Yea it looks like a couple weeks.
HM had emailed me the news before I posted earlier, I just had not seen the email.
It really makes you realize that a source that doesn't use WU or MG is nice to have.
I plan to try MG this morning for another vendor, but my WU experience was one gets thru and the next one is blocked, this will be my next one for MG and I'm hoping it wont be blocked too.
You make an excellent point SmokeyJ. I must admit to being one of the jaded financial professionals who thought that WU and MG would go operating with impunity, and that the various powers that be would leave them alone, save the occasional budget-enhancing "fine". However, I've come to believe of late that I may have been somewhat mistaken in that presumption, and that the regulatory authorities will continue to lean on them to the point where the enhanced "security protocols" disrupt the industry enough so as to cause vendors to seek alternative solutions. I say this because the focus has now turned to senders as opposed to receivers, who the better vendors rotate out of service frequently enough to head off any issue before it arises. Unfortunately, customers don't have that luxury as a sender, unless of course you want to invest in a new ID every month or two or involve 3rd parties in sending your funds, which is dicey at best.
In any event, I would concur that if you have a vendor who accepts MPak, you should treat them well and make sure they know that you appreciate their efforts, because believe me, by accepting MPaks, they are taking on a fairly significant work load in terms of managing their business cash flow and liquidity. Anyway, going forward, I envision a day in the not so distant future where vendors will largely go away from WU and MG, except for occasional transactions where its absolute necessary, and gravitate towards MPaks (for the smaller vendors) and direct bank transfer / ACH (for higher volume vendors). I understand that bank ACH payment will make some folks shudder, but in all candor, it actually is just as safe from a data security perspective as using MG or WU's online interfaces, and is actually more secure than a credit card transaction, charge back rights notwithstanding. I'll be elaborating more on this subject in the payment options section over the next week or two, but one very common, inaccurate assumption that most people make is that by paying via ACH, the vendor obtains access to your bank account information. This is completely inaccurate when a 3rd party ACH processor is used by the vendor to facilitate the transfer, as they never receive the routing and account numbers, or in the case of an international ACH, the swift code. Of course, even in the case of a direct ACH or wire transfer, one can always protect themselves by maintaining a "throw away" secondary bank account just for these types of payments, but again, I'm working on one of my "mega posts" to address the state of the industry in terms of payment options, which I hope to have up in the next week or so. Just FYI.
And again, great point SmokeyJ. At the risk of being cliche, often times we don't realize how valuable something is until it's gone.
