I wonder if part of the justification has to do with recognizing the landing cost (bank and card fees) of the Credit Purchase transaction?
It may be worthwhile for @Finance to audit the accounting method around these transactions.
My policy suggestion would be that the revenue split (30% to co-op / 70% to rights-holders) be applied to proceeds after transaction fees. That is to say, a 5eu purchase of listening credits with 0.60eu in card and bank service fees would be treated as 4.40 net revenue to be split 30% (1.32eu) to the Co-op / 70% to Rights-Holders (3.08eu).
The alternative, and I think the present method the co-op is employing, treats ‘credits’ as a discrete value based on the gross receipt without adjustment for card and banking fees.
Using the illustration of 0.60 in banking and card fees on a 5eu purchase, this method of accounting would provide for the following spilt:
However, since the co-op is bearing all of the landing cost the split is effectively 18/70.
Co-op (net) = 1.50 - .60 (+12% landing cost) = .90 net revenue = 18% of gross to Co-op / 70% of gross to rights-holders. .
Final point: always worth mentioning.
Co-op revenues are not extractive profits leaving the community. Resonate’s receipts are essentially held in trust and committed to operations in service to Members. If the co-op generates an operating surplus it is the Members who will ultimately govern how surpluses are to be distributed (or reinvested).
My suggestion to Members who are sympathetic to the co-op’s mission is to equip the co-op with the means to be sustainable. In my view, the policy suggestion above offers a natural and equitable interpretation of the 30/70 principle as a split of proceeds.
To avoid confusion I have adjusted the figures in my illustration above to reflect what seems to be a common net receipt of 4.41 on a 5eu Listener Credit sale through Stripe.
There are additional charges applied to receive Stripe income as deposits at the bank but I will leave that to someone more expert to determine the average cost per transaction. (Probably less than the .10eu I estimated previously.)
These charges are quite variable depending on the size of the transaction, the number of transactions bundled together as a deposit and the security cost of clearing data charged to a particular bank card (some card data is considered riskier than others and therefore costs more to secure).
For the purposes of this illustration I have tried to show the high end of the potential landing costs. The costs do not generally rise in direct proportion to the size of a purchase so a larger purchase will have a lower percentage of landing cost than a smaller purchase.
Proposal (draft): That @Finance review transaction costs to generate a reasonable net revenue adjustment (probably 12-15%) to be applied to gross receipts via an adjustment to the value of Listener Credits through the Player. (Perhaps there are other simple ways to transparently apply the adjustment.)
Finance could develop a test of actual receipts to periodically determine a fair adjustment (perhaps annually).
This procedure would be subject to review by the Members’ Audit Committee.
Agree it has to be net of transactions fees which seem to be around 8% in Stripe. Also net of VAT when Resonate becomes VAT registered. Happy to start looking at this in more detail later in Feb. Would be helpful to see your process Rich.
This site is the official community for Resonate, a streaming music cooperative owned by the people who use it -- artists, labels, listeners and builders.