Option To Hold Final 2003 check

Forum Moderators: martinibuster

Message Too Old, No Replies

Option To Hold Final 2003 check

dazzlindonna

9:33 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

Just received the email from Adsense giving me the option to have them hold the final year-end payment until a future time. Is there any good reason I would want to do this?

loanuniverse

9:35 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

Just got it too, I think it applies mostly to those sites earning less than the minimum payout.

EliteWeb

9:37 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

What about for tax purposes?

2oddSox

9:39 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

I just liked the reference at the end of the mail to the fact that there might be other payment options coming up in the near future.

Fingers crossed.

2odd...

loanuniverse

9:40 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

What about for tax purposes?

Nope, I don't think they would get into that.. This is mostly for the people not making the minimum payout just being nice so that they don't issue a $10.00 check to someone that has to pay $10.00 to cash it.

CalArch90

9:45 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

I don't think it has anything to do with minimum payout. My earnings are well above the minimum for the month, and I received the email. I think this has more to do with year end taxes and the option of declaring earnings for the 2004 tax year rather than the 2003 year.

Jenstar

9:51 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

Since they will allow you to hold your earnings each month (provided you contact them by the 10th day of the month they would mail you the payment on) this will give publishers more flexibility when charged costly check cashing fees in foreign countries. I know this has come up several times previously, so hopefully this will work out well for some publishers, without having to worry about the six month limitations for cashing a US check.

loanuniverse

9:52 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

think this has more to do with year end taxes ...

Well if the deadline for getting back to them was not after the end of the year I would agree. However, the deadline is sometime in January so this fact and the verbiage in the first paragraph leads me to believe that this is for the publishers not meeting the minimum.

A sentence such as "In accordance to our policy of paying publishers once a year regardless...." would have cleared things out.

Edit: the holding of subsequent months does sound good for those publishers that have to pay cashing charges just like Jenstar pointed out.

caspita

9:56 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

I see it more as a new option in the program. You can opt to hold any payment and not just the final year payment. They say also that you can opt to hold every month if you want. What they won't do is to issue you a payment if you are under $100 at least is it the Dec cheque. Nice for them because if you have a very low balance, like me :-) .. then they will handdle all that money at least untill you reach the minimum, that for me will take like 6 months :-) ... if you add all those low balances opting to hold for sure you get thousands and they can make some extra money with the interest rates :-D.

CS.

Zygoot

9:58 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

I'm considering to send them an email to put my earnings for December on hold, since I need to pay about 12EUR to cash in a check.

satanclaus

10:01 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

I think the way the tax thing is that anything in the bank by midnight tomorrow is taxed. Don't quote me on that though.

Blue_Fin

10:37 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

satanclaus, that isn't correct.

killroy

10:48 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

I just found out that my september cehck of $480 cost my $95 in fees.... which is bad enough and I'm already making a stink about it. What's REALLY bad is that they claim only $20 is their charge and that Citibank charged $75. That makes no sense at all... why would an issuing bank charge money to clear a check, no matter where it goes to? especially such a rediculous amount? It's over 205 of the check amount!

After tryign for some hours I couldn't get hold of a customer service number or email for citibank. Can anybody help out?

Blue_Fin

10:49 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

I fully agree that Google's intentions here are to allow those who incur check cashing fees to limit them by cashing fewer checks when the monthly earnings do not warrant the fees your banks charge.

Personally, I feel the publisher is assuming additional risk by opting for this new option because if your account is terminated for any reason, it is unlikely that you will be paid the earnings that Google is holding on your behalf per TOS #12.

loanuniverse

11:19 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

After tryign for some hours I couldn't get hold of a customer service number or email for citibank. Can anybody help out?

Killroy:

That sounds outrageous. But I wouldn't put it past some institutions to charge that if they have some kind of loophole. Frankly, I doubt it very much that you will get anywhere with Citibank, after all you are not their customer.

Although, I agree with Blue_Fin that you take an additional risk by putting off the payment, in your case the percentage in fees is painful and it might be something to consider.

I would ask my contact in cash management, but everyone I know there is gone until next monday.

lgn1

11:36 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

A lot of banks don't understand the point of diminishing return. That, is where it is cheaper, just to cave and pay the customer, rather than tying up hundred of dollars in office administration and personal time, and damaging any chance that you will be a customer of theirs in the future.

Noel

11:45 pm on Dec 30, 2003 (gmt 0)

Hehe.. I might get AdSense to hold my check till the Euro v/s Dollar get better again!

Noel

birdstuff

12:00 am on Dec 31, 2003 (gmt 0)

I don't thinnk it has anything to do with the $100 minimum because I received the email too.

esllou

1:16 am on Dec 31, 2003 (gmt 0)

man the strong euro is KILLING me! I just checked and it is above 1.25 now! When I started my website, it was 0.90! That is costing me hundreds and hundreds of euros for adsense and other affiliate programs. Bring on the world currency! (At this rate, it will be euros too!)

irock

2:38 am on Dec 31, 2003 (gmt 0)

I don't understand. Am I going to receive December check earlier than expected?

Blue_Fin

2:49 am on Dec 31, 2003 (gmt 0)

No. They are simply asking if you would like them to hold your funds and not send them to you. Did you not receive the email from Google?

irock

3:36 am on Dec 31, 2003 (gmt 0)

I read the first line...

"Google AdSense would like to inform you that we will be making
year-end earnings payments for all open AdSense accounts. You
will receive a check in U.S. Dollars (USD) for your unpaid earnings
(regardless of amount) through December 31, 2003."

It sounds as if Google will make December payment earlier than expected. Perhaps my speculation is wrong.

Blue_Fin

4:27 am on Dec 31, 2003 (gmt 0)

What they mean is that they are paying all earnings accrued through December 31st, even if it's less than $100. They are not saying the check will be issued by December 31st.

willybfriendly

4:39 am on Dec 31, 2003 (gmt 0)

I am always suspicious of offers made to hold my money for me. A hundred here, a hundred there, and pretty soon you have some real cash. So, Google in all their generosity holds several million dollars "as a favor", all the while accruing interest on those funds...

Who is the winner in this scenario?

WBF

loanuniverse

5:29 am on Dec 31, 2003 (gmt 0)

I don't think Google is making any money by doing this. Since the publishers that will take advantage are probably making small amounts of money {lets assume $100 average balance each}, and I would be surprised if more than a couple of hundred do take advantage {lets say 1,000} then with the current interest rates for short-term deposits and the inherent expenses of having someone dedicate a couple of hours a day taking care of the customer service... the numbers are just not there.

Even if we are talking US$500,000 that they get to keep around for six months, it just isn't worth it.

It was really a nice gesture. Their only benefit was to give good service to its partners.

Blue_Fin

5:52 am on Dec 31, 2003 (gmt 0)

I agree with loanuniverse. willybfriendly, I think you would look at this differently if you were earning a few hundred dollars a month (or less) and it cost you $50 or more to cash your check because you reside in a foreign country.

I think it's a wonderful option to those who will benefit financially from it. My only concern is what I stated earlier about the possibility of losing the money altogether if my account were terminated.

simonuk

9:01 am on Dec 31, 2003 (gmt 0)

Personally speaking with the horror stories I've heard about google cancelling accounts and then refusing to send a check I don't think I would risk holding it off.

If a rival were to click on your ad links all day and your account got cancelled you could have a nightmare time getting back on and getting the check.

All too risky for me to chance.

Simon.

mayor

1:11 pm on Dec 31, 2003 (gmt 0)

I agree with Simonuk. Allowing the fox to guard the hen house never was a good idea.

cyberprosper

6:03 am on Jan 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

definitely do not risk the money without a good reason to not cash a check. Too many companies have gone bankrupt over the past few years... now, I do not think Google is gonna go bankrupt, but they probably said that about Enron, etc....

And, even though there seems to be less horror stories recently about publishers not getting paid, it certainly would be best to get what you can while you can get it.