Sounds good. It might be good if the receiver pays the fees but the referral income goes to the senders referrer.
What, what what? How is this working, exactly?
I think now when Bob sends to John, Bob pays the fee and Bob's referrer gets the income but they are considering changing it...
transfer fees will be adjusted to be paid by the receiver of the funds, rather than the sender. This means merchants will see the fees (which will be much less than credit cards) but users will not.
If we change to Bob sends to John, John pays the fee and John's referrer gets the income then we change the incentives a bit from signing up regular users (medium senders) to signing up merchants (high volume receivers)
However if we change to Bob sends to John, John pays the fee, but BTS sees it was sent by Bob and & gives Bob referrers the referral income, then it still keeps a bit of the incentive to sign up regular users. While if John upgrades to an LTM those fees go to John's refferer so there is still a big incentive to sign up merchants and upgrade them.
Provided the minimum transfer size is greater than the maximum transfer fee. I think it works.
I don't know though, there could be a simple reason why this dumb