Washington, I think what is meant stems from the "regular" WU system where the receiver pays nothing (and the sender does) ...would this new model depart from that? If not, how does this affect the WU way of doing business in terms of the agents who pay out on its behalf? Do they now have to reconcile in so many more ways (rcv money, pay the WU agent, pay the mobile money hub, etc). On 31/03/2011, Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 18:10, Erik Hersman <erik@zungu.com> wrote:
Does anyone know what the transaction cost is for people who receive money locally?
Erik Hersman
Erik,
I think it should be obvious. The sender incurs the cost of sending and the receiver incurs the cost of withdrawal, as published by Safaricom already. I don't want to be told I am wrong, because then it does not make much sense, no?
-- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254733744121/+254722743223 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Damn!!
-- Francis Hook +254 733 504561