![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/reformingretail.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/a3.jpg?resize=750%2C498&ssl=1\")
<\/p>\nIf you were a reseller of any of the POS products Digital Dining, Dinerware, pcAmerica, or Xpient, you became a part of Heartland Payments – now Global Payments – after the string of acquisitions from 2015-2017. For many resellers this meant their businesses changed substantially.<\/p>\n
Now that the dust has settled some Global Payments resellers are questioning the aftermath on their business model. While none were irate about their current situation, they were curious about Global Payments’ policies.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
For background, resellers under the Global Payments umbrella now fall into a number of tiers (black, blue, green and red), each with their own benefits. What has irked a few of the more performant resellers has been their inability to sell processing directly.<\/p>\n
“When I sell a POS today I have to pass the payments portion of the deal to a direct payments rep for Global\/Heartland. I still make revenue share if the payments rep closes the deal, but I’d make a lot more if I did the deal on my own paper,” explains one dealer.<\/p>\n
When we asked another reseller what their current payments revenue was they said it was $20 per month per site and $0.02 per swipe.<\/p>\n
On an average deal we’re seeing $50-$80 per store per month, but we know that everyone up the Global ranks is getting their piece, too.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Similarly some of the the direct payment reps feel the same way, though about POS. “We should be able to sell and support POS directly on our deals instead of referring the POS deal to a reseller,” commented one direct payments rep.<\/p>\n
Why does Global seemingly keep lucrative payments residuals from their highest cache of reseller? And why can’t their direct payments reps sell POS themselves?<\/p>\n
The answer is experience.<\/p>\n
It won\u2019t surprise our readers to learn this, but selling (and supporting) POS is a much different process than selling (and ignoring support for) payments. By keeping some walls up Global might actually be playing a smarter long-term game.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat you\u2019re hearing is certainly a small minority,\u201d says Andre Nataf, Global\u2019s SVP of Channel. \u201cWe have over 275 dealers and the current model works for our majority. If the model were so unworkable why would these resellers stick around?\u201d Andre goes on to explain that Global\u2019s current model is in the merchant\u2019s best interest 99.9% of the time.<\/p>\n
We do not block or force our merchants to do business with any of our dealers or payments reps. But we believe that if we can show merchants the highest possible value in one of these categories – whether it\u2019s POS, payments, payroll, or another product – they\u2019ll be inclined to turn to us for their other needs.<\/p>\n
We continue to find that merchants have the best results when they\u2019re being serviced by an expert that can provide that local, consultative experience. And since it\u2019s hard to be an expert in everything that means having dedicated divisions serving a merchant\u2019s disparate needs.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
There are undoubtedly the outliers that can do POS, payments and other products well, but they\u2019re a very small minority – probably < 1% of the resellers out there. If this was you, then we could understand how you might feel there were some missing upside. \u201cIt\u2019s unnerving to see dealers who are less successful than us making more on payments residuals because they\u2019re not following the Global referral model and instead refer their own payments,\u201d these cohort of dealers agreed.<\/p>\n
For the 99%, Global\u2019s model as designed might make the most sense. But for the top performers, it\u2019s understandable how there might be kinks to yet work out.<\/p>\n