming task.

Despite the laborious nature of this process, many organizations have still stuck with it. At any rate, the widely-predicted wave of late payments never formed. People dug in and got things done, despite the unforeseen challenges. The added steps have now become business as usual.

While it seems absurd to add “driving paper around” to anyone’s job description, it speaks to how deeply checks are embedded in the B2B world. Companies hadn’t drawn the line at walking checks around for signatures, keeping a safe full of check stock, or renting an offsite storage space for paper files. What’s one more step?

There are plenty of reasons why it makes sense to stop writing checks, but we’ve narrowed it down to four. These “Four E’s of Going Electronic” make up a compelling business case for payment automation adoption.

Economics. What does it cost your organization to write checks? And not just the sum of material costs like ink, check stock, envelops and stamps–which generally comes out to about 75 cents per check. But also consider the cost of time and people. Industry analysts estimate it’s more like $3 to $5 per check, and it could be as high as $10 in some organizations. Remember to consider opportunity costs in your economic analysis. For example: What could your AP team spend time on instead, once extensive check processes are streamlined?

Efficiency. Even if you only write checks, you might have workflows established for different variations of payments. Perhaps they’re based on the payment amounts, signatures required, or even supporting documentation. All these manual and mechanical workflows could easily be automated, so approvers and signers can do their role in minutes, from any location.

Experience. How do suppliers want to get paid? Do they want to go to the office to handle checks? With ACH or card, suppliers get their money faster, without the threat of a check bounce looming over their heads. If you apply some technology to remittances, cash application experience can be much quicker and painless.

Ease of implementation. It’s easy to do things electronically, but your business case breaks down if you don’t have the resources to contribute towards the implementation process. Suppose you’re going to look for a solution. In that case, the last part of the business case has to be ease of deployment, versus what it would look like if you tried to automate everything yourself.

If you were going to do it yourself, you’d have to find a printing organization to cut the checks. You’d have to get IT to create a file to their specifications. You’d have to keep them supplied with check stock. Then you’d have to get your IT people to create another file for your bank for ACH payments. You’d have to run an enablement campaign to get vendors on board. You’d have to come up with a process for maintaining and storing their information and protecting it from breaches and fraud. You’d have to have IT create a file for your card provider. That’s three separate processes that you have to set up and launch and maintain.

Doing all that on your own is a major undertaking, and when you get right down to it, this is a big part of the reason that checks persist. The case against them isn’t strong enough on its own, and it’s counterbalanced by a case against automation—at least automation as we’ve known it in the past, which is much as I’ve described above–a semi-automated process where you do a ton of work to set it up, only to find yourself managing all these different file types and workflows and data just to be able to move the money electronically—and then you’re still probably doing half your payments by check. People have tried it, and it affirmed their choice to stick with checks.

Compare that to just handing it off to somebody that can automate the whole process and implement in about six weeks with just four hours of IT time. That is what is possible with today’s payment automation solutions. You also get continuous vendor enablement, fraud protection, error resolution and a payment guarantee in the bargain.

What often happens is that employees who want to get rid of checks are the ones most burdened by them. With working from home becoming the new norm, these people are more burdened than ever before. Yet they are not typically the decision-makers when it comes to choosing which projects receive funding. The most significant competition for automation is simply the simplicity of maintaining the status quo.

Perspective is everything. It’s rarely enough to point out how to disrupt the norm–you have to paint a picture for a better future. When writing a business case for payment automation, draw attention to the permanently simplified (and cheaper) workload that automated processes would bring, rather than focusing on the temporary unfamiliarity of your solution. Keeping that kind of mindset may accomplish what years of manual effort have not: eliminating business check writing once and for all.

______________________________________________________________

Derek Halpern is Senior Vice President of Sales for Nvoicepay. He has over 20 years of technology sales and leadership experience, including 16 years in the fintech and payments space.

carve-outs

Carve-outs are Attractive for M&A, but Complications can Decrease Value

Before the COVID-19 pandemic brought mergers and acquisitions to a standstill, dealmakers increasingly turned to carve-out deals –the sale or divestiture of a business unit or division from a company. Our research shows carve-outs have increased by 200% since 2016, demonstrating the attractiveness of these deals.Our research shows carve-outs have increased by 200% since 2016, demonstrating the attractiveness of these deals.

But carve-outs are far from straightforward, especially across borders. The more jurisdictions involved, the higher the degree of complexity firms must navigate. (Complexity, in this case, refers to the headaches and distractions that arise when complying with new regulations, language barriers, borders, currencies, and laws.)

The increased complexity of a carve-out creates both opportunity and risk for buyers. On the one hand, not many firms have the expertise or resources to re-incorporate a business from a parent structure, meaning the few companies able to do this have a natural advantage. On the other hand, the execution risk is increased significantly, and value can be quickly lost from carve-outs if not executed correctly.

A recent survey by TMF Group found that 34% of senior executives from private equity firms with buy-side experience and 27% from corporations said their most recent cross-border carve-out failed to deliver on expectations, with 24% and 19%, respectively, saying costly overruns significantly impacted the deals. If a deal is delayed by more than four months as a result of business entanglements across jurisdictions, the average resulting cost overrun comes to about 16%.

Consider how one financial executive in India described an overrun deal: “We hadn’t expected it to be seamless, but we weren’t prepared for the effect on costs, and we had to make some hasty financial decisions to get the deal over the line.”

If a transaction takes place across jurisdictions, the complexity of those deals increases once local regulations come into play. Examples of regulations that, though innocuous, can significantly delay the deal-making process include:

-In some markets, it can take up to 60 days to open a bank account

-In others, business licenses are required before the new entity can register for VAT, while the company may need a local fiscal representative or director

-Some markets, such as the U.S., carry significant differences between states for regulations pertaining to licenses, tax registrations, and employment regulations

If these complexities aren’t accounted for at the start of the deal-making process, the monetary value of the deal can decrease, as evidenced by the 1 in 5 deals that create millions of dollars in extra costs. Take it from a head of finance at a Finnish corporation: “Complying with the domestic requirements, such as legal, accounting, and taxation, were the most difficult aspects for us to manage…rather than solving complex operational issues, we were more concerned with getting the company ready for various compliance items.”

Conversely, having a presence in the country in which a deal is conducted increases the likelihood of a deal going well. Those with a limited or no presence in the target’s country were more likely to have disappointing outcomes, with 38% of respondents who had limited or no presence at all in the carve-outs jurisdiction noting their most recent carveout had been mostly unsuccessful in terms of reaching its strategic goals.

There is, of course, the question of when deal activity will return to a pre-COVID-19 pace. It’s a question of when, not if, because private equity firms are sitting on large cash piles, interest rates are historically low and companies are distressed. Companies facing a cash flow crunch may be more likely to sell off non-core assets than consider an outright sale of the entire business. The environment is ripe for carve-outs in the near future, although valuations may look a lot different than six months ago.

____________________________________________________________

Randy Worzala is Head of Business Development – North America at TMF Group, a multinational professional services firm based in Amsterdam, providing accounting, tax, HR and payroll services to international businesses. The company has around 7,000 employees in 80 countries.

virtual card

It’s Time to Revisit the Benefits of Virtual Card

In the wake of the many changes this year has brought, companies are moving toward making more of their supplier payments electronically. It’s a welcome thing. Check payments have dwindled in consumer life, but across US industries, nearly half of all supplier payments are still made by check. As accounts payable departments went into work from home mode, it became difficult to cut checks. They rushed to set suppliers up for ACH payments, skipping over what might be a better opportunity: paying them by virtual card.

Not every supplier accepts virtual cards, however. Before you set your suppliers up for ACH, you should at least ask about cards—there are compelling benefits for both buyers and suppliers with that option. For suppliers, getting paid by card is the fastest way to get their money in the bank. On the buyer’s side, virtual cards are the most secure payment method, and they can also generate rebates. To get the promised rebates, you need to find the right card program for your business and have a solid plan for continually enabling suppliers. For most companies, it makes sense to consider virtual cards in the broader context of automating the entire payment process.

To be clear, I’m not talking about p-cards. P-cards are a physical card that AP uses to pay suppliers over the phone. Virtual cards are 16-digit “card” numbers issued to a named supplier for a specified amount. These “v-cards” can’t be processed by anyone other than the supplier, or for anything larger than the authorized amount. And, if somehow a fraudulent transaction should occur, virtual card issuers offer the same protections as they do with plastic cards. When it comes to check and ACH payments, money that falls into fraudulent hands can be challenging to get back. Card processes are more traceable and are, therefore, easier to reverse.

There are Challenges of Maintaining In-House Processes

It’s possible for your team to own their own card payment processes instead of handing the reins over to a payment automation partner. But the work required often dissuades companies from doing so.

One of the main reasons checks have persisted as the top payment type in the business world is the minimal setup required. This makes checks an attractive payment method on paper, especially for companies who do business with thousands of suppliers. But the actual process is more labor-intensive because each check must be approved, printed, signed, and mailed—a process that can take days for some companies.

On the reverse side, card payments require an enablement component. Someone must reach out to each supplier to confirm their payment preference. The up-front work often prevents decision-makers from pulling the trigger on implementing such a system. Ironically, many companies turn to ACH or wire as an alternate solution, but these are even costlier and more time-consuming. For these payment types, companies must collect supplier bank account information. Then they must validate store them securely, and maintain tight, protective controls on them.

For smaller companies that are more focused on generating an additional revenue stream, a standalone virtual card program can be a decent option. The caveat is that without a strong enablement effort, any projected rebate may have to be invested back into your process to maintain it.

Standalone Programs Aren’t Permanent Solutions

An independent program works well when companies are highly integrated between their ERP system and their bank. In these scenarios, the company usually has most of their suppliers set up to receive ACH payments, simplifying the reconciliation process.  However, adding more payment automation over the top of existing automation would be redundant, closing the door on additional revenue that might be generated from a card program down the road.

Larger companies should look at comprehensive payment automation solutions with virtual card embedded into them, even if you don’t plan to use them right away.

How Does Payment Automation Resolve These Problems?

Automated solutions wrap all payment types into a single workflow, making it easy to offer several options to suppliers without adding to AP’s daily workload. Because suppliers are continuously enabled for electronic payments via a supplier network, most companies can immediately pay a significant percentage of their suppliers electronically with no effort. Paying by check also becomes as simple as submitting a pay file and approving it. This simplified process cuts out a significant portion of AP’s manual tasks, leaving them more time to focus on higher-level initiatives.

By automating the whole payment process, including enablement, reconciliation, and error resolution, AP teams usually see cost reductions of up to 70 percent. When you add revenue from card payments into the equation, AP can become a profit center.

Card payments still only account for about five percent of B2B payments. There’s a significant opportunity that companies have been missing out on, either because they haven’t researched virtual cards, don’t want to do the supplier outreach, or haven’t found a partner that can help them make it work. Due to processing fees, not every supplier will accept card payments. Still, a surprising number—around 20 percent of suppliers, in my experience—will say yes if they’re asked.

Now that cash flow is king, companies are shifting to accommodate more ACH enablement outreach. While you’re reaching out to your suppliers, it may be worth your time simply asking if they would accept card payments. Wrapping these initiatives into a payment automation solution may enable your AP department to run lean in the cloud indefinitely.

_______________________________________________________________

Kristin is Vice President of Regional Sales at Nvoicepay, a FLEETCOR company. Her experience in sales and sales leadership spans 16 years, and includes positions held with companies like Capital One and Billtrust. With Nvoicepay, she delivers scalable payment solutions to mid-market and enterprise companies. Kristin has received several accolades, including Sales Rep of the Year & Quarter, and multiple President’s Awards.

payment

Survey Finds Dramatic Increase in Overdue Payments in North America

Will North American businesses remain resilient in the face of COVID-19 challenges? That answer is increasingly difficult to answer in the affirmative, as virus containment measures continue to negatively impact trade, consumer spending, industrial production, unemployment, corporate debt and supply chains.

According to the annual Payment Practices Barometer survey of businesses in the U.S., Mexico and Canada by trade credit insurer Atradius, companies are facing widespread cash and liquidity pressures. Survey data was collected this spring, and conditions have likely deteriorated further. News recently broke, for instance, that the coronavirus caused the U.S. economy to contract 32.9% in Q2, the worst contraction in modern history.

Needless to say, the bleak economic outlook puts businesses in an extremely tight spot, and it is likely insolvencies will rise dramatically, further exacerbating liquidity challenges among organizations in the supply chain. Some troubling signs of deteriorating payment practices and B2B customer credit risk captured in the survey include:

-Overdue payments have increased dramatically. Across the region, 43% of the total value of issued invoices remain unpaid by the due date, a sharp increase from the 25% reported last year.

-The value of invoices overdue by 90 days or more has doubled to 13%.

-Businesses write off 4% of the total value of outstanding invoices, up from 3% in 2019.

The increase in payment defaults is particularly alarming in the U.S., which saw a 72% year-over-year uptick compared to 2019, and in Canada, which saw an 86% increase. In Mexico, the amount of trade receivables firms have written off has doubled since last year.

These trends put a troubling burden on businesses, which end up having to spend more time, resources and funds chasing down overdue invoices. It also means working capital is tied up for longer than before, limiting businesses’ abilities to pay their own suppliers and make strategic investments. In short, rampant late payments cause a bad domino effect, spreading liquidity issues all throughout the supply chain.

UMSCA Firms Are Tightening Credit Controls

Faced with heightened B2B customer credit risk, many businesses across North America are tightening their credit control procedures, the Payment Practices Barometer found.

Firms typically rely on a mix of outsourced risk management, such as credit insurance, and internal tactics such as reducing risk concentrations and increasing debt collection resources. Notably, more than half of the region’s survey respondents plan on upping the efficiency of their debt collection processes through tactics such as payment reminders or outsourcing collections to an agency.

The Payment Practices Barometer also found that while credit-based B2B sales are on the rise across the region, the trend is slowing. Self-insurance against the risk of payment defaults also saw an increase – 66% of businesses rely on this tool compared to 22% last year.

The most prevalent methods of credit control vary by country:

-Many Canadian firms are planning on adjusting payment terms to better align with the credit capacity of customers – average payment terms are now 26 days, compared to 27 days in 2019. They also widely employ payment reminders and work to avoid concentrations of credit risk.

-In Mexico, a significant proportion of businesses employ credit insurance. Additional popular credit management tactics include suspending deliveries until outstanding invoices are paid, requesting payment on cash from B2B customers and requesting payment guarantees.

-U.S. firms focus more on credit management than their peers in the region. A large majority of U.S. businesses manage customer credit risk in-house through self-insurance. Requiring payment guarantees prior to sales and offering discounts for early payment are also widely used tactics.

UMSCA Businesses Remain Hopeful?

Despite the bleak economic outlook and all signs pointing to widespread liquidity issues, the majority of businesses surveyed in North America predicted growth in the coming months, their optimism rooted in the belief that banks will continue to provide credit to cushion the effects of poor cash flow.

But again, that was a few months ago, and business conditions are rapidly changing for the worse. Consumer sentiment, for instance, has fallen back almost as low as in the early days of the outbreak – optimism that COVID-19 will go away any time soon is now a distant memory.

The only thing that can be said for sure is that the business environment in North America is rife with uncertainty with no indication of sunnier skies in the near future. More than ever, businesses need to take a strategic approach to credit management that ensures adequate cash flows and a solid liquidity position.

_______________________________________________________________

Gordon Cessford is the president and regional director of North America for Atradius Trade Credit Insurance, Inc

supplier

How Do Electronic Payment Solutions Fulfill Supplier Needs?

Paying all your suppliers electronically makes sense—in theory. At a high level, doing so is a simple enough task—you enable your AP team to make all their payments through electronic means. Then you have yourself a cost-generating solution. But to your AP team—the people at ground level—there’s much more behind the process than sending payments. They also must track sent payments, follow up on uncashed checks, handle fraudulent cases, and work with suppliers who are missing payments for one reason or another.

Unfortunately, most electronic payment businesses that tout themselves as solutions only find value at the high-level glance, which is a detriment to your team. For example, while banks and card networks move money electronically, they don’t provide much supplier support, which is often needed to take payments across the finish line. In the end, that task often falls to your employees once again.

AP also tends to use the oldest equipment of any team in most companies. They’re still running error-prone manual processes, with stacks of checks and invoices on their desks in need of circulation on foot. Process exceptions and one-off requests torment them. Suppliers are calling and emailing, looking for payment. At the same time, AP handles other issues like lost or erroneous invoices, payments landing in the wrong accounts, or which otherwise need attention.

The whole operation is like a house of cards. Even if you know you need to change, nobody wants to touch a single card for fear that the entire thing will fall apart. Asking them to enable suppliers for electronic payments is extra work, and not usually in anybody’s job description. It’s hard enough to get the regular work done; heaven forbid somebody on the team gets ill, goes out on leave, or quits. They’re really under a lot of pressure.

A new generation of payment service providers automates payments in the cloud and offloads much of the support work that AP usually handles instead of focusing on higher-value initiatives. When your process was held together with duct tape and string, it can be hard to imagine confidently handing the work to a service provider. To understand what’s possible today, let’s look at what payment support services look like at scale here at Nvoicepay.

Supplier Enablement

When our customers sign on with Nvoicepay, our implementation team goes right to work with their AP staff to get supplier lists and instructions for reaching out to them. If any suppliers require special arrangements due to prior agreements with them, we take those into account.

Our customers often pay many of the same suppliers. Because Nvoicepay maintains an extensive network of suppliers—about 800,000 of them—many suppliers are instantly payable without additional work. When suppliers aren’t already in our system, we campaign to get them electronically payable in a fashion that meets their individual needs. We prioritize Mastercard due to the ease of payment for all parties involved. As time goes on, the Nvoicepay team maintains supplier data, keeping up with changes on behalf of our customers.

Suppliers that still need to receive physical checks can do so. Even if they do, the process remains electronic on the AP side so that customers can issue check payments in the same batch as other electronic payments. Supplier questions are routed to our in-house support team, alleviating another large responsibility from AP.

Training and Implementation

While suppliers are being enabled, our technical support team trains the accounts payable group that will be using the software in a succinct, one-hour meeting. We know that AP turnover can be high, so we offer additional training by request to ensure that the customer’s entire team remains up-to-speed.

Our technical support team also works with the implementation team to ensure that the initial configuration caters to each company’s specific needs.

Making Payments

In the life of a manual process, AP teams need to fill out bank forms for each ACH batch or access their bank website to make wire payments. Payment automation consolidates those tasks—and more—into a single file from their ERP, which contains all the invoices the company wants to be paid. Nvoicepay disperses those payments based on each suppliers’ preferred payment type, set up in the enablement step, and continuously maintained.

On the back end, customers have total visibility into how those suppliers are getting paid, when checks cleared, and when Mastercard payments were issued. They can also track unprocessed Mastercard payments.

Payment Modification

Nvoicepay guarantees every payment, and as such, the phone number listed on the remittances is ours. If there’s an issue with a payment, your suppliers call our payment support team directly, and we work through any questions they may have. Our software also includes a form that alerts our Payment Modification team of the need to resolve errors, refunds, reissues, or stop-payments. We turn those requests around quickly, as quickly as a customer could call their bank and do it themselves. We take as good care of our customers’ suppliers as they would. No matter where an error occurs, we work to resolve it and to keep our customers informed throughout the process.

If a supplier reaches out to their customer directly, the customers also have visibility into our system. They can handle those one-off events without trouble.

Card Retention

Many AP groups have dealt with card programs that promised significant rebates but didn’t deliver. Making as many payments as you can by card is what helps you maximize rebates. To aid this, another faction of our operations team—the supplier services group—reaches out to suppliers who haven’t processed their cards after a set time. The team works with suppliers to answer any questions they have about the payment, and to support the processing of as many cards as possible.

Within the supplier services team is a retention group, which assists suppliers who may want to stop accepting card payment. That’s the most beneficial payment method due to the rebate. Still, there can be various issues on the supplier end, such as card fees, or challenges with remittance or reconciliation. The retention group learns what the supplier objections are to card. If we can’t work through them, we enable a different payment type.

While most suppliers can process virtual cards through their terminal once they receive the remittance, others have set requirements or separate terminals that require specialized processes. In those cases, our group called AP Concierge will either call the supplier directly to make payments or pay through their terminal. Our internal goal is to have less than three percent of unprocessed cards monthly. After 60 days, unprocessed payments must be refunded to the customer, which creates unnecessary work.

Embracing True Support

Why don’t companies pay all of their suppliers electronically? Because it takes a village to do all the work around making payments! Nvoicepay’s dedicated teams support every piece of the payment process because we know that’s what it takes. It’s a rare AP team that can handle these pieces on top of getting payments out the door, let alone have special teams devoted to each area.

AP teams have been laboring under manual work and partially automated processes for so long; it’s hard to imagine someone taking all that work off their plate. But that’s precisely what we do.

And sometimes, it’s hard to imagine what AP jobs will look like when the payment process becomes automated. We don’t often see companies cut staff when they bring in Nvoicepay. Instead, we have found that companies reduce their staff growth rate, and that existing staff moves onto higher-value work.

_______________________________________________________________________

Angela Anastasakis is the SVP of Operations and Customer Success for Nvoicepay, a FLEETCOR company. She has more than 30 years of leadership experience in operations and product support. At Nvoicepay, Angela has been instrumental in leading Operations through rapid growth, while maintaining our 98% support satisfaction rating through outstanding service.